20071392 Ver 1_Restoration Plan_20070815

0 7~ 1 3~ 2
Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration
Macon County, NC
Restoration Plan
SCO Project Number 050657901
<s~,
„~t ; ., ,
~~;t :-
>, . ~ 4
yt~~a :`
., .. u_w,_..., r ,.
Prepared for:
1
1
1
~.-
os stem
F.~r,.. ,.,,~..
NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
July 2007
D t.~l{~~,~ A
~~
qU
Ca I ~ ~~q1 ~--
~71AM~ga~ Sf~~ i.i~~.
Q~,~,
'~~r~gg~,y~n

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration
Macon County, NC
Restoration Plan
SCO Project Number 050657901
Prepared by:
EarthTech
A t[~CO International Ltd. Company
701 Corporate Center Drive
Suite 475
Raleigh, NC, 27607
Phone: [phone]
Fax:[phone]
Project Manager:
Ron Johnson
Phone:[phone]
e-mail: Ron.Johnson c~earthtech.com

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
' The Cat Creek stream and wetland restoration site in Macon County, North Carolina was
identified by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) as a potential stream,
' riparian buffer, and wetland restoration site. The site consists of reaches on four separate tracts
of land referred to as: Swartwout, Waldroop, Parker, and Preserve. The Swartwout, Parker, and
Preserve tracts have been purchased by the NCDOT, while the Waldroop tract is in private
' ownership. Following initial studies of the site by NCDOT beginning in 2002, the site was
turned over to the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) in 2005 for final design,
construction, and monitoring.
The proposed restoration area entails about 7,450 linear feet of Cat Creek, and 848 linear feet of
three small tributaries in a rural area of Macon County. Cat Creek and the tributaries have been
impacted by past land use including use as pastureland and a golf course.
Both stream restoration and enhancement is proposed for various reaches of Cat Creek
' dependant upon the existing stream conditions and other constraints. Stream restoration will
consist of Restoration, Enhancement Level 1, and Enhancement Level 2. Restoration will
consist of modifying the streams dimension, pattern and profile to achieve a stable stream
channel. Reaches proposed for Enhancement Level 1 activities will have their dimension and
profile modified, but pattern will remain the same. Enhancement Level 2 activities will consist
of fencing out livestock, spot stabilization, and planting a riparian buffer. The type of restoration
by tract is presented in the table below. A Conservation Easement will be obtained for the
Waldroop tract
' Wetland restoration and enhancement is proposed for the Swartwout, Parker, and Preserve tracts.
Restoration activities will restore predisturbance hydrology to the site by removing fill.
Following fill removal these areas will be planted with native hardwoods. Areas proposed for
' enhancement are areas that are still jurisdictional wetlands. These areas, at a minimum, will be
planted with hardwoods. In some of the enhancement areas, hydrologic enhancement will also
occur with the removal of a small amount of fill.
The following table presents the restoration/enhancement activity by tract and by reach.
t
e

Tahle 1_ Prniect Restoration Structure and nhiectives
Reach ID Restoration Priority Existing Linear Designed Comment
Type Approach Footage or Linear Footage
Acreage or Acreage
Swartwout (wetland) Restoration NA 0.55 ac 2.27 ac Small amount of
enhancement also
included
Swartwout-Upper Enhancement 2 NA 880 880 Stabilization of eroded
areas and planting
riparian buffer and
fencing
Swartwout- Lower Restoration Priori 1 770 882
Swartwout-tJT 1 Restoration Priorit I 463 581

Reach ID Restoration
Type Priority
Approach Existing Linear
Footage or
Acreage Designed
Linear Footage
or Acreage Comment
Waldroop-Upper Enhancement 2 NA 1463 1463 Livestock exclusion
and Riparian buffer
ex ansion
Waldroop-Lower Enhancement 1 Priority 2 480 480 Active pastureland
with cattle use
Parker (wetland Restoration NA 0 ac 4.4 ac Former olf course
Parker Restoration Priori 1 1750 1879
Parker-UT 2 Restoration Priori 1 210 374
Parker-UT 3 Restoration Priorit 1 165 338
Preserve wetland Restoration NA 0.66 ac 1.62 ac Former olf course
Preserve Enhancement 1 NA 1765 1852
Preserve - UT 4 Restoration Priori 1 110 210
This project has the following goals:
• Provide a stable stream channel for the main channel and the unnamed tributaries to Cat
Creek that neither aggrades nor degrades while maintaining their dimension, pattern, and
profile with the capacity to transport their watershed's water and sediment load.
• Improve water quality and reduce erosion by stabilizing the stream banks for all streams
by improving riparian vegetation.
• Improve aquatic habitat of the main channel and tributaries with the use of natural
material stabilization structures such as root wads, rock vanes, woody debris, and a
riparian buffer.
• Provide aesthetic value, wildlife habitat, and bank stability through the creation or
enhancement of a riparian zone.
• Create a contiguous wildlife corridor and provide diverse amphibian habitat with added
topographic and wetland features.
• Provide shading and biomass input to the stream and mast for wildlife when vegetation is
mature.
• Livestock exclusion on Waldroop Tract.
• Enhance wetland biochemical-and geo-chemical processes over an extended area.
tt
s
i
e

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Table of Contents
1.0. PROJECT SITE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION ........................................................1
1.1 Directions to Project Site ....................................................................................................1
1.2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWQ River Basin Designations .............. ...............1
2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION .................................................................. ...............2
2.1 Drainage Area ...................................................................................................... ...............2
2.2 Surface Water Classification and Water Quality ................................................. ...............3
2.3 Physiography, Geology, and Soils .......................................................................
2.4 Historical Land Use and Development Trends .................................................... ...............3
...............4
2.5 Endangered /Threatened Species ........................................................................ ...............4
2.6 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................... .............1 l
2.7 Potential Constraints ............................................................................................ .............1 l
2.7.1 Property Ownership and Boundary ........................................................... .............12
2.7.2 Site Access ................................................................................................. .............12
2.7.3 Utilities ...................................................................................................... .............12
2.7.4 FEMA/ Hydrologic Trespass ..................................................................... .............13
3.0 PROJECT SITE STREAMS ....................................................................................... .............14
1 3.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................ .............14
3.1.1 Stream Survey ........................................................................................... .............14
3.1.2 Stream Reference Reach Search ................................................................ .............15
' 3.1.3 Stream Design ........................................................................................... .............15
3.2 Swartwout Tract ................................................................................................... .............15
3.2.1 Streams ...................................................................................................... .............15
3.2.2 Soils and Hydrology ..................................................................................
3.2.3 Vegetation .................................................................................................. .............18
.............18
3.3 Waldroop Tract .................................................................................................... .............19
3.3.1 Stream ........................................................................................................
3.3.2 Soils ........................................................................................................... .............19
.............20
3.3.3 Vegetation .................................................................................................. .............20
3.4 Parker Tract .........................................................................................................
3.4.1 Stream ........................................................................................................ .............21
.............21
3.4.2 Soils and Existing Wetland Conditions ..................................................... .............23
3.4.3 Vegetation ..................................................................................................
3.5 Preserve Tract ...................................................................................................... .............23
.............23
3.5.1 Stream ........................................................................................................ .............23

t 3.5.2 Soils and Existing Wetland Conditions .....................................................
3.5.3 Vegetation ................................................................................................. .............24
.............25
4.0 REFERENCE STREAMS ......................................................................................... ..............26
4.1 Bent Crcek ........................................................................................................................26
4.2 Unnamed Tributary to Meadow Fork ...............................................................................26
5.0 PROJECT SITE WETLANDS .................................................................................. ..............27
5.1 Methodology .......................................................................................................
5.1.1 Soil Evaluation ......................................................................................... ..............27
..............27
5.1.2 Hydrologic Evaluation .............................................................................. ..............27

iii

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Res7oration Plan i
Macon County, NC
July 2007
5.1.3 Wetland Delineation ..............................................................................................27
5.2 Swartwout Tract ................................................................................................... .............27
5.3 Parker Tract ......................................................................................................... .............29
5.4 Preserve Tract ...................................................................................................... .............30
6.0 REFERENCE WETLANDS ....................................................................................... .............31

7.0 PROJECT SITE RESTORATION PLAN ..................................................................
.............32 '
7.1 General Principles ................................................................................................ .............33
7.1.1 Stream Restoration ..............................................................•---...............---
7.I.2 Wetland ...................................................................................................... -............33
.............33
7.1.3 Reforestation .............................................................................................. .............34
7.2 Swartwout Tract ...................................................................................................
7.2.1 Stream ........................................................................................................ .............34
.............34
7.2.2 Wetland ...................................................................................................... .............37
7.3 Waldroop Tract ....................................................................................................
7.3.1 Stream ........................................................................................................ .............37
.............37
7.3.2 Livestock Watering ................................................................................... .............39
7.3.3 Riparian Buffers ........................................................................................
7.4 Parker Tract ......................................................................................................... .............39
.............39
7.4.1 Stream ...............................................................•------.................................. .............39
7.4.2 Wetland ......................................................................................................
7.5 Preserve Tract ...................................................................................................... .............42
.............43
7.5.1 Stream ........................................................................................................ .............43
7.5.2 Wetland ......................................................................................................
7.6 Natural Plant Community Restoration ................................................................. .............45
.............46 '
7.7 On-site Invasive Species Management ................................................................ .............48
8.0 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ...................................... 49
..............................................
8.1 Streams ................................................................................................................ .............
.............49
8.2 Wetlands .............................................................................................................. .............49
8.3 Riparian Vegetation ...................
..........................................................................
.............50
8.4 Photograph Documcntation ................................................................................. .............50
9.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... .............5 l
TABLES
Table 1. Project Restoration Structure and Objectives .................................................................... i
Table 2. Drainage Areas ................................................................................................................. 2
Table 3. Species under Federal Protection in Macon County ......................................................... 4
Table 4. Federal Species of Concern in Macon County ............................................................... 10
Table 5. Swartwout Tract Existing Stream Conditions Summary ................................................ 16
Table 6. Waldroop Tract Existing Stream Conditions Summary ................................................. 19
Table 7. Parker Tract Existing Stream Conditions Summary ....................................................... 21
Table 8. Preserve Tract Existing Stream Conditions Summary ................................................... 24
Table 9. HEC-RAS Analysis for Swartwout Tract ....................................................................... 37
Table l0. HEC-RAS Analysis for Parker Tract ............................................................................ 42
Table l 1. HEC-RAS Analyses for Preserve Tract ........................................................................ 45

iv

FIGURES

1
1

t

Cat CYeek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Watershed Map
Figure 3. NRCS Soil Survey Map
Figure 4. Swartwout Tract Existing Conditions
Figure 5. North Carolina Mountain Rural Regional Curve
Figure 6. Waldroop Tract Existing Conditions
Figure 7. Parker Tract Existing Conditions
Figure 8. Preserve Tract Existing Conditions
Figure 9. Reference Reach Bent Creek
Figure 10. Reference Reach Unnamed Tributary to Meadow Fork
Figure 11. Swartwout Tract Wetland Delineation
Figure 12. Parker Tract Wetland Delineation
Figure 13. Preserve Tract Wetland Delineation
Figure 14. Reference Wetland Cartoogechaye Creek
DESIGN SHEETS
Swartwout Tract Proposed Restoration Plan
Waldroop Tract Proposed Restoration Plan
Parker Tract Proposed Restoration Plan
Preserve Tract Proposed Restoration Plan
Longitudinal Profiles
Reforestation Plans
APPENDICIES
Appendix 1. Aquatic Survey Report
Appendix 2. Existing Stream Conditions
Appendix 3. Photo Log
Appendix 4. Morphology Table
Appendix 5. Soils Data and USACE Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms
Appendix 6. Hydrographs and Precipitation Data
Appendix 7. Sediment Transport Calculations
1

Cat Creek Sn-eam and YY"etland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
Ju1v 2007
This page left intentionally blank
~~

i

1

~J

i~

~I
i

1
Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
1.0. PROJECT SITE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) initialed identified a portion of Cat
Creek in Macon County, North Carolina for potential stream, riparian buffer, and wetland
restoration and/or enhancement (Figure 1). Following initial studies by NCDOT beginning in
2002, the project was turned over to the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) in 2005 for
design, construction and monitoring. The reaches of Cat Creek identified are located on four
separate tracts of land: Swartwout, Waldroop, Parker, and Preserve. Three of the tracts,
Swartwout, Parker, and Preserve have been purchased by NCDOT.
1.1 Directions to Project Site
The project site is located east of the town of Franklin in Macon County. Cat Creek Road (SR
1 1513} is located off of US 23/441 between Business 441 and US 64. If proceeding south on US
23 turn left onto Cat Creek Road. Proceed along Cat Creek Road for approximately 1.5 miles
and turn left onto Ferguson Road to access the Preserve and the Parker tracts. Cat Creek crosses
Ferguson Road about 1,900 feet from the turnoff from Cat Creek. Parking is available on either
tract near the creek crossing.
To access the Waldroop Tract continue on Cat Creek Road past Ferguson about 0.5 mile. Bethel
Church Road comes in from the right and just before the road there is a driveway on the left with
a farmhouse and large barn beyond the farmhouse.
To access the Swartwout Tract continue on Cat Creek Road past Ferguson Road about 0.8 miles.
Cat Creek Road takes an abrupt left turn (if you go straight you will be on Jack Cabe Road).
Turn left (staying on Cat Creek Road). The Swartwout Tract is immediately on the right. Agate
provides access to the field.

II
u

1.2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWQ River Basin Designations
Cat Creek is located in the Little Tennessee River Basin in USGS Cataloging Unit 06010202.
The NCDWQ Sub-basin is 04-04-01.

Cut Creek SU-eanr and Wetland Restor-atiar Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION
2.1 Drainage Area
The watershed to the end of the project site is approximately 3.6 square miles (Figure 2).
Topography of the area is characterized as hilly with fairly flat floodplains adjacent to the large
stream and steep mountains in the headwater region.
Cat Creek is a second to third-order stream. The headwaters originate about 1.5 miles east of the
project area. Cat Creek flows from the end of the project area for approximately 0.5 miles before
joining Rabbit Creek and then 1 mile before joining Lake Emory along the Little Tennessee
River.
The floodplain along Cat Creek on the upper Swartwout Tract is wide to the west and narrow to
the east due to the adjacent hillslope to the east. Once the main channel flows past the ridge the
floodplain opens up and is relatively wide for a mountain stream. The floodplain for the UT to
Cat Creek (UTl) and lower Swartwout is confined along the left bank due to the road slope but
the floodplain to the right of the stream is relatively wide. The floodplain through the Waldroop,
Parker, and Preserve Tracts is wide and flat until meeting the adjacent hillslopes. The small
headwater tributaries that feed into Cat Creek are typically forested with few small cleared areas.
However agricultural fields are present along the larger tributaries and Cat Creek.
The main drainage feature at the site is Cat Creek (Figure 2), a second to third order stream. The
second largest drainage feature at the site is the Unnamed Tributary to Cat Creek (UTI) a second
order stream. The stream enters the site from the east and flows approximately 464 feet south,
before emptying into Cat Creek on the Swartwout Tract. The watershed for the Unnamed
Tributary to Cat Creek (UTl) is approximately 0.86 square miles to the confluence with Cat
Creek. The headwaters originate about 1 mile cast of the confluence with Cat Creek. Several
smaller unnamed tributaries enter Cat Creek on the other tracts. These streams include two small
tributaries on the Parker Tract labeled UT2 and UT3. The first tributary UT2 is a second order
stream and is shown on the USGS mapping. The second tributary (UT3) is a first order stream
and does not appear on the USGS mapping. A fourth unnamed tributary (UT4) flows into Cat
Creek on the Preserve Tract. This stream is also a first order stream and does not appear on the
USGS mapping. There are also two first order streams that flow into Cat Creek on the Waldroop
property. These streams were not "named" as no restoration work is proposed for them.
Table 2. Draina a Areas
Reach Draina a Area (S uare Miles)
Swartwout 2.1
UT-1 0.9
Waldroop 2.5
Parker 3.3
Preserve 3.6
The main land use throughout the watershed is agriculture with about half of the watershed
remaining forested. Because the upland areas are not as conducive for farming, the majority of
2
i~
I

1

1

Cat Creek Stream and Wetlarad Restoration Ptan
Macon County, NC
1 July 2007
the large pasture areas are located along the flat floodplains of Cat Creek. All of the parcels of
1 land in the watershed support agriculture and/or single-family housing. From the windshield
survey of the watershed, there is a large tract of land on Onion Mountain that is currently being
subdivided for large home and land lots.
2.2 Surface Water Classification and Water Quality
I Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a classification by the DWQ that is designed to
maintain, protect, and enhance water quality within the state. Cat Creek (NCDWQ Stream Index
Number - 03-08-35) is classified as a Class C water body (NCDENR, 2001). Class C water
resources are waters protected for aquatic life propagation and survival, f shing, wildlife,
secondary recreation, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other
uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent,
1 unorganized, or incidental manner. There are no restrictions on watershed development
activities. The unnamed tributaries that flow into Cat Creek have not been classified and
therefore, carry the same Class C classification.
i 2.3 Physiography, Geology, and Soils
The project area in the Mountain Physiographic Province of North Carolina. It is underlain by
sedimentary and metamorphic rocks of the Blue Ridge Belt. These include biotite gneiss-
migmatic; interlayered and gradational with biotite-garnet gneiss and amphibolate with locally
abundant quartz and alumino-silicates.
According to the Macon County Soil Survey (USDA NRCS, 1996) several soil types are present
I in the project area (Figure 3). The predominant soils mapped along the floodplain of Cat Creek
are Reddies, Nikwasi, and an Udorthents-Urban Land complex. Only Nikwasi soils are
considered to be hydric by the NRCS. Reddies soils may contain hydric inclusions. The
surrounding uplands arc mapped as Saunook and an Evaard-Cowec complex. Land use and
management of these soils may impact the soils in the pro~cct area. Soil units mapped by the
NRCS along the floodplain at the site are described below.
Reddies fine sandy loam (Re). This unit is a moderately well drained soil formed in recent
alluvium and is found on nearly level to gently sloping small stream terraces. Surface runoff is
slow. The seasonal high water table is 2.0 to 3.5 feet below the surface. It is frequently flooded
for very brief periods. Permeability is moderately rapid within the surface layer and rapid or very
rapid in the sub-surface horizon. This soil may have inclusions of Nikwasi and other soils.
Flooding is the main limitation of this soil. Runoff from adjacent uplands is also a management
concern.
Nikwasi fine sandy loam, frequently flooded (Nk). This unit is a poorly drained soil formed in
recent alluvium and is found in depressions on nearly level floodplains along small streams.
Surface runoff is very slow or ponded. The seasonal high water table is at the surface to l foot
below the surface. It is frequently flooded for very brief periods. Permeability is moderately
rapid within the surface horizon and the sub-surface horizon is rapidly permeable. Flooding,
t

Ca! Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
wetness, and ponding are the main limitations of this soil. Runoff from adjacent uplands is also a
management concern.
Udorthents-Urban Land complex (UFB). This unit includes both Udorthents and Urban Land
in such an intricate pattern or so small in area that it is not practical to map them separately at the
selected scale. The Udorthents map unit consists of borrow areas, landfills, and mines and major
revegetated cut and fill areas associated with major highways, commercial sites, and golf
courses. These areas are variable in steepness. The land on the Parker and Preserve Tract along
Cat Creek are known to have once been a golf course.
2.4 Historical Land Use and Development Trends
The main land use throughout the watershed is agriculture with about half of the watershed
remaining forested. Because the upland areas are not as conducive for farming, the majority of
the large pasture areas are located along the flat floodplains of Cat Creek. All of the parcels of
land in the watershed support agriculture and/or single-family housing. From the windshield
survey of the watershed, there is a large tract of land on Onion Mountain that is currently being
subdivided for large home and land lots.
2.5 Endangered /Threatened Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT} are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The USFWS lists seven species
under federal protection for Macon County (USFWS, 2006). These species are listed in Table 3.
Critical Habitat for the spotfin chub and Appalachian elktoe are also designated within this
county along the main stem of the Little Tennessee River.
Table 3. Species under Federal Protection in Macon County
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status
Vertebrates
Bo turtle Gl temys muhlenber• ii T(S/A)
Indiana bat ~1ro~is soda]is E
S otfin chub Cis rinella monacha T
Invertebrates
A alachian elktoe Alasmidonta raveneliana E
Littlewin earl mussel Pe Sias rbula E
Vascular Plants
Small-whorled o onia Isotria medeoloides T
Vir inia s iraea S iraea vir iniana T
E =

T =

T(S,~A) =

** Endangered-A species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
ranee.
Threatened-A species that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its ranee.
Threatened due to similarity of appearance-a species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance
~+ith other rare species and is listed for its protection.
Obscure record -the date and!or location of obsen~ation is uncertain.
4
~i

ii

1

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii~ Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Federally Listed: 1997
The bog turtle is a small freshwater turtle with a maximum carapace length of 11.4 cm (4.5 in).
These turtles have a domed carapace that is weakly keeled and is light brown to ebony in color.
The scutes have alighter-colored starburst pattern. The plastron is brownish-black with
contrasting yellow or cream areas along the midline. This species is distinguished by a
conspicuous orange, yellow, or red blotch on each side of the head.
The bog turtle is semi-aquatic and is typically found in freshwater wetlands characterized by
open fields, meadows, or marshes with slow-moving streams, ditches, and boggy areas. The bog
1 turtle is also found in wetlands in agricultural areas subject to light to moderate livestock
grazing, which helps to maintain an intermediate stage of succession. During the winter, this
species hibernates just below the upper surface of mud. Mating occurs in May and June, and the
female deposits two to six eggs in sphagnum moss or sedge tussocks in May, June, or July. The
diet of the bog turtle is varied, consisting of beetles, lepidopteran and caddisfly larvae, snails,
millipedes, pondweed and sedge seeds, and carrion.
The southern population of the bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
to the northern population; therefore, the southern population is not afforded protection under
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. No habitat exists in the project area for the bog turtle.
There are freshwater wetlands characterized by open fields, meadows, or marshes with slow
moving streams, ditches, or boggy areas. A search of the NHP database revealed no occurrences
of the bog turtle within two miles.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
No habitat for the bog turtle exists within the project area. No bogs are located on the site, and
the wetland areas are small and isolated. No individuals of this species were observed during the
site visit and none are recorded at NHP within two miles of the project site. This project will
have no effect on this federally threatened species.
Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) Endangered
Federally Listed: 1967
The Indiana bat is a medium-sized myotis, less than two inches long, with a wingspan of nine to
eleven inches. They weigh only 0.3 ounces. Fur is brownish to grayish black above and buff to
Iight brown below. The feet are small and delicate and the calcar is strongly keeled.
Though extremely rare this bat is found in 27 states in the eastern United States. Hibernation
occurs from October to April primarily in limestone caves or mines with stable temperatures
between 38° and 43°F, and a relative humidity averaging 87 percent. The bats form large, dense
clusters up to several thousand individuals. During the summer, Indiana bat maternity colonies
require dead or dying trees with loose bark, a nearby water source, and areas to hunt for insects.

Ca! G-eek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County NC
July 2007
Males roost nearby, and have the same habitat requirements. The bats roost under the loose bark
for warmth and protection from the elements or predators.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
No habitat for the Indiana bat exists within the project area. No caves or mines are nearby, and
no dead or dying trees with loose bark were observed. Cat Creek and its tributaries are not
sufficiently wide to provide suitable foraging habitat for the bat. No individuals of this species
were observed during the site visit and none are recorded at NHP within two miles of the project
site. This project will have no effect on this federally endangered species.
Spotfin chub (Cyprinella monacha) Threatened ~
Federally Listed: 1977
This small, elongate fish is recognized by the large black spot in the caudal region. The Spotfin
chub grows to a length of 3.6 in. The mouth is inferior, with a tiny pair of terminal labial barbels.
Breeding males are brilliant turquoise on the back and sides and have white-tipped fins.
Juveniles and adult females have olive-colored backs, silvery sides, and white undersides. The
Spotfin chub is believed to spawn in June. It apparently is a sight feeder, and its diet consists
mainly of dipterans.
The habitat of the Spotfin chub is moderate to large streams with alternating riffles and pools and
clear, cool to warm, fast-flowing water. It is restricted to the Tennessee River drainage area. In
North Carolina, it is known only from the Little Tennessee River in Macon and Swain counties,
and has never been found in streams with significantly silted substrates.
BiologicaA Conclusion No Effect
The USFWS has designated critical habitat for this species within Macon County. The habitat
includes the main channel of the Little Tennessee River from Lake Emory Dam at Franklin,
downstream to the backwaters of Fontana Reservoir m Swam County. Cat Creek flows mto
Rabbit Creek, which flows into Lake Emory and the Little Tennessee River upstream from this
Critical Habitat area.
Cat Creek is a small stream and is largely consist of long riffles with few pools and does not
provide suitable habitat for the Spotfin chub. No individuals of this species were observed during t
the site visit and none are recorded at NHP within two miles of the project site. This project will
have no effect on this federally threatened species.
Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana) Endan ered
g
Federally Listed: 1994
The Appalachian elktoe is recognized by a thin, kidney-shaped shell about 3.2 inch long, 1.4 ,
inches high, and 1 inch wide. The outer shell surface of juvenile mussels is yellowish-brown
whereas the adult shell is dark brown to greenish-black in color. Rays may be prominent to

,. ~

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
obscure. The inside shell surface is shiny white to bluish-white, changing to a salmon, pinkish, or
brownish color in the central and beak cavity portions of the shell.
Historical records reveal that this species once proliferated throughout the Upper Tennessee
River system in western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee. In North Carolina populations
were found in the Little Tennessee River system (Talula Creek, Graham County) and the French
Broad River system, including the Nolichucky River (county unknown), the Little River
(Transylvania County), and Swannanoa River (county unknown), the Pigeon River (Haywood
county), and the main stem of the French Broad River (Buncombe County and an unknown
county).
The Federal Register lists two known surviving populations of the Appalachian elktoe. One is in
the Little Tennessee River between Emory Lake in Macon County and Fontana Reservoir in
Swain County. The other is in the Nolichucky River system in Yancey and Mitchell counties.
The habitat in these locations can be described as relatively shallow, medium-sized creeks and
rivers with cool, well-oxygenated, moderate- to fast-flowing water. Substrates are gravelly mixed
with cobble and boulders, or occasionally coarse and sandy.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
~ The USFWS has designated critical habitat for this species within Macon County. The habitat
includes the main channel of the Little Tennessee River from the backwaters of Fontana Lake
upstream to the North Carolina-Georgia state line. Cat Creek flows into Rabbit Creek, which
flows into the Little Tennessee River within this Critical Habitat area.
Cat Creek was surveyed for freshwater mussels on September 13, 2003. The site is described as
poor quality habitat with heavy sediment load and no buffers. The substrate is mainly sand and
gravel with few cobbles noted. Within the project area, Cat Creek contains high levels of silt. No
mussels were observed during this survey. No occurrences of the Appalachian elktoe are
recorded at NHP within two miles of the project site. The survey concluded No Effect for the
Appalachian elktoe. A copy of the survey can be found in Appendix 1.
Littlewing pearlymussel (Pegias fibula) Endangered
Federally Listed: 1988
This small freshwater bivalve mollusk attains an average adult size of 0.95 inches in length. The
species name is descriptive of its wing-like appearance. The outer shell is usually eroded away in
mature individuals, giving the shell a chalky appearance. In younger individuals the shell may
appear light green or dark yellowish brown with dark rays of variable width along the shell's
anterior surface. The nacre ~s whitish on the anterior border and salmon or flesh colored in the
I beak cavity.
This mussel is endemic to the southern Appalachian Mountains and the Cumberland Plateau
regions. Historical records place this species in 24 stream reaches in several southeastern states,
1 however the species is presently known from only six stream reaches. In North Carolina it is
only known from a small portion of the Little Tennessee River Basin.

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan ,
Macon County, NC
July 2007
The littlewing pearlymussel prefers cool, clear, high-gradient streams. It is commonly found at
the head of riffles, but also found in and below riffles on sand and gravel substrates with
scattered cobbles. It also inhabits sand pockets between rocks, cobbles and boulders, and
underneath large rocks. During spawning, it can be found lying on top or partially buried in sand
and fine gravel between cobbles in only 6 to 10 inches of water.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Cat Creek was surveyed for freshwater mussels on September 13, 2003. The site is described as
poor quality habitat with heavy sediment load and no buffers. The substrate is mainly sand and
gravel with few cobbles noted. Within the project area, Cat Creek contains high levels of silt. No
mussels were observed during this survey. No occurrences of the littlewing pearlymussel are
recorded at NHP within two miles of the project site. The survey concluded No Effect for the ,
littlewing pearlymussel. A copy of the survey can be found in Appendix 1.
Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) Threatened
Federally Listed: 1982
The specific epithet of the small whorled pogonia comes from the resemblance of this perennial
orchid to young plants of Indian cucumber root (Medeola virgirtlarta). However, the small
whorled pogonia has a stout, hollow stem m contrast to the solid, slender stem of Indian
cucumber root. The stem is 3.7 to 9.8 in tall, with a terminal whorl of 5 or 6 light green leaves
that are elliptical in shape and measure up to 3 in by 1.5 in. One or two flowers are borne at the
top of the stem, appearing from mid-May to mid-June. The flowers lack fragrance and nectar
guides, and apparently are self-pollinating.
The small whorled o onia was former) scattered in 48 counties in l6 eastern states. Currentl
P g Y y,
the majority of populations are found in New England at the foothills of the Appalachian
Mountains and in northern coastal Massachusetts. The habitat of the small whorled pogonia
varies widely throughout its range, although there are a few common characteristics among the
majority of sites. These include sparse to moderate ground cover; a relatively open understory;
and proximity to features that create extensive, stable breaks in the canopy, such as logging roads
or streams. The pogonia has been found in mature forests as well as stands as young as 30 years
old. Forest types include mixed-deciduous/ white pine or hemlock in New England, mixed
deciduous in Virginia, white pine/mixed-deciduous or white pine/oak-hickory in Georgia, and
red maple in Michigan. Understory components in the southern part of the range are most
commonly found to be flowering dogwood (Corpus Florida), sourwood (Oxyderrdron arboreum),
mountain Laurel (Kalmia latifolia), American chestnut (Castanea dentata), witch hazel
(Hamamelis virginiana), and flame azalea (Rhododendron cale>7dulaceum). Early descriptions
placed the small whorled pogonia on dry sites, but it has since been found on sites with high soil
moisture.
t

1

1
Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Biological Conclusion
No Effect
No habitat for the small whorled pogonia exists within the project area. Most of the project area
is open pasture or weedy fields and within the limited forested areas, the understory is dense. No
occurrences of this species are recorded at NHP within two miles of the project site. This project
will have no effect on this federally threatened species.
Virginia spiraea (spiraea virginiana) Threatened
Federally Listed: 1990
Virginia spiraea is a perennial shrub with arching, upright stems. Its growth form is described as
"plastic" and varies depending upon age and environmental conditions. The roots are a complex
system of horizontal rootstock with mats of small fibrous roots. If exposed, the horizontal
rootstock gives rise to upright stems. Virginia spiraea typically has a diffuse branching pattern
and grows to 3 to 10 ft in height. Leaves are simple, ovate to lanceolate, with an acute base. The
leaf margins range from entire to completely serrate. Virginia spiraea flowers from late May to
late July, with bright to creamy white flowers forming a corymb.
Virginia spiraea is typically found in disturbed sites along rivers and streams. It forms dense
clumps around boulders and in rock crevices, and apparently depends on flood scour to eliminate
woody competitors and create suitable early successional habitats. Typical habitat includes
scoured banks of high gradient streams, or on meander scrolls, point bars, natural levees and
braided features of lower stream reaches. In North Carolina, extant populations are known from
Ashc, Macon, Mitchell, and Yancey counties. In Graham County, there is an historic record of an
extirpated population.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
I The stream banks within the project area provides potential habitat for the Virginia spiraea,
although due to continued mowing and past use of the site as pastureland and a golf course the
makes it marginal habitat. Earth Tech biologists conducted visual surveys for the Virginia
spiraea on July l4, 2003 along the entire project length of Cat Creek. No Virginia spiraea plants
were observed and none are recorded at NHP within two miles of the project site. This project
will have no effect on this federally threatened species.

t

1
t

Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act
and arc not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed
or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Organisms that are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened
(T), or Special Concern (SC) on the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant
and Animal Species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the
North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. However, the level of protection
given to state-listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities. Table 4 contains a complete
listing of the federal species of concern in Macon County, their state status, and an indication of
habitat presence on the Cat Creek site.
9

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Table 4. Federal Species of Concern in Macon County
Common Name Scientific Name State
Status Habitat
Present
Vertebrates
A alachian Bewick's wren Th •omanes bewickii altus E No
A alachian cottontail S lvila us transitionalis SR Yes
Appalachian yellow-bellied
sa sucker Sphyrapicus varies appalachiensis SC Yes
Bachman's s arrow Aimo hila aestivalis SC No
Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea SR No
Green salamander Aneides aeneus E No
Hellbender C tobranchus alle aniensis SC No
Olive darter Percina s uamata SC Yes
Olive-sided fl catcher Conto us borealis NL No
Rafines ue's bi -eared bat Co norhinus ra trees uii T No
See a e salamander Desmo nathus aeneus SR Yes
Sicklefin redhorse Moxostoma s NL No
Southern A alachian woodrat Neotoma loridana haematoreia SC No
Southern rock vole Microtus chrotorrhinus carolinensis SC No
Southern water shrew Sorex alustris unctulatus SC Yes
Invertebrates
Carolina skistodia tomes Skistodia tomes carolinensis SR No
Diana fritilla butterfl S eyeria Jana SR No
Lost Nantahala cave s ider Nesticus coo eria SR No
Mar arita River skimmer Mac•romis mar arita SR ** No
Tawn cresent butterfl Phycoides batesii maconensis SR No
Vascular Plants
Butternut Ju lans cinerea NL Yes
Carolina saxifra e Saxi~ra a caroliniana SR T No
Cuthbert's turtlehead Chelone cuthbertii SR L * No
Divided-leaf ra wort Senecio millefolium T No
Fraser's loosesMfe Lvsimac•hia fraseri E Yes
Glades ur e Eu horbia u+ urea SR T No
Gor e film fern Hrmeno hvllum tayloriae NL No
Granite dome oldenrod Solida o simulans NL No
Mountain catchfl Silene ovata SR T No
Piedmont aster Aster mirabilis SR T No
Piratebush Buc•kleva disticho ~hvlla E No
Sweet inesa Monotro sis odorata SR T * No
Torre 's mountain mint Pvcnanthemum torrei NL No
West Indian dwarf olypody Grammitis nimbata E No
Nonvascular Cants
A liverwort Ce haloziella obhrsilobula NL No
A liverwort Chilosc•v hus a alchianus SR T No
A liverwort Plagiochila shar ii SR T No
A liverwort P/a iochila sullivantii var. sullivantii NL No
A liverwort Pla ioc•hi7a vir inic•a var. caroliniana SR T No
A liverwort Porella a ontca var. a alachiana NL No
A liverwort Porella x>alau ensis SR L No
Anderson's melon moss Brac•hymeniu+n andersonii SR L No
NL = Not tracked by NHP
T = Threatened
E = Endangered
SC = Special Concern
l~

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 200
SR = Significantly Rare
-T = Fewer than ] 00 populations throughout the species' range
L = Fewer than 50 populations throughout the species' range
* = Historic record; the species was observed over 50 years ago
** = Obscure record; the date and/or location of observation is uncertain
Sources: Amoroso, ed. 2002; LeGrand and Hal] 2001, FWS North Carolina Ecological Services
Common name follows FWS listing when different from NHP.
FWS/NHP January 2006
1 No FSC species were observed during the site visit, although suitable habitat is present within
the project area for several Federal Species of Concern.
Records from the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) were reviewed on July 23, 2003 to determine
the presence of protected species. The records did not list any known populations of federal or
state protected species occurring at this site or within 2 miles of the site.
2.6 Cultural Resources
The NCDOT Office of Human Environment conducted a survey for cultural resources and an
evaluation of Cat Creek restoration area on the Swartwout and Waldroop Tracts in April 2003.
During this evaluation, an environmentally sensitive area was found on the Swartwout Tract. The
specifics of the sensitivity of this area are withheld from this public document in order to protect
it. For further information on the specific sensitivity of the site, please contact Earth Tech, EEP,
or the State Historic Preservation Office. Measures have been taken into consideration to avoid
the area including the stream and wetland design and access to the site during construction.
Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office will occur throughout the project to
insure that the environmentally sensitive area is protected and not disturbed.
' Surveys of the Parker and Preserve Tracts were not conducted because both sites have been
extensively modified for development of a golf course.
2.7 Potential Constraints
Lower Swartwout has two lateral constraints. One is the environmentally sensitive area. This
area wi]l be avoided by moving the stream to the east away from the area and the existing
channel. The sinuosity ]s designed to match the reference condition and account for these lateral
1 constraints. The second lateral constraint is the existing wetland on the east side of the tract.
The proposed stream alignment will not impact the wetlands directly, as the alignment and
profile ]s set so that the existing ground ]s the new flood plain and the limits of construction do
not encroach on the wetland. Priority 1 restoration for the stream is important in the area that is
adjacent to the wetland in order to limit excavation and improve groundwater hydrology. The
resulting increase in base level elevation by approximately I' and the reconnection of the
floodplain will promote a more stable and consistent hydrology for the existing wetlands.
Preserve Tract. The sinuosity of the stream is designed to match the reference conditions for
streams of similar stream and valley type while working around the lateral constraints including
the road embankments, bedrock outcrops, and existing wetlands.

' ll

Cat Creek Strewn and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
A review of the EDR report did not reveal any known occurrences of the presence or release of
hazardous materials or wastes on the property. During site activities no evidence, such as ,
distressed vegetation, unusual seeps or odors, or the presence of illegally or improperly disposed
chemicals or hazardous wastes were observed. There are no records of occurrences for
endangered or threatened species within the project area. There are road right-of--way issues
along some sections of the project. On the Waldroop Tract, there is a constraint of keeping the
stream where it is near the barn and protecting the barn. On the Waldroop tract all work must be
done within the fence line. An easement for a septic drainfield for a nearby residence is located
on the Parker Tract, but should not limit access or cause a problem during construction. There
were no features on site that would restrict equipment access.
2.7.1 Property Ownership and Boundary ,
Three of the tracts, Swartwout, Parker, and Preserve, have been purchased by NCDOT for the ,
purposes of restoring the streams and wetlands on the tracts. The Waldroop tract is owned by
Jim and Sue Waldroop. The Waldroop property will remain in private ownership and a
Conservation Easement will be obtained to protect the restored and enhanced stream. A deed
restriction will be placed on the Swartwout Tract with regards to the environmentally sensitive
area.
Cat Creek Road (SR 1513) lies to the south and parallels most of the project area. Jack Cabe
Road (SR 1520) forms the eastern and southern border of the Swartwout Tract, and Cat Creek
Road is to the west. Cat Creek Road divides the Swartwout Tract from the Waldroop Tract and
continues to run parallel to Cat Creek forming the southern border of the Waldroop Tract. A
fence line, approximately 1,000 feet west of the Waldroop barn, divides the Waldroop Tract
from the Parker Tract. Cat Creek Road parallels the Parker Tract until the pond and intersection
with Ferguson Road (SR 1507). Ferguson Road splits off of Cat Creek Road and divides the
Parker and the Preserve Tracts. Ferguson Road then runs parallel to Cat Creek along the eastern
boundary of the Preserve Tract. The project ends at the fence line approximately 1,800 linear feet
downstream of the culvert under Ferguson Road.
Z. 7.2 Site Access
Assess to all four tracts will be from the adjacent state roads and should not provide any
constraints on the project. Access and work on the lower section of the Waldroop tract will need
to be coordinated with Mr. Waldroop.
2.7.3 Utilities
A power line crosses Cat Creek near the divide between the Waldroop and Parker Tracts. The
utility lines will need to be flagged and equipment working in the area will only need to work
around the pole and watch the overhanging lines. Any utilities within the road right-of--ways will
need to be identified, but should not provide any constraints to construction of the project.
1
1
12 ,

1

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
2.7.4 FEMA/Hydrologic Trespass
According to the Macon County Flood Insurance Rate Map (370150 0006 A July 1, 2001), the
floodplain along Cat Creek has not been mapped by the Federal Emergency Management
Administration (FEMA). It is likely that portions of the site are within the 100-year floodplain;
however, no base flood elevations have been determined.
Cat Creek is not regulated by FEMA, and flooding analysis is not required. However, flooding
analysis was performed to insure that the floodplain is not raised significantly along the stream to
affect non-project areas. The USGS Method for estimating the magnitude and frequency of
floods in rural basins was used to estimate the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100-year peak discharges for
the different drainage areas.
The USGS regression equations from USGS Fact Sheet 007-00 were used to estimate flood
discharges (USGS 2002). The latitude and longitude and drainage area for each site are inputs
that are required.
' HEC-RAS, version 3.0, was used to compute a flooding analysis for the existing and proposed
conditions. This analysis is used to ensure that the project will not significantly change existing
floodwater limits and that shear stresses are not unreasonable. The results of the HEC-RAS
analysis are presented in Section 7.

1

1

t
i
1
13

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
3.0 PROJECT SITE STREAMS
3.1 Methodology
There are several steps in performing a stream restoration design project. The first step is to
survey the existing conditions of the stream and analyze that data. Once the existing conditions
are analyzed and the existing stream type is known (i. e., B, C, G, etc.) the design process begins
by deciding what type of stream channel needs to be built (i.e., C or E). It is important for the
newly constructed channel to handle bankfull flows and remain stable. Once it is known what
type of channel will be constructed, a stream reference reach needs to be identified and surveyed.
Once the reference reach data is compiled, a stable stream can be designed by altering the
pattern, profile, and/or dimension of the existing channel and by using in-stream structures.
3.1.1 Stream Survey
The US Forest Service General Technical Report RM-245, Stream Channel Reference Sites: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Technique was used as a guide when taking field measurements.
Accurate field measurements are critical to determine the present condition of the existing
channel, conditions of the floodplam, and watershed drainage patterns. Topographic mapping of
the restoration site was provided by NCDOT. This mapping was used to evaluate present
conditions, new channel alignment and grading volumes. Mapping also provided the locations of
property pins, fence lines, large trees, vegetation lines, culverts, and roads.
Field surveys of the existing stream channels and surrounding floodplains were conducted July
14 through 17, 2003, and July 31, 2003 to determine the potential for stream restoration. The
stream measurements arc used in the classification and assessment of the existing stream type
and provide data to classify the stream using the Rosgen classification method, Levels I and II
(Rosgen 1996). While conducting the field survey, visual observations were made regarding the
stream condition, seep locations, disturbed wetland areas, stream crossings, fencing layout,
bedrock outcrops, and other unique features of the stream and surrounding floodplain.
During the Cat Creek site visits, seventeen (17) cross-sections were taken using standard
differential leveling techniques. These cross-sections were used to gather detail on the present
dimensions and condition of the channel. Cross-sectional area was calculated using the bankfull
features. Twelve (12) cross-sections of the existing Cat Creek channel were surveyed. In addition
to the cross-sections along the main channel, two (2) cross-sections along the existing Unnamed
Tributary to Cat Creek (UT1) on the Swartwout Tract were surveyed, and three (3) cross-
sections were surveyed on the smaller tributaries on Parker and Preserve. Pebble counts,
pavement, and subpavement samples were taken along Cat Creek and UT1. A majority of Cat ,
Creek has been altered in the past; therefore, meander length, beltwidth, and radius of curvature
were measured in the few areas with sinuosity. An estimation of the bank erosion potential was
conducted at the seventeen cross-sections using the Bank Erodibility Hazard Index (BEHI) ,
developed by Rosgen (]996). Field survey data is included as Appendix 2, photos of the sites
are included as Appendix 3 and a Morphology Table presenting all the measured and design
parameters is included as Appendix 4.
1
l4 ,

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
1 3.1.2 Stream Reference Reach Search
The reference reach is a stable stream segment used to develop dimensionless ratios for natural
channel design. A reference reach that has the dimensions, pattern, and profile of the desired
stream type to be designed should be found within the same physiographic region and if possible
within the same River Basin. A stable reference reach has the following: stable banks and bed
material; stable bedform sequence; stable pattern; native vegetation along the buffer; similar
valley type; and similar land use within the watershed. Potential reference reaches were first
identified by reviewing USGS topographic maps for Macon County and the surrounding counties
within the Little Tennessee River Basin. Sites were then visited and viewed from the road and
other points of public access. The landowners, for the stream reaches that appeared to be suitable
were contacted and permission was obtained to evaluate the reaches in greater detail.
3.1.3 Stream Design
The stream restoration design is based upon the dimensionless ratios taken from measurements
of the reference reachs in relation to bankfull stage. These ratios are used to derive the proper
pattern, profile, and dimension for the channel to ensure sediment is transported effectively and
the channel is stable. For this project there are several different reaches each with different
problems but with similar characteristics. The reaches were divided based upon the
characteristics and location. Overall the site was divided into 9 reaches: Swartwout Upper,
I Swartwout UT, Swartwout Lower, Waldroop Upper, Waldroop Lower, Parker, and Preserve.
The stream restoration designs for each reach were based upon the existing site characteristics
and needs for restoration and/or enhancement. The designs used dimensionless ratios from the
1 reference reaches.
3.2 Swartwout Tract
The land uses within the watershed for Swartwout Tract include farms, forested land, secondary
roads, and scattered residences. The watershed at the end of the Swartwout Tract covers 2.1
square miles (Figure 2).
3.2.1 Streams
r Cat Creek flows through the Swartwout Tract for approximately 1,632 feet (Figure 4). A
geomorphic survey was performed on the Swartwout tract in order to evaluate its current
condition and determine a classification for the reach. The longitudinal survey for classification
' was 180 feet long, which of a sufficient length to identify the poor bedform of the entire reach.
The reach was broken into an upper and a lower classification section due to changes in valley
type, slope, geometry and cover type. Table 5 summarizes the existing conditions data found in
' Appendix 2 for Cat Creek on the Swartwout Tract. Appendix 3 contains photographs of the
Swartwout Tract.

1
~ 15

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Table 5. Swartwout Tract Existing Stream Conditions Summary
Tract Bankfull Bankfull ER Width Avg. Sinuosity BHR BEHI Stream
Width Cross- to Water Type
(feet) Sectional Depth Surface
Area Ratio Slope
Upper 17.5 17.] 6.9 17.9 0.015 I.O1 1.53 Very C4
Reach High
Lower 19.9 16.7 1.6 23.7 0.014 }.01 1.32 High NA
Reach
UT1 l6 20.2 3.4 12.7 0.022 1.06 1.41 Very Cob
Riffle Hi h
Mt. 20.4 24.4
Regional
Curve 18.0(UT) 19.5(UT)
*Additional Survey Data located in Appendix 2
*Location of Cross-Sections shown on Figure 4.
The cross-sectional areas of Cat Creek, the Unnamed Tributary (UT 1), and the reference reach
sites used for this report are plotted on the Mountain Regional Curve of North Carolina
developed by the North Carolina State University (NCSU) Water Quality Group, 2000
(Figure 5).
Cat Creek Upper Swartwout
For the first 300 feet, the centerline of Cat Creek is the property line for the boundary with the
landowner to the east. This reach borders a mature hardwood forest to the east and to the west is
an old pasture. This portion of the reach runs through a steep, confining valley where the
channel has apparently been moved against the valley wall, though this is likely to have occurred
decades if not a century ago. The modification as well as other anthropogenic influences has
caused the channel to over widen and incise. This portion of the reach is relatively stable,
though still actively widening in several locations. The proposed enhancement/stabilization
efforts will not cause any deforestation of this reach.
Cat Creek meanders tightly around a heavily wooded ridge and then makes a drastic bend to the
left. The lack of channel bedform, the over-widening, and the lack of riparian vegetation on the
outer bank have caused severe erosion on the outside bends near the fence line and an existing
access road. Banks here are undercut and mass wasting is causing a significant contribution of
sediment to Cat Creek. This section of more than 100 feet of bank has continually eroded during
the few years that this project has been in planning. The location of the bank stabilization efforts
and proximity to the property boundary fence are shown on Figure 4. The fence is beside an
access road that belongs to the adjacent property owner. From this meander bend the channel
flows over bedrock through a wooded section. The channel remains incised and with short
stretches of bank wasting occurring down to an old ford. Here the channel slope changes and
property constraints are eliminated allowing for full channel restoration.
16
1

1
fl

1
1

t

1
1

1

1

i]

i
L
1
1
1

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Within this reach Cat Creek classifies as a C4 channel under the Rosgen classification method.
It has a bankfull width of 17.5 feet. A Bank Height Ratio of 1.53 is indicative of incision. Bank
wasting indicated the successional stage of this channel is in a current trend of changing from a
"C" to a "G" or "F" as incision or widening continues in future flood events.
Cat Creek Lower Swartwout
The lower reach of Cat Creek flows through a former pasture. The pasture was active up until
the time the property was purchased by the NCDOT in 2003 as a stream and wetland restoration
site. The stream has been moved from its natural alignment and built as a straight "V-ditch" at
some unknown date in the past. Spoil piles line both sides of the channel creating an incised
channel. Entrenchment ratios are a poor indicator of channel stability in this case, due the fact
that the channel is now a straight reach with no access to the floodplain during relatively large
flood events of up to approximately the 5-10 year event. The channel modification has created a
channel with little to no bedform and very poor riffle -pool sequencing to provide biological
function and channel stability. This reach has intermittent bank wasting along its length. Many
channels that are re-aligned and altered by man would have developed a somewhat stable pattern
after decades have past. However, in this reach, the confinement by the spoil berms has disabled
the ability of the stream to develop any meander pattern or bedform and, therefore, its ability to
possess the dimension pattern, profile and biological function of a natural channel. The proposed
re-alignment and raising of the channel grade will re-connect this channel to the wide floodplain
of the remnant channel and improve the stability and function of Cat Creek.
The channelized reach of Cat Creek does not lend itself to classification under the Rosgen
classification system. It has a bankfull width of 19.9 feet. An entrenchment ratio of 1.32
indicates that it is entrenched. Remnants of a spoil bank along the east side and a sinuosity of
1.01 provide evidence of past channelization and disturbance. The average water surface slope is
almost equal the valley slope, which in itself indicates the lack of pools and tendency of
instability of the reach. Just below the confluence of UT1 the channel has been pushed up against
the base of Jack Cabe Road.
UT to Cat Creek (UT1)
This small stream flows onto the site through a culvert beneath Jack Cabe Road (Figure 4). The
UT runs parallel to Jack Cabe Road before joining Cat Creek just upstream of the bridge on Cat
Creek Road. The stream has been channelized from the culvert to its confluence with Cat Creek
with a spoil pile on the right bank preventing it from reaching its floodplain on bankfull and
larger events. lncision and the confinement of the spoil pile on the right bank and Jack Cabe
Road on the left bank has caused bank wasting, bank scour, bed scour and general instability
along the entirety of the reach. The reach has poor bedform with few pools for habitat and energy
dissipation of higher flow events. Sinuosity of the altered channel is 1.06, also indicating its
channelization. The channel is overly wide in some areas and a few side bars along the right
bank are present, indicating aggradation. The presence of rip-rap stone in the channel indicated
attempts to stabilize sections of the reach in the past. A review of the existing topography
indicates that the at one time the stream was likely located to the east where it flowed through a
wetland area and into Cat Creek. It is probable that the channel was altered in order to move it to
l~

Cat Creek Sh-eant and Wettand Resroration Ptan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
the edge of the pasture, rather than running through the middle of it. The proposed re-alignment
will; reconnect the channel to the floodplain, help reduce near bank stress, provide for a stable
channel with greatly reduced sediment contributions to Cat Creek, provide a stable bedform and
natural sinuosity for this valley type, and improve the hydrology of the nearby existing wetlands.
The proposed channel revision will minimize construction impacts of the adjacent wetlands.
The channelized reach of the UT does not lend itself to classification under the Rosgen
classification system. It has a bankfull width of 16.03 feet. An entrenchment ratio of 3.4
indicates that it is moderately entrenched. Remnants of a spoil bank along the right bank and a
sinuosity of 1.06 provide evidence of past channelization and alteration. A bank height ratio of
1.41 demonstrates the incision of the altered channel and offers an explanation of the relative
instability of the channel. There is no evidence of channel access to the remnant floodplain on
the right bank.
3.2.2 Soils and Hydrology
The floodplain along Cat Creek is divided into an upper field and a lower field by a natural
narrowing of the floodplain. According to the Macon County Soil Survey, the floodplain
adjacent to Cat Creek is mapped as Reddies (Figure 3). See Section 5.0 for details on wetland
soils and hydrology.
3.2.3 Vegetation
Upper- Swartwout
Along the upper section of Cat Creek, a mature hardwood forest is present to the east and to the
west is a pasture. Trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants that are along the left bank shade a
majority of the stream in the upper reach. Tree species include red maple (Acer ruhrum), tulip
poplar (Liriodendrop tulipifera), spicebush (Lipdera bepzoin), and flowering dogwood (Corpus
Florida). Herbaceous vegetation includes switchgrass (Papicurp viroalum), wingstem (Verbesina
alternifolia), soft rush (Juncus effuses), sedges (Carex sp.), jewelweed (Impatiens capepsis), and
goldenrod (Solydago sp.). The west side of the channel is similar to the lower pasture portion of
the tract described in detail below.
Lower Swartwout
In the lower section, Cat Creek flows through a pasture. The channel is fenced off and heavily
vegetated with herbaceous vegetation. The pasture has been mowed annually and consists of
grasses and other herbaceous vegetation. The dominant grass is pasture fescue (Festuca
arupdinaceum). Other herbaceous vegetation includes sedges, soft rush, goldenrod (Solydago
sp.), blackberry vines (Rubes sp.), and Joe-pye weed (Eupatorium rpaculatum). Because of
infrequent mowing along the channel, scattered woody vegetation is present and includes black
willow (Salix pigs), tag alder (Alms serrulata), and elderberry (Sambu~us capadensis).
18
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
UT to Cat Creek (UTl)
The vegetation along this stream consists of scattered trees and shrubs with a dense herbaceous
layer. The trees are red maple and the dominant shrubs are tag alder and elderberry. The
herbaceous vegetation is variable and includes jewelweed, wingstem, blackberry, New York
ironweed (Vernonia noveboracensis), purplestem aster (Aster puniceum), goldenrod, deertongue
(Panicum clandestinum), and Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum).
Wetlands
The wetland area adjacent to UT1 is dominated by herbaceous vegetation. This vegetation
includes blue aster, goldenrod, soft rush, sedges, and ironweed.
3.3 Waldroop Tract
The Waldroop Tract is an active cattle and horse farm owned by Sue and Jim Waldroop (Figure
' 6). Cat Creek flows through the property for approximately 2,160 feet. The tract has been
divided into an upper and lower section based upon the proposed design. Photographs of the site
are Iocated in Appendix 3.
Data obtained from field surveys were used to compute the morphological characteristics of the
channel. Table 6 summarizes the existing conditions data found in Appendix 2.
Table 6. Waldroop Tract Existing Stream Conditions Summary

1

Tract Bankfull Bankfull Cross- ER Width to Ave. Water Sinuosity BHR BEHI
Width Sectional Area Depth Sursace
(feet) Ratio Slo e
Waldroop 22.9 39.1 3 13.4 0.0077 1.01 1.37 Low
Lower
Mt. Regional 27.1 41.4
Curve
* Additional Survey Data located m Appendix Z
Locations ofCross-Sections on Figure6
3.3.1 Stream
The upper section is fairly stable with a few eroded banks and a narrow buffer. The lower section
is unstable due to the highly eroding banks, deep pools, and lack of a good riffle-pool sequence.
This section has a narrow mature buffer that is being eroded away and therefore in need of
stabilization. The watershed at the end of the Waldroop Tract totals 2.5 square miles.
Upper Waldroop
The upstream portion of Cat Creek on the Waldroop Tract flows alongside Cat Creek Road
1 (Figure 6). The upper reach includes approximately 1,463 linear feet. One small road ditch
enters the property at the beginning from the north along Cat Creek Road. The creek flows
through an equipment/livestock crossing and continues through a narrow buffer. In this section

19

Cat Creek Stream and Welland Restoration Plan '
Macon County, NC
July 2007
the stream is fairly stable. However, just below the equipment crossing, there is a boulder
outcrop and below the boulder, a large scour pool has formed. A small tributary enters from the
left just upstream of a wooden equipment access bridge. Cat Creek then flows under the bridge,
which is just upstream of the barn.
Lower Waldroop r
Adjacent to and just below the barn is a wide cattle crossing. The crossing is used regularly to
move cows from the pasture on the north side of the stream to the "bull pasture" on the south
side of the creek. A watering access point for the bull pasture is also found in this area. The cattle
have caused erosion and caved in the banks at the crossing. However, rock and other materials
have been placed in the crossing, and it appears to be relatively stable.
Below the barn, the creek flows through a narrow (5 feet on both sides) but mature buffer ,
between two fence lines, roughly 35 feet in width. This section of the stream has severe
streambank erosion and is overly wide in multiple locations. This has caused aggradation of
fines in the channel bed and bar formation which is creating stress on the banks along aggraded ,
sections of the channel. The eroding banks are also causing loss of large trees.
Although the channel is entrenched and has large bank height ratios, the flood-prone area
extends into the bull pasture. Due to past channel modifications the stream does not lend itself to
classification under the Rosgen classification system. The banks are eroding and scouring, the
pools are infrequent, and riffles are shallow and wide with aggradation. ,
3.3.2 Soils
According to the Macon County Soil Survey, soils adjacent to Cat Creek are mapped as Reddies
fine sandy loam. Soil on the Waldroop Tract was not evaluated during field investigations.
3.3.3 Vegetation ,
Waldroop Upper Section
The vegetation along this section consists of a narrow tree and shrub buffer with pasture on both
sides. The woody buffer is approximately 25 feet in total width. The vegetation is maintained in
a shorter, shrubby state by the landowner in this area. The woody portion of the buffer consists ,
of mostly tag alder with a few scattered black willows. Herbaceous vegetation consists of
blackberry, rushes, wingstem, and deertongue grass.
Waldroop Middle and Lower Section
The vegetation along this reach is also a narrow buffer of trees and shrubs with pasture on both '
sides. The buffer consists of much larger and older trees and shrubs with maintenance limited to
keeping vegetation away from the fence. Several of the larger trees are being undercut by bank
erosion. Species include black walnut (Juglans nigra), red maple, privet (Ligustrum sinense),
and scattered black cherry (Prunats serotina). Herbaceous vegetation consists of blackberry,
t
20

1 Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
rushes, wingstem, and deertongue grass. The buffer in this section is relatively dense throughout.
' The adjoining pastures are regularly maintained through mowing and grazing of livestock.
Species present include fescues and other pasture grasses.
' 3.4 Parker Tract
The Parker Tract begins downstream of the Waldroop fence line. This tract was once part of a
' golf course. The channel has been straightened and the floodplain altered by fill material and
drainage modifications to allow for the construction of the golf course. Although the golf course
has not been active for a number of years, the tract is still open with the locations of greens and
tee boxes still visible. The tract is owned by the NCDOT who purchased it in 2002 for their
stream and wetland restoration program. Photographs of the site are located in Appendix 3.
' Cat Creek flows for approximately 1803 feet through the center of the Parker Tract. Two small
unnamed tributaries, UT 2 and UT 3 enter the site from the west.
' A geomorphic survey was performed on the Swartwout tract in order to evaluate its current
condition and determine a classification for the reach. Table 7 summarizes the existing
conditions data found in Appendix 2 for Cat Creek on the Parker Tract.
Table 7. Parker Tract Existin Stream Conditions Summar
i~
~i

Tract Bankfull Bankfull ER Width to Avg. Sinuosity BHR BEHI
Width (feet) Cross- Depth Water
Sectional Ratio Surface
Area Slo e
Parker 18.5 40.3 _5.7 8.5 0.0058 1.06 1.38 Low°
UT2 8.2 12.9 13.9 5.2 0.013 I 1.33 Low
UT3 6.7 6.9 22.4 6.5 0.013 1 1.5 NA
Mt. Regional 27.13 41.4
Curve 14.7 (UT2) 13.5 (UT2)
11.2 (UT3) 8.2 (UT3)
*Additional Survey Data located in Appendix 2
Locations of Cross-Sections on Figure 7
' 3.4.1 Stream
' After leaving the Waldroop Tract, Cat Creek flows under an old wooden bridge. From the
wooden bridge, the stream turns slightly to the southwest and runs parallel to Cat Creek Road
(Figure 7). There is bedrock present for approximately 400 feet through this section. The stream
flows through the abandoned golf course field and there arc no trees along the banks. This reach
is extremely straight and has been channelized as evident from spoiled material at the top of the
stream banks and from personal accounts from adjacent landowners. The bed material through
1 this section is very unconsolidated, consisting of loose gravel and a significant percentage of fine
silt. The Lack of consolidation is evidence of the present condition of the actively eroding and
aggrading channel. The incision, indicated by a high bank height ratio of l .38, is causing erosion
1 in multiple locations along the length of the reach. Mid channel bar formation exists throughout
the reach, again evidence of the lack of sediment transport capacity of the channel through this

21

Cal Creek Stream and Welland Restoration Plan '
Macon Couniv, NC
July 2007
reach. Delta bars exists where the 2 tributaries join this channel which is also an indicator of a
Iack of sediment carrying capacity and the resulting in-channel stresses that cause bank erosion.
The entrenchment ratio of 5.6 is misleading, as this much floodplain is not available until the
flow is high enough to reach approximately 1.7 of the max depth. Until the channel reaches this
relatively high flow (approximately greater than the 5-year storm event) there is no useable
floodplain. At 2X max depth, the channel has a moderate floodplain width, and thus the
misleading nature of the entrenchment ratio. Entrenchment ratio is intended to indicate the width '
of the floodplain available for floodplain flow (lateral confinement) of the channel and is more
useful for stream and valley type determinations than channel stability. The vertical
confinement, as indicated by bank height ratio, is a much more consistent indicator of channel '
stability. This is evident by the highly unstable nature of this reach, even though it has an
adequate entrenchment ratio. Approximately 500 feet upstream of where Cat Creek crosses
under Ferguson Road, the main stream slightly increases its sinuosity which results in several '
severely eroded outside meander bends with overhanging, under-cutting banks.
A small tributary (UT2) enters at the midpoint of the straightened and channelized section of Cat
Creek from the left. This tributary once had a more sinuous pattern but has been straightened and
shortened. The USGS mapping shows this stream flowing into Cat Creek near Ferguson Road,
further downstream then where it now enters. Though the fill material of the old golf course
covered much of the relic channel, low points in the valley verify the alignment indicated by the
USGS topographic mapping. There are two ponds Just upstream on UT2. This channel is
similar to Cat Creek on this tract in that it is very incised, but has a useable floodplain at 2X max
depth, thus having a misleading entrenchment ratio. Again, the channel has to experience a
substantially larger than bankfull (approximately l .5-year storm event) to reach any floodplain.
In most flood events, the channel contains the entire flow without reaching a floodplain. The
low straight reach has a steep slope that is equal to the valley slope. An alluvial channel is not
likely to reach stability without having a channel slope that is less than valley slope. The current
slope condition is predictably causing down cutting of the channel bed. UT-2 is highly unstable,
lacks bedform, has been straightened (sinuosity of 1.0), and has mass wasting banks
intermittently along its length until it joins Cat Creek.
Another tributary, UT3, enters Cat Creek from Ferguson Road downstream of UT2. This small
tributary is also very straight from the alteration of the channel during construction of the golf
course. This channel has the same problems as UT-2; no sinuosity (1.0), steep channel that is
equal to valley slope, incision, and no riffle pools sequence for energy dissipation. The bank
height ratio of 1.53 indicates a high degree of incision. As would be expected with this incision,
the channel has multiple sections of severe erosion and mass wasting banks.
Just before Cat Creek crosses under Ferguson Road, a ditch enters from the right. The ditch runs
parallel to the Parker/Waldroop property line and appears to have been installed to drain
groundwater flow and spring seeps at the base of the hillslope along the west side of the valley. '
The watershed at the end of the Parker Tract is 3.3 square miles.

22

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon Couniv. NC
July 2007
Within the Parker Tract, due to the past channel modifications, Cat Creek and both unnamed
tributaries do not readily lend themselves to classification under the Rosgcn classification
system.
3.4.2 Soils and Existing Wetland Conditions
According to the Macon County Soil Survey the floodplain adjacent to this section of Cat Creek
' is mapped as Nikwasi and Reddies soils (Figure 3}. However, the natural soils have been
disturbed and/or buried. Based on numerous soil borings and soil pits it is estimated that some
areas have a surface layer up to two feet thick of fill/disturbed material overlaying the natural
hydric soil. Beneath the fill/disturbed material is a hydric soil having dark gray and gray colors.
The fill appears to be thickest near the channel and old tee/green formations. Typical soil profiles
are given in Appendix 5.
See Section 5.0 for details on wetland soils and hydrology on this tract.
3.4.3 Vegetation
The Parker Tract has been significantly altered because of its past use as a golf course. Although
' the site has not been maintained as a golf course, it is mowed regularly, and herbaceous
vegetation dominates. The banks along Cat Creek and its tributary consist of annuals and
perennials with scattered shrubs and small tree seedlings. The surrow~ding field supports a
' similar vegetative composition, although the field was mowed prior to field activities. Woody
vegetation consists of elderberry, black willow, black cherry, and tag alder. Herbaceous species
include Canada goldenrod (Solida,~o car~adensis), Joe-pye-weed, ironwecd, blackberry, soft rush,
I annual ragweed (Ambtrosia artemisiifolia), switchgrass, and deertongue. According to an
adjacent landowner, this floodplain was once part of a large swampy area 30 years ago.
3.5 Preserve Tract
The Preserve Tract is similar to the Parker Tract in that it has been significantly altered from past
' use as a golf course. The watershed at the end of the Preserve Tract is 3.6 square miles (Figure
2). The preserve Tract was purchased by NCDOT in 2004 as a stream and wetland restoration
site.
3.5.1 Stream
' Cat Creek passes through a culvert at Ferguson Road and flows through the middle of the
Preserve Tract. Although once a part of the golf course, Cat Creek through this tract has more
sinuosity, terraces (benches) are present, and the bed material is stable compared to the Parker
Tract. There are several severely eroded meanders near Ferguson Road. Downstream, the
channel appears to be returning to a stable state, though lacking riffle-pool sequencing from past
channelization. Access to a small floodplain and wetland has encouraged stability along the
majority of this reach. The proposed enhancement will involve minimal disturbance of the
channel to install a few structures to restore pools in the channe] and provide for improved
biological function. What little instability that is present in the lower portion of this reach is
' 23

Cat Creek Stream and Wetla~zd Restoration Platt
Macon County. NC
Jzdv 2007
apparently due to a lack of good bedform and a need for energy dissipation at intervals of
approximately 150 feet. Bank stabilization is proposed for the upper portion of the reach. There
are also several areas of bedrock near Ferguson Road. Figure 8 shows the locations of cross-
sections surveyed and existing conditions at the Preserve Tract.
Several small streams or tributaries flow into Cat Creek on the Preserve Tract. The first (UT 4) is
a small tributary that enters from the right (east). Although very small, this tributary is perennial.
This tributary is actively incising and widening due to a short and steep average slope to its
confluence with Cat Creek. This channel was apparently re-aligned and channelized during the
construction of the golf course at the site. The tributary has perpendicular alignment to Cat
Creek, and it is assumed that the reminant channel would have run at a more natural angle to
converge with Cat Creek. The proposed restoration of the tributary will re-align the tributary to
amore natural confluence with Cat Creek, restore dimension, bedform and pattern, and greatly
improve sediment contributions from the actively eroding tributary.
Near the midpoint of the site there are two small drainage systems that enter from the left (west).
Both of these appear to be fed'by small springs or seeps that originate on the Preserve Tract and
have very low rates of flow. A fourth small tributary flows through a culvert beneath Ferguson
Road and through a second culvert into an old pond bed, before flowing into Cat Creek. None of
these small tributaries are shown on the USGS mapping.
Data from field surveys were used to compute the morphological characteristics of Cat Creek.
This reach classifies as a C type stream. The cross-sectional areas for Cat Creek on this reach
plot along the trend line for the Mountain Regional Curve (Figure 5). Table 8 summarizes the
survey data and the cross-section locations are shown on Figure 8.
Table 8. Preserve Tract Existing Stream Conditions Summary
Tract Bankfull Bankfull ER V4'idth to Ave. Water Sinuosity BHR BEHI
~'~'idth (feet) Cross- Depth Surface
Sectional Area Ratio Slo e
Preserve 33 50.2 2.2 21.7 0..0072 1.13 1.52 Low to
Very
High
UT4 13? 6.2 7.6 27.9 0.045 1.05 l.3 N/A
Mt. 30.60 51.8
Regional 99 (liT4) 6.5 (UT4)
Curve
* Additional Survey Data located in Appendix 2
Locations of Cross-Sections on Figure 8
3.5.2 Soils and Existing Wetland Conditions
The eastern floodplain on the Preserve Tract has extensive fill from the construction of the golf
course. According to the Macon County Soil Survey, the floodplain adjacent to this section of
Cat Creek is mapped as Udorthents-Urban Land complex (Figure 3). Soil borings revealed that
up to 4 feet of fill material has been added at some locations. Four shallow pits were excavated
to help determine the depth of fill material and nature of the underlying soil. Depth of fill is
variable and beneath the fill is a dark gray or light gray hydric soil. Much of the fill material is
24

i~
1

1

t

Cat Creek Stream and Weltand Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
Jnly 2007
rocky which makes determining characteristics of the underlying soil difficult or impossible
using hand augers.
Sec Section 5.0 for details on wetland soils and hydrology on this tract.
3.5.3 Vegetation
' The Preserve Tract is dominated by herbaceous vegetation that is maintained by regular mowing.
The channel banks are mowed to the edge of the stream, except along the wetlands. The
floodplain supports a diverse vegetation of annual and perennials with scattered shrubs and trees.
Trees are scattered along the stream and include sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tulip poplar,
and black walnut. Shrubs include elderberry, black willow, black cherry, and tag alder.
Herbaceous species include Canada goldenrod, Joe-pyc-weed, ironweed, blackberry, soft rush,
annual ragweed, switchgrass, and deertongue.

1

1

' 25

Cat C~~eek Sn~eam and Wetland Resdora~ion Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
4.0 REFERENCE STREAMS
Earth Tech conducted any extensive search for suitable stream and wetland reference sites within
the Little Tennessee River basin. Several potential reference reaches were identified. However,
upon additional field evaluation of the reaches it was determined that they were not suitable.
Because of the long history of utilizing the larger floodplains for agriculture and cattle, few
undisturbed, stable streams exist in the Little Tennessee River watershed. Two reference reaches
in other watersheds within Mountain Physiographic Province were identified were determined to '
be suitable based upon similarities in valley type. This reference data was used to develop
design parameters for Cat Creek as well as the tributaries.
4.1 Bent Creek
Bent Creek, a fourth order stream, is located in the Bent Creek Experimental Forest south of ,
Asheville, North Carolina in the French Broad watershed (Figure 9). The stream is located in a
wide alluvial valley within a relatively mature hardwood forest. While logging from the early
twentieth-century caused most of the streams within the Bent Creek watershed to become ,
somewhat entrenched, the streams have since stabilized through vegetative-control. Because of
the similarity of the Bent Creek valley type, width, drainage area (3.7 square miles), and
elevation to the lower reach of Cat Creek, Bent Creek was determined to be a suitable reference ,
reach for this project. Morphological parameters for this reference reach are presented in
Appendix 4.
4.2 Unnamed Tributary to Meadow Fork ,
UT to Meadow Fork, a third order stream, is located adjacent to the Blue Ridge Parkway in
Allegheny County, North Carolina and is within the New River Watershed (Figure 10). The
surveyed reach is located in a decades-old fallow pasture and has been relieved of active grazing
for four years prior to surveying. Relic benches indicate the original channel was an E channel,
which then downcut and widened with grazing pressure and vegetation removal years ago. A '
stable C channel appears to have existed for several decades and then cessation of grazing
allowed the channel to transition to an E in the years prior to being surveyed. The drainage area ,
(l.3 square miles), valley type and valley width of the UT to Meadow Fork is similar to that of
the upper reach of Cat Creek and the tributaries to Cat Creek, therefore it was determined to be a
suitable reference reach for this project. Morphological parameters for this reference reach are
presented in Appendix 4. '
1
1
1

26 '

1

1

t

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon Couniv, NC
Ju1y2007
5.0 PROJECT SITE WETLANDS
5.1 Methodology
Wetland restoration is based upon existing site characteristics, including soil properties,
topography, and hydrology. A detailed study of these site characteristics was performed to
describe the existing conditions and to develop restoration goals that guide the wetland
restoration design.
5.1.1 Soil Evaluation
A detailed investigation of the soils adjacent to Cat Creek was conducted July 28-31, 2003, and
October 1-3, 2003. The soil investigation was accomplished through a series of hand auger
borings. Features evaluated included horizon depth, moist colors, textures, and other notable
features such as mottles and depth to free water. Presence and depth of potential fill materials
were also recorded. On December 2, 2003, a number of soil pits were dug to determine buried
drainage features, such as drainage pipes, and to verify hand auger borings.
5.1.2 Hydrologic Evaluation
Fourteen groundwater-monitoring gauges were installed on the Parker and Swartwout Tracts to
study groundwater conditions and to determine jurisdictional wetland hydrology. A rain gauge is
also located at the Swartwout Tract. The gauges were installed and maintained by Fish and
Wildlife Associates, and the data were provided to Earth Tech. Recordings for both the
groundwater-monitoring gauges and the rain gauge were taken from September 21, 2002 through
December 15, 2003. Data for the 2003 growing season, April 30 to October 12, were analyzed
(165 days). Areas that are seasonally inundated and/or saturated to the surface for more than
12.5% of the growing season are jurisdictional wetlands. Areas saturated to the surface between
5% (8 days) and 12.5% (21 days) of the growing season may be jurisdictional wetlands if soils
and vegetation meet jurisdictional criteria.
5.1.3 Wetland Delineation
Hydric soil areas were identified and delineated in accordance with soil criteria established in the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987).
The hydric soil boundaries were flagged and surveyed using GPS surveys techniques. A site
visit with Steve Lund, with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) was performed on
February 24, 2004. During the site visit Mr. Lund confirmed wetland areas and boundaries.
5.2 Swartwout Tract
Upper Swartwout -The floodplain in the upper field is nearly level with the stream flowing
along the eastern edge. Hand auger borings within this field indicate that hydric soils are present
(Figure I l). The hydric soils form a triangle with a shallow drainage swale bordering the east
side. The soils narrow to a point where the swale empties into a ditch that flows into Cat Creek.
A buried concrete culvert also empties into this ditch. The culvert protects the end of a perforated
1
27

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
drainpipe that drains the wetland area. A soil pit dug in this area revealed that the remaining soils
in this field have anon-hydric, sandy, surface layer overlaying a gray hydric layer 19 to 24 '
inches below the ground surface. This non-hydric surface layer is likely fill material brought in
to level the site for a small riding arena.
Two groundwater gauges are located in this upper field (Figure 11). Hydrographs for these ,
gauges can be found in Appendix 6. Data analysis shows that jurisdictional hydrology may be
met for Gauge 10 installed within an area of hydric soils. Groundwater was within 12 inches of ,
the surface for only one 8-day period (5 percent) during the growing season, May 6 to 13. This
meets the minimum hydrologic criteria for a wetland despite the drainage modifications. The
other gauge (Gauge 9), within a filled area, does not show wetland hydrology during the growing
season. Neither of these areas were determined to be jurisdictional wetlands by the USACE.
Lower Swartwout -The lower field is bisected by Cat Creek. Along this reach a small berm is '
present along the banks of Cat Creek, which helps reduce over bank flooding. To the west, a
slightly higher terrace grades into a shallow Swale near Cat Creek Road. Hydric soils form a
narrow linear shaped unit along the swale. According to the previous landowner a drainpipe was ,
installed in the Swale several years ago to drain a spring or seepage located near the head of this
swale. This drainpipe was located and found to drain into a ditch along Cat Creek Road. Three
groundwater gauges are located in this Swale. Data analysis (Appendix 6) shows that
jurisdictional hydrology is met for Gauges 2 and 3. Groundwater was within 12 inches of the
surface for all of the growing season for Gauge 2. This indicates this area meets the cr~ter~a for
wetlands despite the drainage modifications. The remaining gauge (Gauge 1) does not show
wetland hydrology at any time during the growing season. This area was determined not to be a ,
jurisdictional wetland by the USACE.
To the east of Cat Creek the floodplain expands into a wide triangle that connects to UT1.
According to the previous landowner, drain tiles were also installed in this field, one along the
base of the slope that drains into UTl and a second more centrally located (Figure ll). Soil pits
were used to verify the location of these drainpipes. The soils in this area show mottling in the ,
surface layer, indicating extended saturation, but lack the extensive low chroma colors found in
hydric soil. An underling layer of gray soil is found, ranging in depth from 12 inches near the
drainpipes to 20 inches or deeper. Typical soil profiles are provided in Appendix 5. '
Five groundwater gauges are located in the eastern portion of the lower field. Hydrographs
(Appendix 6) show that jurisdictional hydrology is met for all gauges. All gauges had wetland
hydrology for at least 19 percent of the growing season (31 days). Groundwater was within 12
inches of the surface throughout the growing season for Gauge 6. This indicates this area meets
the criteria for jurisdictional wetlands despite the drainage modifications. Some, but not all of
this area was determined to be a jurisdictional wetland by the USACE.
Rainfall measurements were obtained from an on-site rain gauge. Precipitation during the 2003 '
growing period ranged from normal to below normal. Precipitation data are provided in
Appendix 6. Recorded onsite precipitation events show a good correlation to groundwater data.
t
28 ,

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon Cozrnty, NC
July 2007
In the corner of the floodplain along UTI and above the drainpipe, the soils are hydric and were
delineated as Jurisdictional Wetlands (Figure 11). This wetland area is located between the toe
slope and aberm/spoil pile along the UT. This triangular shaped wetland starts as a narrow point
near the culvert at Jack Cabe Road and expands into the floodplain. Shallow standing water was
observed in portions of the wetland. This wetland appears to originate as seepage along the toe
slope.
' S.3 Parker Tract
The wide floodplain within this tract has been extensively altered during construction of the golf
course. According to the general contractor who built the golf course, soil additions and contour
grading were used to increase drainage of the site. Several shallow surface swales are found that
drain surface water toward the stream. The contractor does not remember extensive fill in this
area and indicated the use of drainpipes was limited. On the north side of the floodplain along the
toe slope, a ditch and berm were constructed to drain the seepage water away from the fairway.
This ditch flows along the edge of the floodplain and the old fairway next to the fence line along
the Waldroop property. The ditch empties into Cat Creek just above Ferguson Road. This ditch
ranges from about I foot deep and 5 feet wide to 2 feet deep and 10 feet wide. Near Cat Creek
the channel is deeper due to a head cut. In the southeast corner of this tract soil pits verified that
' a drainpipe is present near the road embankment to Cat Creek.
Three hydric soil areas were delineated within the floodplain on the north side of Cat Creek
(Figure I2). The first is a small, depressional area near the edge of the old fairway. The
fill/disturbed soil is absent near the center of the depression and increases in thickness from the
center till the hydric indicators are greater than 12 inches. A low berm separates this area from
the ditch. The second, slightly larger area of hydric soils is also separated from the ditch by the
low berm. The third area is the most extensive, covering approximately one-third of the length of
the floodplain, ending near an old tee near Ferguson Road. Most of this area is separated from
the ditch by the low berm. Toward the channel these soils grade into a deeper surface layer and
borings indicate these soils are disturbed. Soil indicators and depth of fill materials vary.
Four groundwater gauges are located within this tract (Appendix 6). The hydrographs show that
jurisdictional hydrology is met for all four gauges. All gauges had wetland hydrology for at least
17 percent of the growing season (28 days). Ponding is indicated on the graphs and was observed
when data were collected. This area meets the hydrology criteria for jurisdictional wetlands.
Three areas that were determined to be jurisdictional wetlands are shown on Figure 12.
Although hydrologic conditions meeting jurisdictional criteria are present, it is likely that these
wet areas were historically much wetter than they are today. This area was reportedly once part
of swamp forest system that occurred along Cat Creek. These systems typically contain low
swales and areas of ponded water for extended periods.
1
1
29

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 1007
5.4 Preserve Tract
Two wetland areas are present on the Preserve Tract (Figure 13). The first is a narrow linear
wetland adjacent to the channel on the east side. This wetland is situated on a low floodplain
bench. It appears that this wetland once extended further to the east. Soils to the east of this
wetland have a surface layer of fill 16 to 24 inches thick. Soils beneath this fill are hydric, having
a dark gray layer over light gray. The hydric soil layer is silty clay loam over silt loam with sand
lenses present (Appendix 5).
The second wetland is located in an oid pond bed. Soils in the old pond have a thin sandy loam
layer that is dark gray with organic matter. This pond most likely was a shallow excavation that
was surrounded by the fill/disturbed soils found across the site. Both areas were determined to
be jurisdictional wetlands by the USACE.
30

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
6.0 REFERENCE WETLANDS
A search for a reference wetland was conducted using NWI maps, USGS Topographic Quadrant
maps, windshield surveys, and personal communications. Site suitability was determined based
' on floodplain topography, source of hydrologic input, site soils, and the vegetative community
present.
' The Cartoogechaye Creek wetland is located southwest of Franklin and west of Old Murphy
Road along Cartoogechaye Creek (Figure 14). This wetland is located along a steep toe slope at
the edge of the floodplain. The hydrology is seepage with minimal input from over bank flooding
and upland runoff. The seepage flows for approximately 500 feet, with a portion adjacent to a
maintained residential area. A shallow network of swales with variable depth parallels the slope
and collects flows. The network flows parallel to the slope, converging into a deeper wide Swale.
A small ditch connects the deeper portion of the swale to Cartoogechaye Creek. The ditch did
not have flow or show evidence of recent flows, but appears to allow overbank flows to drain
rapidly after floodwaters recede.
The vegetative community is forested except near the maintained area. Trees include red maple,
river birch and sweet gum. Shrubs include tag alder, and elderberry. Herbaceous vegetation
includes sedges, rushes with scattered annuals and perennials. The maintained area is similar to
pasture land.

I~

u

t
3]

Cat Creek Stream and Wetla~ad Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
7.0 PROJECT SITE RESTORATION PLAN
Stream and wetland restoration and enhancement is proposed for Cat Creek. General principles
regarding the proposed restoration are provided first followed by a detailed discussion for the
restoration proposed for each tract. '
Stream restoration requires determining the extent a stream has departed from its natural stability
and then establishing the stable form of the stream under the current hydrologic conditions '
within the drainage area. The proposed restoration of the main channel and tributaries will
include; construction of stable meander geometry, modifying channel cross-sections, raising the
existing streambed elevation where possible, and establishing a floodplain at the new stream '
elevation, thus restoring a stable dimension, pattern, and profile. This restoration is based on
analysis of current watershed hydrologic conditions, evaluation of the project site, and
assessments of stable reference reaches. The following recommendations are included in this '
restoration plan:
• Form a stable channel with the proper dimension, pattern, and profile;
• Raise the existing streambed elevation where possible;
• Establish a floodplain along the stream channel;
• Place natural material structures in the stream to improve stability and enhance aquatic
habitat;
• Stabilize stream banks with herbaceous and woody vegetation; and
• Create or enhance a minimum of a 30-foot riparian zone to provide aesthetic value,
wildlife habitat, and bank stability.
In areas where on-site constraints do not allow for full restoration, enhancement is proposed.
Stream enhancement requires determining the current condition of a stream and then evaluating
the locations where the stream needs stabilizing. The proposed enhancement of Cat Creek will
include creating bankfull benches where appropriate, installing grade control structures as
needed, stream bank sloping, and establishing a permanent buffer along the stream to insure that
the existing stream habitat will remain undisturbed. This enhancement is based on analysis of
current watershed hydrologic conditions and evaluation of the project site.
Wetland restoration requires determining the type and extent of degradation at the site and the
alteration of hydrologic and vegetative conditions that would be expected under natural '
conditions. The proposed restoration at Cat Creek will result in a wetland community on the
floodplain adjacent to Cat Creek with adequate hydrologic conditions to support appropriate
wetland vegetation. The restoration is based on the current conditions at the site and a
comparison of this site to other local wetland sites. The following recommendations are included
in this restoration plan:
• Remove fill material to elevations of natural soil;
• Plug and fill drainage ditches;
• Remove sub-surface drainage systems;
• Increase surface storage through contouring; and t
• Stabilize the site by reforestation and creation of habitat diversity.

32 '

i~

1
1

[1

i
1

i
Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
7.1 General Principles
7.1.1 Stream Restoration
The design was based upon natural channel design methodology. Morphological characteristics
were measured on the existing stream and reference reaches to determine a range of values for
the stable dimension, pattern, and profile of the proposed channel. The measured and proposed
morphological characteristics are provided in Appendix 4.
Sediment Transport
A stable stream has the capacity to move its sediment load without aggrading or degrading. The
total load of sediment can be divided into wash load and bed load. Wash load is normally
composed of fine sands, silts and clay and transported in suspension at a rate that is determined
by availability and not hydraulically controlled. The bed load is transported by material rolling,
sliding, or hopping (saltating) along the bed. At higher discharges, some portion of the bed load
can be suspended, especially if there is a sand component in the bed load. Bed material transport
rates are essentially controlled by the size and nature of the bed material and hydraulic
conditions (Hey and Rosgen 1997).
Entrainment calculations were completed for each restoration reach and are described in more
detail in each proposed restoration tract section below.
Flooding Analysis
Cat Creek is not regulated by FEMA, and flooding analysis is not required. However, flooding
analysis was performed to insure that the floodplain is not raised significantly along the stream to
affect non-project areas. The USGS Method for estimating the magnitude and frequency of
floods in rural basins was used to estimate the 2, 5, l0, 25, 50, and 100-year peak discharges for
the different drainage areas.
The USGS regression equations from USGS Fact Sheet 007-00 were used to estimate flood
discharges (USGS 2002). The latitude and longitude and drainage area for each site are inputs
that are required.
HEC-RAS, version 3.0, was used to compute a flooding analysis for the existing and proposed
conditions. This analysis is used to ensure that the project will not significantly change existing
floodwater limits and that shear stresses are not unreasonable.
7.1.2 Wetland
Wetland restoration will consist of both restoration and enhancement. Wetland restoration at the
Cat Creek site is based on an extensive field evaluation combined with the use of aerial
photography, topographic mapping, and interviews with former owners. Data from ground water
monitoring gauges were evaluated to determine the existing hydrologic condition. Restoration
and enhancement of the wetlands will restore a more natural hydrologic regime and associated
33

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan '
Macon County, NC
July 2007
functions. Revegetation of the site will use a landscape approach and integrate the wetland and
stream with non-wetland floodplain and upland to create a continuous landscape. ,
Hydrologic restoration efforts will focus on undoing and eliminating the past drainage alterations
and fill material. Wetland hydrology is primarily to be from groundwater and seepage areas '
located along various toe slopes. The natural drainage has been significantly altered, and the
existing wet areas were once wetter than present. Hydrological restoration techniques will
consist of filling ditches, removing drainpipes, excavation of fill materials, and restoring the '
natural contours to restore sheet flow. Adding shallow swales and microtopographic features
throughout the floodplain will increase surface water storage and allow greater infiltration. Based
on the analysis of the groundwater monitoring gauges, sufficient water is available to restore '
wetland conditions throughout the proposed restoration area for each tract.
7.1.3 Reforestation '
There is no reliable record of the originally occurring communities along Cat Creek. The site will
be reforested with vegetative communities suitable for stream bank and well-drained floodplain, ,
and poorly drained floodplain and wetlands. Appropriate species selection and quick
establishment of vegetation along the stream banks are needed to protect against potential
erosion and damage to structures. Quick establishment of wetland vegetation is less critical, but ,
is necessary before the function of the wetlands will be realized.
7.2 Swartwout Tract
7.2.1 Stream ,
The upper section of Cat Creek adjacent to the riding ring and bordering the woods will have
minimal work performed. Sections of actively eroding banks in this section will be sloped back
to create bankfull benches and reduce near bank stresses. The channel through the middle and
lower reach of Cat Creek and UT1 will require construction of a new channel and installation of
structures (Design Sheet 1). The old ford that forms the transition between the upper and lower
reach will be removed.
Dimension
Cat Creek (Swartwout -Upper section)
The existing Cat Creek channel averages 17.5 feet across (bankfull width) with cross-sectional
area average of 17.5 square feet. The design channel will be constructed to bankfull target ,
dimensions that are based on reference reach data and regional curve information for a C-type
channel under the Rosgen Stream Classification System. The channel will border on a E type
with awidth-to-depth ratio of l 1.8.
1
1
34 ,

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
' July 2007
Cat Creek (Swartwout Lower section)
The existing Cat Creek channel averages 19.9 feet across (bankfull width) with cross-sectional
area average of 16.7 square feet. The revised channel will be constructed to bankfull target
' dimensions that are based on reference reach data and regional curve information for a C-type
channel under the Rosgen Stream Classification System. The channel will border on an E type
with awidth-to-depth ratio of 11.8.
UT to Cat Creek (UTI)
The UT to Cat Creek channel averages 16.02 feet across with cross-sectional area averaging 20.2
square feet. The revised channel will be constructed to bankfull target dimensions for an C-type
channel. The channel will border on a E type with awidth-to-depth ratio of 11.9. The dimension
1 used will allow vegetation to progressively "tighten" up the channel so that it becomes an E type
channel over time.
Cat Creek (Lower Swartwout- Below Confluence)
The Cat Creek channel below the confluence of UT1 will be designed similar to the middle
section but bankfull width and cross-sectional area will be increased to handle the increased
flows entering from UT1. This section of the revised channel is approximately 110 feet long and
does not warrant a separate set of design parameters. The revised channel will follow parameters
' from the Waldroop tract for this relatively short length to the end of the reach. The revised
channel will be constructed to bankfull target dimensions for an C-type channel. The channel
will border on a E type with awidth-to-depth ratio of 12. The dimension used will allow
vegetation to progressively "tighten" up the channel so that it becomes an E type channel over
time.
Pattern
Pattern will be introduced into the stream by increasing the sinuosity of the stream through
' restoration. Meanders will be introduced into the channel with appropriate radius of curvatures
and lengths based on the reference reach data and existing site constraints for an C-type stream
channel that borders on an E -type channel. The site has two lateral constraints, the
' environmentally sensitive area and the nearby wetlands. The sinuosity is designed to match the
reference condition and account for these lateral constraints. The second lateral constraint is the
existing wetland on the east side of the tract. The proposed stream alignment of Cat Creek and
UT1 will minimally impact the wetlands directly, as the alignment and profile is set so that the
existing ground is the new floodplain and the limits of construction do not encroach on the
wetland. Priority 1 restoration for the stream is important in the area that is adjacent to the
wetland in order to limit excavation and improve groundwater hydrology. The resulting increase
in base level elevation by approximately 1 foot and the reconnection of the floodplain will
promote a more stable and consistent hydrology for the existing wetlands (Design Sheet 1).
Introduction of these meanders will increase stream length, sinuosity, and habitat while lowering
slope and shear stress.

35

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan '
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Bed form
The design channel will incorporate riffles and pools to provide bed form found in C and E
stream types with gravel bottoms. Pools will be located in the outside of meander bends with
riffles in the inflection points between meanders. The degree of bed form alterations will relate to
the type of valley the existing channel flows through. The proposed riffles will have a thalweg
depth of 2.0 feet. Rock sills and j-hook vanes (log and rock) will be utilized, where appropriate,
as grade control structures throughout the proposed channel. Modifications to the bed form will '
provide stability by the dissipation of energy and improve the in-stream habitat of the channel.
Where possible, log structures will be used to provide detritus for benthic organisms.
Structures
At this time, no rock structures are planned in the upper section of Cat Creek because the '
existing bedrock appears sufficient and would preclude the placement of grade control structures-
Root wads will be installed in the meander bend near the access road in the upper reach (Design
Sheet 1). Rock sills will be installed where needed in the main channel through the lower section
of Cat Creek and in UTI. Log and rock j- hook vanes (grade control vanes) will be installed
where needed along the lower section of Cat Creek and UTI to help turn the water, reduce near
bank stress, and maintain pool definition. Cross-vanes will be installed after the confluence of
the main channel and the tributary. The rock sills, rock vanes, and cross-vanes will be
constructed from natural materials such as stone and boulders (blasted).
Shear Stress
Shear stress was checked using The Revised Shield's Diagram for a proposed riffle cross- '
section. The critical shear stress for the proposed channel has to be sufficient to move the D84 of
the bed material, which for the existing riffles m the mam channel of Cat Creek ~s coarse gravel.
Based on the shear stress calculated, the Revised Shield's Diagram predicts that the main
channel can move a particle that ranges from 40-400 mm (very coarse gravel to a small boulder). '
Because the existing bed material is coarse gravel in the riffles, the proposed stream has the
competency to move its bed load according to the Revised Shield's Diagram and preliminary
design calculations.
The Ds4 of the existing riffles in UTI classifies as very coarse gravel. Based on the shear stress
calculated, the Revised Shield's Diagram predicts that the tributary channel can move a particle '
that ranges from 50-500 mm (very coarse gravel to large cobble). Because the existing bed
material is very coarse gravel in the riffles, the proposed stream has the competency to move its
bed load according to the Revised Shield's Diagram and preliminary design calculations. '
Appendix 7 contains the sediment transport calculations and data for each reach.
Flooding Analysis '
The USGS regression equations from USGS Fact Sheet 007-00 were used to estimate the
following peak discharges (USGS 2002). Along with existing and proposed cross-section, these

36

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
' July 2007
discharges were input into HEC-RAS to determine floodwater limits in the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and
1 100-year storms. Table 9 summarizes the peak discharges for the different storm events.
Flooding analysis was performed to insure that the floodpIain is not raised significantly along the
' stream. The USGS Method for estimating the magnitude and frequency of floods in rural basins
was used to estimate the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100-year peak discharges for the different drainage
areas.
Table 9. HEC-RAS Analysis for Swartwout Tract

Site DA Qz Qs Qio Qzs Qso Q~oo
(cfs) (cfs (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs
Cat Creek, just upstream of UTI 769 acres (1.2 sq. mi.) 153 274 377 535 676 835
Cat Creek at Cat Creek Road 1,356 acres (2.1 sq. mi) 229 402 549 779 970 1192
Brid e
7.2.2 Wetland
Hydrologic restoration in the upper field will consist of removing the existing drainpipes and
filling or contouring the ditch adjacent to the wetland. Excavation of fill material and the creation
of a low broad Swale will slow surface drainage and increase hydrologic storage. Swales and
' contours will be constructed and oriented to allow for additional inputs to the restored areas from
overbank flood events.
Hydrologic restoration in the lower field will consist of removing the existing drainpipes located
along the toe slope and in the lower Swale. Filling of shallow ditches and contouring will
complete efforts to restore hydrology. Contouring will allow sheet flow to occur and will include
j shallow Swales to slow surface drainage.
7.3 Waldroop Tract
Stream enhancement is proposed for the Waldroop Tract. Minor stabilization work is proposed
on the entire reach. A majority of the reach will receive a slightly expanded riparian buffer. No
' wetland restoration is proposed for the Waldroop Tract.
7.3.1 Stream
Upper Reach
1 Enhancement in the upper section will involve installing grade control structures below the
equipment crossing and below the bedrock feature to help control bank erosion. Only these two
structures are planned in the upper reach on the Waldroop Tract. This reach is proposed for
' Enhancement Level II which will include fencing and an expanded riparian buffer.

' 37

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan '
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Lower Reach
The fence along the lower section downstream of the barn on the bull pasture side will be moved
15 feet south, away from its existing location and into the bull pasture. This will allow the left
bank to be sloped back at a 2:1 slope and the creation of a bankfull bench. Through this section, ,
grade control structures will be installed for grade control, habitat improvement, and to create
pools. The cross-vanes will be installed based on the design parameters for pool-to-pool spacing,
which ranges from 46 to 173 feet. Since the section is fairly straight and available land is limited ,
for increasing sinuosity, the grade control vanes will help to create pools for a stable bed
sequence. This reach is proposed for Enhancement Level 1. Design Sheets 2 and 3 shows the
proposed layout for the Waldroop Tract. ,
Tlimancinn
Within the Waldroop Tract, Cat Creek averages 22.9 feet wide with across-sectional area ,
averaging 39.1 square feet. The design channel will be constructed to bankfull target dimensions
for C type channels. The channel will border on an E type with awidth-to-depth ratio of 12. The '
dimension used will allow vegetation to progressively "tighten" up the channel so that it
becomes an E type channel over time.
Pattern !
Because of the relatively narrow easement in this reach, no changes in pattern are proposed for '
the Waldroop Tract.
Bed form
A series of cross-vanes will provide bed form for this reach. Pools will be located below the '
cross-vane and riffles will be above. The proposed riffles in Cat Creek will have a thalweg depth
of 2.6 feet. '
Structures
Several structure types will be installed in the stream channels. These structures include, rock
vanes, cross vanes, rock and log j-hook vanes, and root wads. These structures are placed at
appropriate locations to reduce near bank stress, provide for bedform definition and maintenance, ,
provide habitat and detritus for benthic organisms, and promote sediment transport.
Shear Stress '
Shear stress was checked using the Revised Shield's Diagram for a proposed riffle cross-section.
The critical shear stress for the proposed channel has to be sufficient to move the D84 of the bed ,
material, which for the existing riffles is very coarse gravel. Based on the shear stress calculated,
the Revised Shield's Diagram predicts that the stream can move a particle that ranges from 20-
200 mm (coarse gravel to large cobble). Because the existing bed material is very coarse gravel ,
in the riffles, the proposed stream has the competency to move its bed load according to Revised
38 '

Cat Creek Strewn and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
' July 2007
Shield's Diagram and preliminary design calculations. Appendix 7 contains the sediment
transport calculations and data.
Flooding Analysis
1 The reach undergoing Enhancement Level 1 is relatively short and is tied directly into the Parker
Tract restoration. Therefore, a separate HEC-RAS analysis was not conducted on this reach.
' The HEC-RAS analysis conducted on the Parker Tract includes the lower reach of the Waldroop
Tract (Section 7.4.1).
7.3.2 Livestock Watering
Cattle and horses will be restricted from accessing Cat Creek by the installation of new fencing
' in several areas where they are currently accessible. Water for the horses and cattle will be
provided by installation of a watering structure. The exact configuration and type of watering
structures have not been determined and is being developed in cooperation with the local Natural
Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS) office.
7.3.3 Riparian Buffers
The riparian buffers along Cat Creek will be slightly expanded in several locations through the
Waldroop Tract. On the upper portion (above the equipment bridge) the buffer will be expanded
but fencing will be installed to restrict livestock from the creek. The riparian buffer in this area
will average about l 5 to 25 feet. The existing equipment crossing (ford) at the upper end of this
reach will remain and new l2-foot gates installed to prevent livestock access to the creek.
Along the lower reach the riparian buffer will be planted within the expanded fence line. The
buffer in this area will average 20 feet.
7.4 Parker Tract
Both stream and wetland restoration is proposed for the Parker Tract, which has been
significantly altered by construction of the golf course. The parker contains the channelized Cat
Creek, 2 channelized tributaries and several acres of depleted and filled wetlands.
7.41 Stream
The stream restoration work on the Parker Tract will include restoration of the dimension,
pattern, and profile of the main channel and its tributaries. Design Sheet 4 shows the proposed
layout for the stream in order to incorporate the proposed wetland areas discussed in section
7.4.2. The reach will be predominately Priority 1 restoration with Priority 2 restoration on the
1 lower portion due to the need to meet grade of the culvert at Ferguson Road. Grade control
structures, bank revetment, and proper pool -riffle sequencing will provide channel stability,
improved biological function and properly transport the sediment load.

39

Cat Creek Stream and Welland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Dimension
Cat Creek '
Within the Parker Tract, Cat Creek averages 18.5 feet wide with across-sectional area averaging '
40.3 square feet. The design channel will be constructed to bankfull target dimensions for C type
channels. Raising the channel base so that it re-connects with the floodplain will aid in
alleviating near bank stress during bankfull and greater storm events. The channel will border on ,
a E type with awidth-to-depth ratio of 11.9. The dimension used will allow vegetation to
progressively "tighten" up the channel so that it becomes an E type channel over time.
UT2 '
The bankfull width of UT2 averages 8.2 feet with across-sectional area average of 12.9 square ,
feet. The design channel will be constructed to bankfull target dimensions for C type channels.
Raising the channel base so that it re-connects with the floodplain will aid in alleviating near
bank stress during bankfull and greater storm events. The channel will have awidth-to-depth '
ratio of 13.25
UT3
UT3 has a bankfull width average of 6.7 feet and across-sectional area average of 6.9 square
feet. The design channel will be constructed to bankfull target dimensions for C type channels.
Raising the channel base so that it reconnects with the floodplain will aid in alleviating near bank
stress during bankfull and greater storm events. The channel will have awidth-to-depth ratio of
13.24. '
Pattern
Cat Creek
Restoring sinuosity to the channel will provide apool- riffle sequence that is necessary for
energy dissipation and biological function. Pattern will be introduced into the stream by
restoring the sinuosity that is appropriate for a channel of this size drainage area and valley type
(Design Sheet 4). Meanders will be introduced into the channel with appropriate radius of
curvatures and lengths based on the reference reach data and existing site constraints for an E/C-
type stream channel. The proposed alignment utilizes an adequate riffle length to meet the
critical design parameter of the ratio of riffle slope to average water surface slope as derived
from the reference reach. This is important for the design and self maintenance of relatively flat
pools that function well as energy dissipaters and habitat. A short riffle causes steeper riffle
slopes and has the possibility of causing pools to steepen over tune as the central tendency of the
channel shifts to a flatter riffle slope.

40 '

~ ~,_
1

1
Cat CYeek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
UT2 will be restored to follow the perceived remnant channel location, as indicated by
topographic maps and a corresponding depression in the valley. The proposed re-alignment of
the tributary to a more natural and sinuous state will help to reduce stress by dissipating energy
in pools and loosing elevation in properly designed riffles. The revised channel will meet Cat
Creek at a natural angle and reduce the stresses that Cat Creek currently experiences when the
two flows converge. Reference reach ratios provide a predictable stable channel pattern. By
matching the critical values of the reference reach, such as meander wave length, radius of
curvature ratio, and belt width, the proposed channel will be subject to significantly less erosion.
Restoring sinuosity also reduces shear stress in the channel by providing an average water
surface slope that is flatter than the valley slope.
' UT3

t

0

The proposed re-alignment of the tributary to a more natural and sinuous state will help to reduce
stress by dissipating energy in pools and loosing elevation in properly designed riffles. The
revised channel will meet Cat Creek at a natural angle and reduce the stresses that Cat Creek
currently experiences when the two flows converge. Reference reach ratios provide a predictable
stable channel pattern. By matching the critical values of the reference reach, such as meander
wave length, radius of curvature ratio, and belt width, the proposed channel will be subject to
significantly less erosion. Restoring sinuosity also reduces shear stress in the channel by
providing an average water surface slope that is flatter than the valley slope.
Rest form
The design channels will incorporate riffles and pools to provide bed form found in E stream
types with gravel bottoms. Pools will be located in the outside of meander bends with riffles in
the inflection points between meanders. The proposed riffles in Cat Creek will have a thalweg
depth of 2.6 feet. The proposed riffles in UT2 will have a thalweg depth of l .5 feet. Cross vanes
and rock sills will be used as grade control structures throughout the main channel while rock
sills alone will act as grade control structures on UT2. The cross vanes will be constructed out of
natural materials such as boulders and stone. Modifications to the bed form will provide stability
and habitat to the channel. The proposed riffles on UT3 wilt have a thalweg max depth of 1.15
feet
Structures
Several structure types will be installed in the stream channels. These structures include, notched
rock sills, rock and log vanes, cross vanes, rock and log j-hook vanes, and root wads. These
structures are placed at appropriate locations to reduce near bank stress, provide for bedform
definition and maintenance, provide habitat and detritus for benthic organisms, and promote
sediment transport. Structures can create problems if placed improperly or too often. This
design is a "softer" approach that uses more log material and less structures over all.
' 41

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon Counts-, NC
Julv 2007
Shear Stress
Shear stress was checked using the Revised Shield's Diagram for a proposed riffle cross-section.
The critical shear stress for the proposed channel has to be sufficient to move the D84 of the bed
material, which for the existing riffles is very coarse gravel. Based on the shear stress calculated,
the Revised Shield's Diagram predicts that the stream can move a particle that ranges from 20-
150 mm (coarse gravel to large cobble). Because the existing bed material is very coarse gravel
in the riffles, the proposed stream has the competency to move its bed load according to the
Revised Shield's Diagram and preliminary design calculations. Appendix 7 contains the
sediment transport calculations and data.
Flooding Anal,~is
The USGS regression equations from USGS Fact Sheet 007-00 were used to estimate the
following peak discharges (USGS 2002). Along with existing and proposed cross-section, these
discharges were input into HEC-RAS to determine floodwater limits in the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and
100-year storms. Table 10 summarizes the peak discharges for the different storm events.
Flooding analysis was performed to insure that the floodplain is not raised significantly along the
stream. The USGS Method for estimating the magnitude and frequency of floods in rural basins
was used to estimate the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100-year peak discharges for the different drainage
areas.
Table 10. HEC-RAS Analysis for Parker Tract
Site DA Qz Qs Quo Qzs Qsa Q~oo
ors ors ~r5 ors ors ~r5
Just upstream before UT2 1,650 acres 263 460 626 877 1099 1347
enters Cat Creek from the (2.6 sq. mi.)
pond
Just upstream before UT3 1,982 acres 299 521 706 987 1235 157]
enters (3. ] s . mi.)
Upstream of Ferguson 2,139 acres 315 548 742 1036 1295 1583
Road Culvert (3.3 sq. mi.)
7.4.2 Wetland
The Parker Tract has been extensively altered from construction of the golf course. Historically
the tract once contained an extensive wetland system. The restoration effort will focus on trying
to undo the past golf course alterations and will focus on the area on the north and east side of
the creek. The shallow ditch along the northern edge of the property will be plugged at its lower
end. Using the bottom of the ditch as a reference elevation, fill material will be excavated. This
will allow the seepage from the toe slope to remain on-site instead of discharging directly into
the creek. Low swales will be formed parallel to the hill slope to catch and hold the seepage. Any
drain tiles or pipes encountered will be removed.
42

~I

1

i

Cat Creek Stream and Welland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
' July 2007
Although groundwater gauges indicate that hydric conditions are currently present, this
' floodplain area has been extensively altered and is not as wet as it once was. Plugging the ditch
and removal of the fill will help return the historic hydrology to the site.
7.5 Preserve Tract
The relatively stable reach of Cat Creek that runs through the Preserve tract is proposed as
1 Enhancement 1. This involves a reestablishment of riparian vegetation, bank stabilization on a
stretch of less than 150' in length and the establishment of pools at appropriate intervals, as
determined from reference reach data. UT4 is proposed as Restoration (Priority 1) in order to
reconnect the channel with its floodplain and restore dimension, pattern and profile of a stable,
natural channel of this valley type and drainage area.
' 7.5.1 Stream
Cat Creek
The Cat Creek channel averages 33.0 feet wide with cross-sectional areas average of 50.2 square
feet. The design channel will be constructed to bankfull target dimensions for C-type channels.
This reach has been altered by the development of the tract as part of a golf course. However,
the channel was not particularly incised and has formed a relatively stable bankfull floodplain.
Where stabilization is necessary, typical cross section is used that is derived from reference reach
conditions. The proposed typical cross-sections for the channel are provided in Design Sheet 5
and 6. The typical cross-sections are not different from the Parker Tract because there is not a
significant increase in the drainage area from the lower Parker tract and the Preserver tract.
UT4
1 The UT4 channel averaged 13.2 feet wide and has an average cross sectional area of 6.2 square
feet. This small channel will be restored to natural dimensions for a channel of this valley type
and similar drainage area as determined from dimensionless ratios from the appropriate reference
' reach. A width-depth ratio of l 0.48 is proposed for this reach. This geometry corresponds with
very low w/d C type channels that border on E type channels- The relatively small drainage area
of this reach will allow for a lower width-depth ratio channel to be constructed to transport
sediment loads from roadways and upstream agricultural activities.
Pattern
Cat Creek
The existence of herbaceous vegetation along the channel banks is likely to be a significant
factor in the relative stability of Cat Creek in the Preserve tract. For this reason, the proposed
design has no significant alteration the channel pattern. This reach is too far along with
stabilizing itself to make it worth the disturbance that would be required to provide Cat Creek
with a more typical sinuosity. The existing sinuosity, with enhancement to the vegetation, and

43

Cad Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
stabilization of the eroding banks where needed, will provide a stable pattern due to the stream's
ample floodplain access. '
UT4
Pattern will be introduced into the stream by increasing the sinuosity of the stream through '
restoration (Design Sheet 5 and 6). Meanders will be introduced into the channels with
appropriate radius of curvatures and lengths based on the reference reach data and existing site ,
constraints for an C/E-type stream channel. Reference reach ratios provide a predictable stable
channel pattern. By matching the critical values of the reference reach, such as meander wave
length, radius of curvature ratio, and belt width, the proposed channel will be subject to
significantly less erosion. Restoring sinuosity also reduces shear stress in the channel by
providing an average water surface slope that is flatter than the valley slope.
Bed Form
Cat Creek
Although this reach is fairly stable, it has very little bedform and indications are that what
instability the channel presently experiences is probably due to lack of energy dissipation via
pools. For this reason, the proposed enhancement to Cat Creek includes the installation of
structures at appropriate intervals to create apool-pool spacing that is indicated in the reference
reach. The design will provide pools for energy dissipation and the maintenance of the pool
riffle sequence that make up a stable natural channel. Restoring this stable profile to the channel
with minimal construction will improve the channel's stability over long periods of time,
improve sediment transport and restore needed habitat and biological function.
UT4
The design channel incorporates riffles and pools to provide bed form found in E stream types
with gravel bottoms. Pools arc located in the outside of meander bends with riffles of adequate
length to loose elevation between the meanders. The proposed riffles in the main channel will
have a thalweg depth of l .l feet.
Structures
The proposed design uses rock and log j-hook vanes and notched sills to reduce near bank stress ~
and provide pool definition where needed for the Cat Creek channel. Structures are to be placed
without disturbing the riparian vegetation and channel sections in between the structures. '
Rather, the design limits the access to install structures to a perpendicular approach to the
channel This will minimize the disturbance to Cat Creek while allowing placement of needed
structures to primarily improve bedform. No structures are proposed for UT4 due to the small
size of the channel. During construction, the designer may choose to a grade control near the
confluence with Cat Creek if flow observations dictate that one is needed.

44

Qhear Rtrecc

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
Shear stress was checked using the Revised Shield's Diagram for a proposed riffle cross-section.
The critical shear stress for the proposed channel has to be sufficient to move the D84 of the bed
material, which for the existing riffles is coarse gravel. Based on the shear stress calculated, the
Revised Shield's Diagram predicts that the stream can move a particle that ranges from 18-200
mm (coarse gravel to large cobble). Because the existing bed material is coarse gravel in the
riffles, the proposed stream has the competency to move its bed load according to the Revised
Shield's Diagram and preliminary design calculations. Appendix 7 contains the sediment
transport calculations and data for each reach.
Flooding Anal
(Note: HEC-RAS for proposed will be performed during the design phase once Earth Tech has
verified data from the topographic survey that may be in error.) The USGS regression equations
from USGS Fact Sheet 007-00 were used to estimate the following peak discharges (USGS
' 2002). Along with existing and proposed cross-section, these discharges were input into HEC-
RAS to determine floodwater limits in the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100-year storms. Table 11
summarizes the peak discharges for the different storm events.
Flooding analysis was performed to insure that the floodplain is not raised significantly along the
stream. The USGS Method for estimating the magnitude and frequency of floods in rural basins
was used to estimate the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100-year peak discharges for the different drainage
areas.

n

t

L

Tahle 11_ NFC'-RAS Analyses fnr Preserve Tract
Site DA Qz Qs Quo QZS Qso Q~oo
Just upstream of UT4 2,147 acres 315 549 744 l 038 1297 1586
(3.4 sq. mi.)
End of Preserve Tract and 2,349 acres 336 584 790 1101 1375 1679
end of ro~ect site (3.7 s . mi.)
7.5.2 Wetland
The Preserve Tract has been extensively altered by past agricultural and golf course activities.
Restoration will consist of removal of large amounts of fill that has been placed on the site.
Using the existing wetlands as a reference elevation fill material will be removed to expose
buried hydric soil layers. Excavation of fill material around the old pond will expand the existing
wetland. The culvert for the tributary above the old pond bed will be removed and the water
directed into the wetland. The existing wetlands will be enhanced by planting hardwoods and
shrubs.
' 45

Ca! G-eek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
7.6 Natural Plant Community Restoration
Revegetation efforts will emulate natural vegetation communities found along relatively
undisturbed stream corridors. To quickly establish dense root mass along the channel bank, a
permanent native grass mixture will be seeded on the stream bank along with temporary seeding
to provide immediate erosion control. Areas around structure installations will be revegetated
with live stakes, and transplants may be salvaged on-site. Live stakes will be installed on the
outside of the meander bends to ensure a dense root mass in those areas of high stress. It may be
necessary to line key sections of the channel bank with coir matting to provide cover until
vegetation can be established. This will be determined further along in the design phase of the
project.
Along the tops of the channel banks (riparian area), trees and shrubs will be planted. A mixture
of live stakes and salvaged transplants will be utilized to stabilize the banks. In the areas where
invasive and exotic species are found during construction and monitoring, control by removal or
appropriate herbicides will be implemented to prevent competition with the revegetation efforts.
The use of material that is genetically adapted to specific site conditions enhances long-term
growth and survival and avoids contaminating the gene pool of the surrounding vegetation with
non-adapted ecotypes. Plant material should be native species collected or propagated from
material within the mountain physiographic province and within 200 miles north or south
latitude if possible.
Reforestation plans are provided in Designed Sheets 18 through 23 and will focus on 3 separate
zones having different hydrologic regimes and will include: streambank vegetation; riparian
buffer on well-drained floodplain; and wetlands in poorly drained floodplain. Along the
streambank, vegetation will be subjected to fluctuating stream flows and stresses. The riparian
buffer on the well-drained portions of floodplain will be subjected to occasional flooding, but
because of the well-drained nature will be drier much of the year. The wetlands within the
floodplain will be saturated much of the year and will be subjected to shallow ponding for long
periods. Vegetation planted in each of these areas will need to survive in different hydrologic
conditions. The following paragraphs describe the vegetation treatments for the 3 individual
zones.
Str-eambanli Vegetation
Areas around structure installations on Cat Creek and the UT's will be revegetated with live
stakes. All banks excluding point bars will be reinforced with live stakes. Species that may be
proposed for planting in these areas are listed below.
Tag alder
Black willow
Silky willow
Silky dogwood
Elderberry
Arrow wood
Alrtus serrulata
Salix nigra*
Salix sericea
Corrtus amomum
Sambucus canadertsis
Viburnum dentatum
*Use is limited to only in outer meander bends

ii

f

46 '

1

Cal Creek Stream and Welland Res~o~-ation Plan
Macon County, NC
Ju1v 2007
Woody vegetation will be planted in November or February and March. Care will be taken to
make sure that planting occurs in temperatures above freezing to insure maximum reeling
survival.
Riparian Buffer -Well-drained Floodplain
The target community to be planted in the riparian buffer and well-drained floodplain zone is a
Low Mountain Alluvial Forest as described in Schafale and Weakley (1994). Bare root material
will be used. Planting a mixture of the species listed below will best reflect the character of
stream bank vegetation typically found along small low mountain streams. Species that may be
proposed for planting in these areas are listed below.
Bitternut hickory
Black walnut
Green ash
Northern red oak
River birch
Slippery elm
Sugarberry
Sycamore
Spicebush
Painted buckeye
Possum-haw
*Use is limited
Carya cordiformis
Juglans nigra
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Quercus rubs
Betula nigra
Ulmus rubs
Celtis laevigata
Platanus occidentalis
Lindera benzoin
Aesculus s}~lvatica
Viburnum nudum
Wetlands
The target community for the wetlands and poorly drained zone of the floodplain is a Swamp
Forest-Bog Complex as described in Schafale and Weakley (1990). This community is described
as occurring in "poorly drained bottomland, generally with visible microtopography of ridges
and sloughs or depressions. It is also noted that in addition to being seasonally or intermittently
saturated that seepage is sometimes present. Their planting is dependent upon availability.
Species that may be proposed for planting in these areas are listed below.
' Bitternut hickory
Black willow
Green ash
' Ironwood
Red maple
River birch
Sycamore
Carya cordiformis
Salix nigra
Fraxinus pem~sylvanica
Carpinus caroliniana
Acer rubrum
Betula nigra
Platanus occidentalis
FAC
OBL
FACW
FACW
FAC
FACU+
FACW-
Areas outside the proposed 30-foot buffer that are currently vegetated with non-invasive trees or
shrubs will remain undisturbed where possible and succession allowed to proceed naturally.
Woody vegetation will be planted between November and March to allow plants to stabilize
during the dormant period and set roots during the spring season. A minimum of 680 stems per
' 47

Cal Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
,~lac•on County, NC
July 2007
1

acre will be planted in portions of the buffer that have been disturbed by construction activities.
No planting or disturbance is allowed within the environmentally sensitive area on the '
Swartwout Tract.
On the Waldroop Tract the middle portion of the riparian buffer will consist of alder, elderberry, ,
and black willow. The riparian vegetation will be periodically trimmed to an elevation of 3 to 5
feet to allow visual access to the horse pasture from the Waldroop residence. This is necessary
for safety. Additionally, elderberry will be planted throughout the riparian buffer on the '
Waldroop Tract.
7.7 On-site Invasive Species Management
Fescue is present in old pastureland throughout the site and can hinder the establishment of

riparian buffer vegetation. Specifications for fescue eradication will be included in the Special
Provisions section of the bid document. Kudzu is also beginning to encroach onto the Preserve
Tract along Ferguson Road. With roots that can extend to 9 feet below the soil surface and a
potential growth rate of one foot per day, kudzu has the potential to overwhelm a newly planted

site if not adequately controlled. Regular, aggressive management of this exotic invasive vine '
will be required. Management should begin with the site preparation stage and continue through
the 5-year monitoring period at a minimum. An additional 5 years of aggressive management
may be necessary to completely eradicate the viable propagules. Management techniques will
include an initial site preparation burn, painting cut stumps with an appropriate herbicide such as
glyphosate, sifting stockpiled soil to remove root fragments, and monitoring the project area
monthly April through November to spray sprouts with glyphosate.

48 '

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
8.0 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
The following section provides both the stream and wetland monitoring for the proposed
restoration. The stream will be monitored to insure that it is stable while the wetland will be
monitored to determine if it meets the hydrological requirements. Vegetation will also be
monitored.
' The monitoring report will follow the most recent EEP guidelines at the time monitoring is
initiated. The report will discuss the current years' results and a discussion of any changes that
have occurred on the restoration site. The relative significance of these changes will be
' discussed in detail and a maintenance plan will be recommended if applicable. The current data
overlaid over the previous data and a photo log showing successive photos will be included
' 8.1 Streams
Monitoring of the stability of the channel is recommended to occur after the first growing season
' and should continue annually for a period of 5 years or until two bankfull events have been
documented. Bankfull events must be documented during separate monitoring years.
' The dimension, pattern, and profile of the stream should show no radical change during the 5-
year monitoring period. To determine this, the longitudinal profile and cross-sections will be re-
surveyed annually. Cross-sections will be overlaid to verify no significant change in the
dimension from year to year. Similarly, the longitudinal profile will be overlaid to confirm a
stable bed profile, i.c. riffle pool spacing should remain fairly constant and there should be a
general lack of aegradation and degradation.
t 8.2 Wetlands

Monitoring of the wetland restoration site will be performed for 5 years or until success criteria
are met. Monitoring is proposed of both vegetation and hydrology.
Monitoring of vegetation will follow protocols established in the most recent version of the
Carolina Vc~ctativc Survey-EEP Protocol. Sample plot distribution will be correlated with the
hydrological monitoring locations to help correlate data between vegetation and hydrology
parameters.
Success will be determined by survival of target species within the sample plots. A minimum of
260 trees/acre must survive for at least five years after initial planting. At least six different
representative tree species should be present on the entire site. If the vegetative success criteria
are not met, the cause of failure will be determined and an appropriate corrective action will be
taken.
Monitoring gauges will be installed in enhancement/restoration areas to monitor site hydrology.
Monitoring gauges will be installed in accordance with USAGE guidelines (USAGE 1993b). The
number and location of the gauges will be determined after final design.
49

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007
The hydrologic goal is for the soil to be ponded, flooded, or saturated within 12 inches of the
surface for at least 8 percent of the growing season under average climatic conditions.
8.3 Riparian Vegetation
Monitoring of the riparian vegetation outside of the wetland restoration areas will be performed.
Monitoring protocols and success criteria will be the same as for the wetland areas.
8.4 Photograph Documentation
Photographs will be taken on an annual basis and compared to the as-built photos. The photos
will be used to make a qualitative assessment of channel aggradation or degradation, bank
erosion, success of riparian vegetation, effectiveness of erosion control measures, and the
presence or absence of developing in-stream bars. Any significant changes from the as-built
conditions will be discussed and highlighted in the report.
50

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon Cowzty, NC
' July 2007
9.0 REFERENCES
Amoroso, J.L., ed. 2002. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
' Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Macon County, NC Flood Insurance Rate Map,
Community Panel Number 370150 0006A C. 2001.
' Harrelson, C., C.L. Rawlins and J. Potyondy. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
General Technical Report RM-245.
Hey, R and D. Rosgen. 1997. Fluvial Geomorphology for Engineers. Wildland Hydrology,
Pagosa Springs, Colorado.
Lee, M.E., R.K. Peet, R.D. Stephens, and T.R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for
' Recording Vegetation. Version 4.0
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. and S.P. Hall, eds. 2001. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal
Species ~f North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North
Carolina.
NCDENR. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water Quality
Section. http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wghome.htmi (16 July 2001).
Rosgen, D. l 996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, Colorado.
Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Crnrolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service "U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services:
Southeast Region" http://southeast.fws.gov/es/ (accessed 11 November 2003).
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 1996.
Soil Survey of Macon County, North Carolina, North Carolina.
r

' S1

Cat Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Macon County, NC
July 2007

United States Geological Survey (USGS). Fact Sheet 007-00. 2002. "The National Flood-
Frequency Program-Methods for Estimating Flood Magnitude and Frequency in Rural and '
Urban Areas in North Carolina, 2001 ".
52
1
1
1

1

1
1
1

392
,~

r~
7
Ecosystem ~~
FIGURE 1
VICINITY MAP
. ~,,,., ~.. Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina
2,000 1,000 0 2,000 4,000 Feet

-, _ y
., ~ ', ~_
._
~~ _
,,-.
- - -
~~.,,,
EC _ _
n ~- e ~ _
.t~s(i ~ - - ~ I C'ti r i " ~'+ - `~ ''^~ `~' -' `tip i ``_ r ~t„' ~ ~t"~-~
. ;'f ' - ' 't ...-' S aP. it 1 1-`~ f - ~, ^.,~ ',1 - , .. r `''" 4 .. r~ .+r~ ~ ~~ n
.. ~ a `I ~~ -'__ f'~tr _. A`i.-f w ~c_~ _ j i' i~ J- ~ + ~ ~~~ i~i1 'S5~ ~ ~
~. ~ ~~ {per, ? •-y .. i - } I, ~,'~ , ~ a 1 - r
Preserve }' - ~..~.,~~`~' ~- - - . ~r;,,~ ~'~ - ;, ,; ~~. ~~--
~• ,, ~; ~
~/- MACON
<ee
f~ = ~~....~r
Jackson -
. ,t~,,., ~,., Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina
2,000 1,000 0 2,000 4,000 Feet
FIGURE 2
r~ WATERSHED MAP
~COSySt211]

cC Ha 2 _ _ -----
EvC
Sc Legend ^
BkC _ water EvD
HaC2 BkC2 Braddock clay loam, 8 15 %slopes, eroded
EvC -Evard-Cowee complex, 8-15 %slopes
-- EvD -Evard-Cowee complex, 15-30 %slopes - -
- _ EvE -Evard-Cowee complex, 30-50 %slopes
-- - ExC - Evard-Cowee-Urban land complex, 8 15 %slopes
SCC _ ExD Evard-Cowee-Urban land complex, 15-30 %slopes
~
CC
Ud _
HaB2 - Hayesville clay loam, 2-8 %slopes, eroded
"~~Ri
~ HaC2 -Hayesville clay loam, 8 15 %slopes, eroded _
~ _ HaD2 -Hayesville clay loam, 15-30 %slopes, eroded
N
f
2
f
fl
d
d
"" ~
` --`
H8C2 ikwasi
ine sandy loam, 0-
%slopes,
req.
oo
e
-
_ NkA -
ReA - Reddies fine sandy loam, 0-3 %slopes, freq. flooded H8C2
/// ScB -Saunook loam, 2-8 %slopes -
_ HaD2
EvE _
_T ScC -Saunook loam, 8-15 %slopes
~
~ "' Ud -Udorthents, loamy
`
~
S 4-1 UfB -Udorthents-Urban land complex, 0 5
% slope ~ S C
~
-- HaD2 ;
Prese rve Sc
H Sc6
_ ~~"
EvD ~
~- HaD2 Sc
- __

---
- ---

___ ' ~ EvC
- HaB2 --
u„r~
'

e
EVC -- - = -
_ - - `v,
HaC2 w EvD
ScC
~~ --
d
i^_~ ~ Swartwout
~
....-~ m
_ ,- - ~.
u°'. N ,~ ~e
_ Sc6 - - - - , >`°
_ _ReA ,_,,
- ~ Waldroop' L
Parker ~ --,_~~--~ _.
_ _ _ _: w Ev~___ ~
_ ScC _ \- -- - - ~
x Cat - - EvC ~ - `~ d~~ NkA
xD ~~~`~ HaD2 reek Rd, ~ S~cC EvE q ScC
c~~ ~
_ G ~ -
ExC Gam ___ C '„ ~ EvC ,', EvD -
HaC2
`Sc EvD ReA
HaD2 EvC EvD
w HaD2 Sc6 EvDScC ScC EvD
MACON
Cherokee Jackson
-~"` ~ FIGURE 3
Clay r NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP
~COSySte111
~~~,.~:~;., Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina
750 375 0 750 1,500 Feet

R
J � �
Sl 0
-..
''Riding f
\ /Sq., Ring
i
I
l
' fir_; � • i \ _
J e
�� S
z
f \ \STA -2+72 �Q
oa
Cat Creek R
H
Rid STA. 0+77.5

North Carolina Rural Mountain Regional Curve
iooo - _ _ _ , - -
- __ -
-
- - - -
--- - ^
^ ^ -
-
v _
_ -- -
L
L' _ --__-_-_-_ - _- _. _
O
~ 10
__ _
_

O _ -- - --_.. - -
-- -

V _
-___-___-- -. ._- ._ __
_._ _.
-_- - -_
.~
1
m ~ _ _
-- - -
- y=21.49x0.6 - -
Ry=0.88
o
i
.
o. i i i o i oo i o00
Drainage Area (mi ' )
^ Mountain Reaonal Curve ;~ Swartwout Tract Existing and Proposed Swartwout UT Cxistingand Proposed
Waldroop Tract Existing and Proposed Parker Tract Existing • Preserve Tract Existing
-} - Raccoon Reference ^ Parker Tract Proposed • Preserve Tract Proposed
- Power (Mountain Regional Curve)

nnacoN FIGURE 5
Cherokee Jackson
~- NORTH CAROLINA MOUNTAIN
cry ~ r REGIONAL CURVE
L
('OS~Stelll
,.k~,,,~~,., Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina

~' . BEGIN
,~ WALDROOP
~k ~
~* /
{1 P
~R_- ~, ti~
<~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'
~ ~ ~ F:.
~ _.,r,,° ~ z~so ~J ~~, ~.~ ~ ~r,`&~~~` _, ~ ~_~.~ ~~ ~,~ s ~ ~~
Legend
Road
Bridge
Culvert
Building
Stream
Index Contour (5-Foot Interval)
J Property Line
Jurisdictional Wetland
Existing Cross Sections
e Existing Long Pro
Existing Fencing
X
0 75 150 300 450
Feet
fat
' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ FIGURE 6
,~ . y~,a, ~ , : ~ ~ .~,. ' "'~ WALDROOP TRACT
.~ r
~ ;~ ~.~~ ~ ~;~` o°~~%r`~'~ ' EXISTING CONDITIONS
~~ ,
>~ ..,~,
'`,,~~ '• ,, t ,. ' 4~ Cat Creek Restoration Plan
' ~ ~~. ~ e' Macon County, North Carolina
- ...
j ~~~3 1 ~ N sF~
t„ ~ i
~.Y
~,
S ~ Z"
• , ; N 1 ~_
~~~ ~^ ~
. f
r ~ _
ij ~ ~ ` ~ x~vr~, ~' .~4jv~ A 1.~i
.~'~' t ~ -~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4- Chi 't' ~4`.' ,~ tn+`~, _,: Y',
s ~r / ~ ~
Mgr -~ s~` ~~, ! --- "~'~~+r"~ '"' ~•_~
is ~~ ~-'h ~,
~ TRACT ''~ '" ~~~~,
~~ ~
-' ~ .~
1 ~vYa

Legend

~~~'

f
1 -
~~ ~
~~~

}
~,,
4~~_
~+~,` - ~~
f 2125 -
ea=
'~ ~'F~. .~ 2120
~}
2115
is
-, - 2„~ j
'~ ~• _:
zlos ~ G~~.
~,
ao ~
,~ zloo ,,
„p
'vs ,._ t~~t'-'t ~'A~~~ ~ ~ a 'art' '~'" +r~, ~?F€-r E~° - +`,;;,, -
r. `~"
gs - '~_ ~~; - -
_ ;
x ~ - '~> - -~ ~ 9
_. , ~ ,- ..
~ Gage
Road
Bridge
Culvert
Building
Stream
Index Contour (5-Footlnterval)
Property Line
Jurisdictional Wetland
Existing Cross Sections
Existing Long Pro
---------~ Drain Tiles
0 75 150 300 450
Feet
ch Rd
5
Holly Spt~O~
fat
r~
Lcos~~stem
J ~:
1'A Jf_ 1• AM
FIGURE 7
PARKER TRACT
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina

fJ~

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
,~ -,tea ~ ~ ~~ , ; . ~ , . , - n
,~-~;, ~~ ~~ _ ~ t' Gag u ve
.--~ ~}~iy~„"~"a; h'~ ~ : ~ Y' ~ Cpld~Knob ~~ s i ~~~
~''~~~`_" BPS avecdam/'`~J ' " -~, ~l - ~ `L~ I ~ ., . /' _'~ 1: - - /.HER ~ ~\. Q ;
,
- -~ ~ `-~' ~-- y~, ~'~! ,. Gap J ~ _ r ~ _. _, ~~~y.~
m /' _
r1. - ~ ~' ~.: ~ ~-~ i1~ -~ ~ ~OUrltdtEl ,. ~ Pror Mo ,tarr, '~4.. ~ ~ ~ ! ~ 24
i. ~ I ' ~ ~ ~i 1 ~ ~ ~ ~, _ , ~ ~ ~ ~ fT ""~' ~ ~ ,
~ ~ A ~ ~, ~~ ~, - ~ MraPrlerS ;T ~r f _ i I~ v - ' m ~
'~~-' - `1 `p v GREEK VISLd 1 l_,:/:\ ~ -,~ ,<l - ~` r -
SOURCE: USGS Quadrangle: Waynesville, NC, 1941, Photorevised 1979.
Maptech® USGS Topographic Series'"', ©Maptech®, Inc. 978-933-3000, www.maptech.com/topo Copyright 2001 Maptech
MADISON ~'~
_ ~", __
^r" ~ MCDOINEL•L
BUNCOMBE ~,~-~
n ~-_ .- FIGURE 9
HAYWOOD! ~.
"`~ _ _ ~ _ _~ - == -- ~ REFERENCE REACH
-~_.._
- - HENDERSON RUTHERFORD , BENT CREEK
~!,COSYSte111
'~""'"'""'' Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina
2,000 1,000 0 2,000 4,000 Feet

_ l t
a 'xfi -ti ~~~ -- Reference Site .;~ }-~` ~ `~
p. 43 C
~~ N' - a ~' ~. 4- iJ .~y , v '~, Jf t ~~.1~ 1 i t- '~'_-^ A ;. _ rGA~c~ ~ ~.:~~. a
--•.N - ~~ ~~f'• /r `~~ Yom, i_.. ~ ~~ ~ jry J!,~ - ~`-'- -
~~ M .,r/mss'/`J YI { ",~ v 1 i,-, _~ ~ ` ~ :~[` ~ - ~ } ~ ~ -i~/j.-r `~~Q !4i
- RHO ~ - ,}~ f~~s.~ ,\ ~~'r: ,~~ ,I:~ ~., ~, j~. ~ -- At, 4~b ~ f___ ~ -
~ f/.-,_ /~ ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 c, .. ~ ~ eI~ ~~~~ ~ ((~'~+•~S 3,3'40 /~~f `~ n) - ~ /ll~,
~ ~.'
1.23 Sq. Mi. ,. . '~~ ~ `~ >., , ,, ', ~~-. - ~ ;~'
~ /. } ,
,~` ~` tit i 4,. ;~~ - ~'' . ;"~ ~ ' /~ - _8 _!~ ~ ' r -- _ 1 .'~--
~, ;, ~ ~ ,
i r 1 iJ -- p
,~ '4-
-r ~~ ! ~J, n.-. ~ TliC~~IU~7D ('HaTFlaJI tti'11.I
/'
- '_ ,1_itt+eGtHnQfAther'-MttY_ / ;~~- ~ \~^ ~~'\ r'',.c ~ ~~ 't', 1~J-~`~ ~ V I ~ ~
SOURCE: USGS Quadrangle: Whitehead
Maptech® USGS Topographic Series'"', ©Maptech®, Inc. 978-933-3000, www.maptech.com/topo Copyright 2001 Maptech
ALLEGHENY SURRY
ASHE ~.- FIGURE 10
r REFERENCE REACH
WILKES ~ K
ECOSyStelll UT TO MEADOW FOR
Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina
2,000 1,000 0 2,000 4,000 Feet

~~
ti
ry Legend
- ~°
- - - - _ _ // / % ; 6 Gauge
` ` _ ~ ~ ~~ /~ ~ tib • Soil Boring
.~' ~ ~ ~ ti ry ~ Pit
•~ r
~ ~ ~~ I~ h ~' ~ ~ Data Point
i I ~ i ~ ~`--~ ~ ~ ~_ ti~5 a`' _ r /
~ _. -
I 1 I ° ~ ~\ ~ ~° ~ ti° ~~~ ~ Bodge
I ~_
,~5 i - ,:' ~ - - __
~.
~" i j I y~ ~, _, ~ __ - / ,, ~ • ~ - Culvert
III 5 S1 ~/
I ~ e N _ n - % ti°~ _- •~ •9• BEGIN Building
"- i
" i _.
~m
2~~° ~ ~ ~ _: ;,' l3° _ , - .' . PROJECT ~ Stream
it
1 ~ - ~ • B 3 _ ti ry ~ 2,5° -- Index Contour (Interval 5 ft)
" ~ ~ i r ~ ~ ~ • ° -----
~'~ ~ ~ • tie - --- Drain Tiles
i ~ f~ • • • ~ ~ Property Line
I ~~ • y
f~f, ~,~
z,ep _~-- _ ~ 1 ;~ ; ~,~' Jurisdictional Wetland
` ~ ~S9 ~~ °° i ~ Environmentally Sensitive Area
=" ti ~;
~ 1 ~ ' SWARTWOUT --- _ ~~
~ ,
2155 1 ~ ~' ' De th to H dric Soils
~~` ' p Y
i I ~ ~ ~'' TRACT ' Q ' ~ - ~~
li
l ~ - I 1 _ '
2,50- ~ ~ c _ ~~ 0-12..
~ ~ _ - i l ~'` ~ _ --- 13-18..
,' ,t ~ 19-24..
v / ,
- 2145 -' / / - -
/~ / j
2140= ~~ , ~! ~' ~ / -- ~ - - a
~, ~ ~ ,F . ti / ',
p ~a ~
- 2195 ~~ j / -~ h ~~ -.-- _..
1 ;' ~ ; ~,
f / _
- .. ~ i
-- 2130 - - ' ~ _ " n
~~~ ~ "
- -- _--- 2125 ~ l 2125 ~ ~ -. '''
i • `~ /
~_ __.2120 ~ ` - ~ , » -.
_ ~ / i,
2° ~ ~ \ ! ~ t , `\ 2170
.2115 r _ ~ ~ ~-~~ __ - 2 75
- _ ~ 218° 0 75 150 300 450
' ~ 220° Feet
s
~'`
"
~,05 ~ ~ ss -
- 2,,° ~ " 2,95 ____--
,,
y,
~ ~ ~o ~>~ ~ _ _ .2190 ~~~ I ~ ~ N~ ~ :rjL ~~,
S3 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~! ! ! v
- . (~~ , . , + - -_1' ~^0 ~Nr 441 C~ 1 r ~ Rd
m y
W TR~# OOP ,,'3%. ~ r S4 ~ ~'•/"> ' ~S 1Z-~ -'°'~ , ~ ryo~ ~ / a- f ~ LL Not~,spti~ci
Caf Creek ~ ,.• . S6 z,~ 'e° .~ ~ Fr=an~klin ~
~.
__ - - i °" 3S 64 ~
_ ~~ ~,
- _- • I
- - ~' " ~ ;
, a
_ _ \ ,~ ~ ~ ` 441 64 ~l/ Cdt C eek~~,.
r
~ 23 /
1
END _ ac ~ ~ / ,
_: SWARTWOUT ~~~ _ ~ ~Ty. ~ ~~_ ~ c
__ _ ~ i
5
-~ i ~ ~ _ --,~~---- ~~' ~~~ f ~ 2''° ~~~,, ~ FIGURE 11
a Y
__ _~_ ~ ~_~ _ ~ SWARTWOUT TRACT
i \ ''
~'~~--~~ -i ~, r WETLAND
~! ~%~_-~'--~ --=~~= ~ ,.~:' , a - ~ DELINEATION
- _~~~T ~ , -~--~--= ~` ,~~.' , t ,`,:- ~ ~,COSyStelll
~- , ~~~ ~ .` ,, ,~\: ,\ ~ , •.,,~ Cat Creek Restoration Plan
22,5 -- _, __-~ -
-- ~ ~ Macon County, North Carolina
220 ~ 2175
~y5

4~
Legend
\ 9 Gau e
,\
_ j j ,
i , ~ I i ~ ~ -
~"~
~ i ~ i ~ ; / , i ( ~ ~ `~ zso ~ ~ , ~ • Soil Boring
-~" ~
~`
END ~ ~ ~ -, ~ ;.~ ~ ' i , ,_
~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ Soil Pit
'. - ,~` ~ -
_~~~ ~ I PARKER , ,~ ,~ , ~ ~ ~ ~~1 ~, ', ~ ~ 250 - 2,~ ~~ ~ ` i ~ ,i ~ ~_. . Data Point (DP)
~ ~~ , ~ ~ t
0 l ~~~ '~ ~ \ \ ~ ` ~~--~ \ ~ 2 -2„5 _~ ~~ ~ ~ ' ~~ ~--' ~` Road
_ ~~ ~ „ y
^ \\ \~ ~ ~ - ~ :~ / /ins' /~
,-
_1U1r-. `~~ ~ \~~ ~~ ~ \ \ ~-'~~ -'~-. ~ -zles y ,~ /~ !~ / CUIVeft
"° -Old ~ \\ \~ ~\~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ``~~ ` e'ea __- ~i f ~
' ~ Tee ~. -
~ ` ,~\ '~. ~~-~~`- ~ _ __ ~ /' ,''~ ` Building
~ ~ \ ~, ~, ~~_
~ ~` ~ ` -- - ~ - ~
- 3 ~ -
~
~ Stream
~, N ~ • • ~\~
~~\-~ 274p
- .,- ~~-
\~ t ~\ ~
' ~ Index Contour (Interval 5 ft)

^`~
/ _
~
~ . ~ ti~ ~,\ ~_~ _ ~~ ~- ~ _ - -- :
~~ =
~~ ~~ \ ~`,\ \\ ~Z '~-`_ -- 2135
f ~'' -_~ "
'
~ `
' z
~"
~
,.
~
! ........-~ Drain Pipe

t
Li
0 P
- -
• • _' -_
`'
~
~~~ ~
,3o _ _
~-
~
\
~ ~_
-~
t
~
~
~ ~
` roper
y
ne
'
'~

=~ ~ _
`><
~ ~
~~
~ti \ --2,~ ----
,.~-'
_ ~-- Jurisdictional Wetland
~ ','
-'z
., ., ~ _ 2ua - - -4-~ -~
~~ 't, ., ti. ~_
Depth of Fill over Hydric Soils
°
ry° ry°0 _ - - ti ~ --2115--.a~`~~

202
°~
~` `\ 13-18"
5 - - °
~ i `,~ ~ ~-- - -- -- zoos - -
i
\ -__~ `
~
~ 19-24„

"~ _-' _
• DP1 1 ,,--~
~ ` ~ - - 2,00 - _ _ _ - ~, '`~
T
l
>24"
2080
o •
~~_
~ ~ -
2~5

_ -----
_----
_ -
2a85 _ ~ ~ l-
_ ,,,
`

~~ v

~' __
°.
• ~°1 Z WALDROOP _°~ ~`-~~~
zz95 ~"- _ _ --
'a - PROPERTY n ~
2,00 ~ ~ ~
~

210h

.-2110 -
~
-'`,,

o ~~
• ~ ~'_`'

'1-
z
- °
1
t~'
~-
~ 0 75 150 300 450

--~
-
~
~~. ~

' Feet
_
, _- ~, °1~ `°
~//~/J - ~ `f ~_~ ~ \ L ~ 7 ~~~ ~f'/~ ~Y YID
/,'~~~- ,- ` _ ,, \` ~ _ /~ ~~c3~ 441 9~ ~\ o
~0
~- ~ i ~ ' ~ ~ m Oh
~ ,,_ ~~ ~,_. J,~`L ~ • - _ --- _ ~- u. Holly spi~o0
~. -
~~
di' • ~
a~ ' ~Fra~nkfin L
~~ ° oia °Pi • ', !%' ' _ PARKER __ sa
° cr~e~, • TRACT
~ 64 ~ o ~a.
`-- ~ • 441
_ • 'a • ,.~ at Creek b
• • ~ 23 , \
_ t ~ ~ - • • Wooden ~°
_ --2155 -- I • ~ Bridge °° BEGIN
PARKER
-
~f ; 1oe5 2p85 _ ____~~ FIGURE 12
~ 2p ~"`~ _ _= oid ~__. - - ~- PARKER TRACT
,;~ _
~ ~.~; ~ •., Green - WETLAND
~' ,' ,' : - •,~ rRACT ~ DELINEATION
~_
~ `, ~ ~ __
\1 1!~ ' ~ I~. ~ ~ ~-nom-. oa • 2080 - ~~^~ ~ ~ ,~~ Cat Creek Restoration Plan
y'' Macon County, North Carolina
,~, --`-'
~. \

ti V
- ~ 205 I l fI\ / ~v-,~ Ji ' , ?
_ - _ ~ 1 t 1
toes -~ _ ~ zvo ~ ,~ ~ ~~ ~_/ - ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ - s ~' /~
-- - ~ _ ~ v
~ ~ \ ~ a,so ___--
Z,6o-~ tio~ ~ ~ ~~ i, ~'~
\ ~_ ~ ~~- _
za~o 2p65 ; \~~~ f 11 '` ~ \\\ ~ Q
-_ Zoo _ '_-_'--- _-_ ._; .`. ( ~ ~ ry
Zap __ _________________ - ~ ~\\~
_ _ • _ _ \~~\~ I ~'
END - -
~; -_ --
PROJECT ~~_- ~-- ,\ ~ 1 ~ I'
~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~ .,~i~
.,,.. e
2065 } ~.
-- -...-_ ` 5 _ l
_ ` y_._
2055 --~ __ - - - - - - -
.. -.---
_ _ ------ - - - - .Old
~- ~ _ _ - __
- ~ _ - - - ~~° `- - - ~Porid PRESERVE a ~`-~~~'~
-- _Caf Creek _~_ f3ed TRACT `~ ~---_r_~
- 2 ... - ~ _ - ~ _ _ _ ~~--~
_ y -- :_ : ~_ _ ~~ -
~ -_-___-_- _ _--- __ -- _- 2,os
~~
~~
------
`~ .r - - ---- - -
zoss __ .- - - -~--• - ----- ~--- 4`~0~ 1166
l l ,-!_ - -- ------------ - - _
`;~
2085 - ~--'-- ~ ~... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
f ~
s - ~ - - --
----
~~ _ 5
\ ~\ ~ -
~~~ Y' l0 1.95 \ \ - ,., -.. - -
~6 _
~~
~ 2~6~ _.2165 - \ - \ \ ~`\~~ ~. - /
~\ \ ~ \ \ \` ~~j ~/' ~~/~ 2180 - 21A6 -~ \ ~\ ~\1~~~~. _ _ _
~i/~~ / ~\\~ ~ ~ " °a
~ // /_ .--u1o- ~ \ v r
zo 1
i /J! / ~~ '_ 425 ~\ ~'\,_\ l \ \\ s
/ 2220 - - \ \\\ `\\ \~~
v -. _ 225 \~~ I i N
- - \ t
~j6 ~~1 f~II`~~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~I,)1) ~% ~l
1 /~~ ~ ,
z /i//~'~ /~ //
I %/jl~/~~' it ~ / BEGIN ~
~~ ~' ,, ~ ( 2„5 2„~ PRESERVE
_-2,20
I ~ 1 ~~ ' ; ~ ~ - ~_~ _ -- --~~-- -
zi25 `-
~ _~__~ ~,
// ` ~~- \
°- - 2f7 2,30 __ \ \\ ~_=~:.

5 _ .\.
~~
_--_-_ .__'2140 - - -.
_ 2145 -
/ I
~-
;~
O y^
N
f
,t , '~ ',
WALDROOP
PROPERTY
11t 1
~; ~ ~
V'~~,}
\\
Legend
• Soil Boring
Soil Pit
~ Data Point (DP)
Road
Bridge
Culvert
Building
Stream
Index Contour (Interval 5 ft)
------ Drain Tiles
Property Line
Jurisdictional Wetland
Depth of Fill over Hydric Sails
0 a-12..
13-18"
19-24"
>24"
0 75 150 300 450
Feet
c~
~, , ~
~ Ecosystem
1 , ~~,,.H,,~

G,~~~chRa
5
`S pt`~~ ~
fat
FIGURE 13
PRESERVE TRACT
WETLAND
DELINEATION
Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina

_- - nab _ r~~ _ -
- -_ -F _ - _ ~ "~~
- ~ _-- ~ - -
~ s~ ... ~ tom. ,~~~~ - ~ -'~J ~~~~• ~ ~,~..~~ ~ -~ • ~ J
"~ f t ` = ~ r i 1 ~ t - ~*`;~ Kk' 11eTn~ria! Ch .
__ ~,.~ __.. s . , . .. _ ~ _ ~ F _
~,~~-- ~~~-` _ ~..` - ___ __~ ~ mot. ^~~?' `-Y ,l - ~,'#: -_.-~ s
- _ -err Yl!r._'r ~~- . - `~Ca_ _ h. t"_, ~ ~' _
-. •t ~ ~P:t - '- - _ •CeR4f7~~AYE ~* '-•~: J'+,~ J art -
- ~ ,
~.
r j-;r~k ;-_ - - - ~ -
,~~1~, ~~.~_ f` Reference ~ } '~~ `_.._. ~ ~-1 ~...
~''~ } 3-~-''; ~ - _; Wetland ~: ` _ {f' r~ - - ~. ~~ ~ -
~. ~ _ ~: r
_ ~4an:nA:r~ [~a # P - ~ ~ _~.. -. ~ e- ~ al! a}dk ti r3J 6 Mr ~` ~~
~y 1S ~ 4~~ ` V ~ - 4 ~l ~ iJ ~ ~ 1
. ~ ~ -
R
.~ a :~ c
. r ~Y~t'Fa: ' m~'x`r' ~' ra• ri: af' ~ a k `~ £ ~ ~,~.-~--, ~~ _r ~ ,~. _. i , - ~ ~~t M~- -
k_ r ` f 1'.~r _ 1 ~n ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f
t +I Q ~
~ ~
~_
"~ r . - ~'~-Yi ~... C . i ~ ~ t~.. ~``'. ti ~ 4 . ~ - - _ 1f to ~
¢ _
~ ¢ r - i
i
SOURCE: USGS Quadrangle? Franklin, NC, 1946, PR 1978; Prentiss, NC, 1946, PR 1978; Rainbow Springs, NC, 1957, PR 1978;
Wayah Bald, NC, 1957, PR 1978.
Mantechn USGS Tonoeraohic SeriesT"'. ©Ma~tech®. Inc. 978-933-3000, www.magtech.com/topo Copyright 2001 Maptech
~ ~ MACON
Cherokee Jackson
Y
~' r FIGURE 14
Clay r REFERENCE WETLAND
EEK
L' COS~Stelll CARTOOGECHAYE CR
Cat Creek Restoration Plan
Macon County, North Carolina
2,000 1,000 0 2,000 4,000 Feet

'Y
i
o ~~
,,, ~~~
~~~ 7 ~.~ ~
~`'~ BEGIN PER SWARTWOUT ` ~
~, ,~
+~~ .`
~, ~ ~ \
~ ~\
~EIIOVE 45 FENCEd ,~~\ +~ ~~~
~ n ~ :~
~ ~ ~ 1 ~ `~
KEEP THIS FENCE ` ~ `~ ~~ ~ ~~
WE'LANC RESTORATION ~ ~~,,~ ,~ ~
i
,,
~~ I
~~ ~
r~ N
~~
~~
~ ~
iI/
N
~ ' ~
0
ti ti ti ~~ /
~ AREA ,~
//
~ ~ ~` \.
REMOVE WEN fENCEJ \, _ \ ~ ~1 ~ ~ / // r•
\ } INSTALL ~ ~ \ ~
! BRUSH YATR ~\ ~ - ~ _~ ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~// / ~ ~ ~ .~-
.. ~ RESHAPE BANK ANO ~ 1 ~ ~ -- - _ _ - - - /~ ' `~ - ' `i /
`. CHANNEL AT WR£CTKhV ~~ ~ ~~ _ , -' _>/ ~~.~ ~~ r r ~
F DESIGN ENGINEER l
REMOVE 15'CNP ANS c> ^% ~~ ~\t-` _-~_~'' ~~i ~Y' .~
50 fT DRAIN TILES ~ ~ ~~ ~,~-~ r^~
~~t-- ~ -r'.~r,
INSTALL FENCE b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~~~ ,.M1' ~~
..y r. ~~~Z ~Z
\ ^'..^ n ...^ ^'^..^' \i' ~ ~~-~ _~ ~£ _ REMOVE DRAINAGE TILES
- 5~~~9~
a
nV
8~
a
n
H
a~
a
m
0
0

- _
--
~" ,~~
-_
OQ ~~
W 2 s.-.'
~~
192531 tlesian sheetl.tlan 7
9:18:12
~~
~ . Q
~•
P,~~~ ~~_
- _==`~
ti I
COMBO LLG VANE lTYPJ
ROCK CROSS VANf
REMOVE DRAINAGE TILES
~:! ,~ j L_
~-~-
~V' ~~ ,•
/'~ ~ ii.
,JT TRACT ~ ~~z'
I !; ~I ~i~; ~o
I~ r
~~ z
~~ ~
~o~
. ~ i ~:.
- cV I I rw „,
Il ~F o
~, ~ ~,~ N
~~~ , ~ ~a ,
/f
/ ; _'
~/ ~ ---_
!
it
~~ g
~ ~ ~ ~/ Q
~~ r~~ ~ ~o
,11 / /~ ~ / J Vl
i/J~A~~ ~
I / l Ai Z
/ ~~/~~/~/+ 0
11 1 1 1 1~ I
l l ~ l l
~ /!//!/
• ~y/~/I /{1 1
.> i .- 9 ~ ~ i N '.
/ AT / ~,m
v NATRESS /TYPJ s1~T `AI' L E
LL ¢m
I I j l i I I I~+~ r 2 ~ A
~~I !I VIII ~ ~~
~IIIIIII lilll L ~ ~~
IIIIl11I~1111! ~` m
1!1!1!1!!!11!' ~~ ~~
III III !! e
II~~I!~Ii~lll}1' ~ ~~
,111, a
1 1 1
REA fTYPJ ~ 11 11 ,
1111 ~ Z
111 O
~ i 1 1 1 1 1' a
1 1 1 l\ 1 1 1 1 l ~~
I l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11~ ~¢ r
.111111 111 111 W O
1\11111111`' ~ a ~
~~, X 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i ~, W
1 1 1 ~~W W
,1' W'W 2
o
WAO~~NiEA lTYPJ 3 v a ~
fIL!~ EXISTING CHANNEL ~°i Z
ti aaW ~
CHANNEL PLUG lTYPJ ~ ~ w ~
~\ 1 ~ 'r ~ r
~ W
. \.~ ~ W
Y r ~
W O
L 1 ~ u
7 _i._ _ _'S] \ \ \ \ \ ~, tai
\\ ~ \ 1 \
T'\ 1 1 ~ 1 1 ,
V~~~ 1 1 ,
1
~, ~ `\ 1
~'~ ~~`1111 V
~1

~p4 (yam •~\~`~\ ~\~\~~ ~\--~ ---
~ ~ Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ Z sZ
___ ~
~ ~\ ~
) Gc \•. .\ .~ L n
P e IZ C / /i~•-
_? ~ ~ y
~ ~
- -
~~ ~ i ~E ,~ ,~ \ ~• -SfIZ ~ ~ Q
~~.
••~ 3
L y{~]
V ~ YWE FENCE AS NEEDED
c •~~\ °~ \` _ __ FDR CONSffNATIDN EASExENT~ ~i /~
,. ~_u~_
pST" ~, /1 s j ~ ~ wwN.a ~
____
_.
PE ~r,• • • ' •~ `v --.~ ~, B~ fB 0 W Rf FENCE ~ ~ ~ ~
l ~ _:~.- / INSTALL 6 STRAND ~.! • ' • ° • .. a• \ V
% ~ ~ ~ ~ - - BARBED WIRE FENCf ~-- LK ~ - .~ • ~ ~ ~
'-, ~ -
a •'
.~ . ~ 1NSTALI V~wES AT DIR£C71pN W
1 ~ ~~~ \\ ••.\, ~~VS~kL PERMANENT OF OESnGx fxGixEER /~ a
/ `i / ` ` 1y /••' EC'JIPNENT CROSSrNG -~J\ - - IIII) b
/R\ ~rllYY ~ a
~/~ --SQ/~ r2'GATEJ `E~rPYE~CMR~OSSrnD '--°- a
LEGEND ~ ~\
i ~
LOG VANE / '
~ ~ ~ i Z
..
a~
COMBO LOG VANE •
;Z ~ o a
//'~ ~ ~ N
' ~ c ROCK CROSS VANE / W O
~ - ~ --°-~~. • ~ ~ a ~
' ~/r az~z . Z ~ W
] e NOTCHED SILL i • -
4„J'} ~ a ~ Z W
s~~~ '•• WoW =
~ RooTwAO \ • ; V U (n
a J.~ ~ ~~^~ • Z
--~~ uuRlsDlcnoNaLwETLANDS • ~ ~ z z
N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 BRUSH MATTING •• O,Z y ~~ W ~
W~ / PROPOSED WE7IANDS • ~(
Q~ ~ ._• I ENHANCEMENT - • 1 W ~ Q
~ C
O~ ~ r ~ PROPOSED WETLAND •
9 ~ I _ _ _ I RESTORATION • • OII~ U W
O
Q ~ r
PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY ~•\
o \ ••• V
o
PROPOSED THALWEG \ - •
~ PROPOSED BANKFULL ~ • V ~f 7/ZTi2CO7
`~ r DRAINAGE HIES `~, - • s 'aG;E~.r NC 925'1
• ~/
i •tlp~~ ~ FILENAME y
GN - • • - • CONSEAVAIIDN EASEMENT
~~ T /p ~ •a~i4• { SRrEi ND 2
- FENCING ~`_ •~. n_
j~ ~/ - Ij

'4&~ '.
r
s3^>X l
531 tlesian sheet2.dan 7127

5~
1
0~'~2
~/
~--~
e
•
s
' 9
1 ~
• ~,t
•~
.y
'~' _~ l I-If//~ ~'
I
1
! ~ •
J,! 1~ ~2
! ii /~J
~ !' ~ I ~ Aga
!r !
~! ii
! i' ti ~r;
!Ei ,a ~!,
~ ti !
1 ~ 1 ,p112 ~,'~~ !
~ V / ~
r ti
~ ~iZ '
6NfFK 9710_ SR~ ~~ _ ~ \
0+
~C \
L ~'
,'
~~
`1 /,
~ ~ ; lNSTUL s srRAND
~ I BARBED WIRE FENCE ALONG
• ~ ~ ~ ' • CONSERVATION EASEUENT
~ ~ ! ! BOUNDARY
~ ~ ~ ~ L COUeO LC; vANE mPJ ~ a.. ~ . -
it
~ ~ ~~
I~
~~ Z . 1 ~INSTALL7r E
~~~~ INSTALL 6 STRAND • ~ ~~!
BARBED WIRE ffNLE~
. - ~ ~-.;
4 ~ C
~'' ,• ~lNSTAUlrcArE
~•
.•
.~ / ~~~ r
'. ~~
~~/ .,~
~ / K ~ z
T
INSTALL 6 STRAND
BARBED WIRE FENC£
AS NECESSARI

.•.
,' ,•• ~,
'd ~ ,
~ ,
~,
~
r
•' LEGEND _
~p~~ • ~
,~~ ~.~ 'l
E ~ r LOG VANE
1
6~~~
/•,
j5 0 0 ,/ ~
` CONBO LOG VANE
s~
/
••
/
^
r/
~ ~ ROCN CROSS VANE
~
/
/
,
~ / (
Sn
.
• / ~~ ~
S /
E6 - i
•'
P ,j NOTCHED SILL '•'~U4 ~
/
~
E5
•
~
i ~
/'
~ E ~ RooTwnD

C ` ~ / ~
\ .~0~
/
~
~M~ JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS
4
8 ~
/
VV
`~
~I

I 1111 I I BRUSH MATTING '

N
N

~
~ ~•^•~
SWG
~

v
7 / •
PROPOSED WETLANDS
L •_• I ENNANCENENT
'j
pp
WI1I
Q®
O~ ' -' ~
-------~ r- - - ~ PROPOSED WETLAND
~ _ _ ~ RESTORATION ~
''I
1

0
PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY
-._._ __.__.- Cblz

a F
PROPOSED THALWEG -
0
a
PROPOSED BANKFULL
_ ,
DRAINAGE TILES
o
~ ~ - ^ • - • CONSERVA710N E45ENEM
~^
't
N - - FENCING . ~
O ~ -~
p .
7
(,~
JO ~.~
REUOVE AND REPLACE ~ ~
~Cf55 ~ NECESSAR! FOR ~ ~~~~.. \
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
~-
a .._.._.._..-r
•
•
~~",.,,
9~,
W
~FO99 N
ry f ice.. F
4~ /. ~' \ z
~' \.. \ o
w ! o
i~~ '
\ ~~
`GOURD LCG VANE (TYPJ
ice' `~
~ \ \ ~
N
~
/
' ~
~ a
~•
, -.
L ,~,I
y9t .. ~.yy
~, ~ o
~~
A~
.~

` \ ~ ~ ~~
W ~~

,,/~
~ a
h ~ j
a
•
s
•
~•
\\\\ ~
1
''•
~•
M
r
W
W
N
/ZR
V
/H^
VJ
W
l
192531 design sheet3.tlan 712712007 9:18:57

'~
~ ~
c
Q
8°
N~
N
~~
~~
a~
O
9
0
Q
yN
22O
b~
N
0
WL2~
JO
...192531
rRE11GVE ORa1N TILE$/~
/ ~~/!
~rv~ /~'.
I ~~~~~
~~~
t1~G / T
1
,p
~~
•,~ ~ o~~
---i`
f Otl~
v ~.;
r~~' v a
+a , ~.
///'~ °
V9S . 'S ?2
~ot ~L ~ .~Q~~ s ,
~ ~ A
~ _~
/~ ~ ~ o~a° ~ e a
~ ~/ ~L o a
% n ~ ~m•
D ~~~ ~~~
~ ,~^~~ ~ ~ ~0~
~. / ,•~ o~ ,~ ~ werLA~RESroRArroN ` ~'
~. stir AREA ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_.

,~.,
~ \ . i
~~ ~ ~ ~
\` ~ ~ -
\ ~ ` i
s ~~` \ \ ~ .
uy<ec \\\G~\~\ \ Y/ice ~
INSTALL BRUSH YATRESS (TYPJ ~ ~
~' /
I
l ~ \ e~
I ~;~ ; , ~ i / ~ ~ ..:
i ~ ~ r ~ `~
I ~ 1 ' ~ ~.`
ILT wmn s , -,
r
%~(r I ~ ~~ ~ II ~a ~ /( ~;
( ~ ~ /'%.
~ ~' ~ ~/ /mar ~'/~{
7
NGTCHED SILL rTYPJ vOr_ , A '~~ ~~ ~~
~~~
~ ~
-- ~
~~
RlJOT WAD (TYPJ ~ ~ ~~
~;~
~~~ ~~
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL ~ \
~~ ~ ~~
~~/ .
~~'~ \
( ~ INSTALL BRUSH I
~` , ~' ~ j ~ / a ~ T ~ CDUBO LCG vANE rTYPJ
'~ \.
VG CHANNEL ~ ~cJ ~ / , _ _ _ a-'INSTALL BRUSH N.9TRE.5,$ RYPJ ^ ~' 4
~ ///
~::% ~ _ _ ~ / ~CDYBO LDG VAyS !TYPJ T I ~ ~ ~ \\..
/ ~ \ ~ ./ ~.
TRACT

..I, s
~' /
a
~~a
~J
zll
~~ ~ ~ ~~
~ o
\ \ a'
IATRE55ITYPJ \\ ~~ Q
~ ~
~ \l Q
\ ~ Z
~ o
~~ ~ ~o
~ ~` o
u N
~, -~ 1 ~ ~
~, ~ 1,~~ ~
!'
_ a„
~... ~ 1 \\~. ~~
~ wgl ~ E ~ ~
'CHANNEL PLtlG I ay~~s9 5, G~ `_' '^ ~
\ oe 9
l a1 s _ 3~
~ l ~1 a,,,
s ~` ~_ h~
_ W ig
0
~RCt)T WAD rTYPJ / I ~~_f ~,L ~/ 1 ^ ~~.
,/ I .r ,,, ~.r~f'_'~_ _ '\~- `, 1 r~ '~IIM~NNEL~PLUG (TYPJ.
B I i ~ -- _~ w `. `.
~ ,r~ ;~„~
! ~~
/ l ~;`~ ` . /~~ ~
~, ,.
~ ~G µANf !TYPJ
~ ~~ ~1

LEGEND ~ ~ , ~'~ 080Z
j LOG VANE ~ •
COMBO LOG VANE
ROLNCPOSS VANE e
_______ ~~ Gr
p NOTCHED SIl1 ~ ~ ~ ~~' a ~Q•
J
ROOT WAD
~ f
~L~ JURISDICTIONAL WETUNOS •~
1111111 BRUSH MATTING
'-' I PRGPGSeowEnaNDs
•_ ENHANCEMENT
r 'PROPOSED MfTUNO
~ _ _ _ ~ RESTORA11ON
PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED MALWEG
PROPOSED BANNFULL
DPAINAGE TILES
- • • m = CONSERVATION EASEMENT
FENCING
tlgn 712712007 9:19:15
,,~(~
lN" •
((-- ~..
7~
~ */ / a
'+~
s-
Z
..moo
i r
a
~,` o a
~ C
a
a~i
J =
N ~
3~u
Z
atf =
OZ
u
W
Q
~~~
r W
N ~
N
t Y r
1 N
o
U W
a
V

r
W
W
/2
VJ
Z
,"^~
VJ
W
0
T
PARKEF
~v _~-~ .y
h
RDCK CR055 VANE RYPJ ~ ~ ~ -~ 8
w,

,' • F
,-
zI
pIIZ"~ '~ ~,o
.' ~ ,_-
.',
//'/'', 1~° V
~~y, ,
~ II~~....II 0

i

' \~
\\.

/- ~ ~
/ ~' ~ ~ ` 1 ~ // ~ V
•~~ \ N ~ r 97 J
\~~ ___~_~_ //// •M F
• O ___
~ , ~, ~ - ~ SjpZ pl~+ P ~~
ice- ~ ~JE / ;/:~~~ STACUTURES ARE TO BE BU1LT 0
___. ~ ~pESE
1 ~ ~ ~. ~ IN EXISTING CRANNEL ~ N
~. ~ -`"_' _ _ .' l /~//ice ~ -1'c __ / 1~, ~~ ~ / x
/ ~
ss __~_--_ A" / / - ~
\~.$~
~~ ~~
~,~ /' _ ~ /
_~ w ;y ~ -RESNAPE~ANK AT CHANNEL' / ~ ~ ,-., ~ <5
.~.
_ y ~ NOTCREO ~LL fTYPJ~
---..,
~ '~" EXISTING BEDROCK AREAS "~~
_ ~ J ~~
~./ - _
.~~ \ -
/ a \\ ~
/ ,~ \~~~}\ AE~AI AwF
\ °
,p``~Z -, ~ZI o'er I III-
i Z ~ --' '-' -' ~ PRESERVE TRACT ~ `~ '' ~g
DZ - i i~ Z ~
~°'~~?~ ~ .0212 ,'~~~~ ~~ ~~~i ~~ ~o
i
~A ~
•
'~
•
LEGEND ~ ~ ~~ A ~~_
`~ LOG VANE ,~ ~ \~ m
m'J ~~ \~ \ ~\ xy _.. _ ..
COMBO LOG VANE ~`.\~ ~ ~\ \~ V
/ AOCK CROSS VANE

l ;J NOTCHED SILL
r -

~ ~ ~ RDOrwaD
~

` ~'V« JURISDIC110HALWENNOS
/' 1111 11 1 BPUSX MATTING
~
~ PROPOSED V+EMNDS
- I
ENHANCEMENT
~ ~ t- - - ~ PROPOSED WEMND
f _ _ ~ RESTORATION
PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY
PftOPOSEO TMALWEC
~- PROPOSED BRNKFULL
DRAINAGE TILES
~~ `~ ... ~ • CONSERVATION EASEMENT
':$: BEDROCK AREAS
/ .'
•
1 tlesian sheet5.dan 7127
0
~•
n srEP .~ p`' ~~ ~' ~--
I
4~EVOVE P1PE~ ~0
~ ~N
STEP P0~ ~ / `~
s=~
E Q b
7 \` vtm
~ /j ~ ~.z.~..: ; ... .` . ~.~~/~~.- -~ / HBO LGG v~wE mP~
~ ea~ 411
~ ROOT WAO AREA fTYPJ ~',,, .~~,,.-~~"~ ~ ~
~` `~iA1~;...~-.~-+-~~ ~REST~ATfON AREA ~-.\ ~~
~ wET~O tTWD~i '
~ ` ' ~, .. £LCE 0° li 21'NfDdp , a~ 7 ~~ `y-..~.~.~--~~~
~ ~..
/1 y o,~2
U
N I i
i
O /
N NC~ ice'// '
O ~ i~ ~/
1 `
r '
2125 ~
2/~~
.~
~ 1~~
\~
s = 3~
N
~ ~~
m
V1Y a ~G
Y a

H
Q
O ~
~ a
Zy~
aX..z
JZW
~~~
WQW
;UZ
all =
OZ
U
W
~~~
~ W
V1 ~
V1
Y ~'
N
~ w
U

W
WT
''i^
v/
Z
f"~
N
W
a
u
UatE
1121/X':
PeD~ECr ND 925;
i __•~anE
»E:" JC G
„Pa Nrv 3'r -~t1 3'
Q
one
N
N~
n
tiV
a~
O
o,
'c
0
0
'o
y0
6
°o
~M
N
O
w2
~~

i

/ ~,
•
-~_~
_-J''i ~ ~ I SBO` Z _~~
'~' ~ i 0~~
,,
2 • . ,
`02 ~~•~ '
n ~ •j
,~ ,
' 0102
_ ;~
__ '~,_--
~'--- -----'i __,- --
• ~ ~~
•
--- ""esEwegave ~-'`' ----~-G~- Ae -------~_Lpo / ~---0~
A
~a , .
,~ ' ~
i ~ Z /
F ~` -\/
`\ '~' y~ ft~ ~T<T i~ r NOlCNfD S
\ /
i~ '~f a
~ ~ ~~ r ~~
\ / Z
coal J •
,q~ ~1 .
F iTy~J ~ ~
~/ ~(' ,
'~
_ __
~ .._.\
f
~~ ~A~~~
~°~~`~ i
1 .Q~_
,,~/VV""
/• ~2~_
'-~/ ~ ~ ~
~ ~~
•
~pti ~~Z \i
' ~ /~-~~
~ 1
~~~ 0112 -I
f /~ ~
// I 1
~ '
I'~I
' I
I 1
~ I
~ 4ti
~ \
• A~
PRESERVE TRACT
5104
S~Z
~~
~o
l `_~
~I
~ ~~~
2pss
O
W
V
f
Z
0
0
~N
~~
E 2 m
c ' ~
B
s ` ~~
+, : ~ ~
W~ z
~~
h~
8
LEGEND
~, LOG VANE _

a
cGMeoLCCVANE ~ a
~ V ~ I
ROCK CROSS VANE W O
~
a
O
2 y r- F-
w
NOTCHED BILL Q r Z W
J Z W
W TT

Roorwno WS
#vZ i '
~
a6Za
O Z
-L'V<R- JURISDICTIONALVrETLANDS ~
VW
~
~
II II III BRUSH MATTING ~
y
j
~
~
I PROPOSED WETLANDS
ENHANCEMENT
L Y O
W N Q
- ~

- - ~ PROPOSED WETLAND W
V
~ _ _ _ ~ RESTORATION
F
a
PROPERTY LINE 90UNDA0.Y V
a
~~
8
N~
W
h~
~~
0
a
0
~~
N
0
~..
W(2L~~
~O
192531 design sheet6.dan 712712007 9:19:59
PROPOSED THALWEG _
7/27/2001
PROPCSED BANKFULL ,, ,~0
92.1
OMINAGE TILES - - -
• • - • CONSERVATION ERSEMENT .
~;~~ FENCING

J

u

~~I

i~
i

I'~I

~- '~ ~. ~ ~. -, ~.. PIIOIER AEFEAENCF N0 . SXEEf N0.
_
I
' 92 1
. ~. ' ~ 0.0AGWAY DESIGN
ENGMEE0. XYDRAULICS
ENGNEER

~'~ 1'11
o U
_ INCOMPLE E PLANS
DO NOT V~ POR /A ACON9R1ON
2120 PRELIMIN RY PLA

-_
DD NOT UBR
CON4fRUCENR Q
DESIGN ' HEET 7

-__
-
1371NG G
._ _
4UND
2110 _ _ _
2110
wec _ _
---- -
PIS
6S~D-®A
pl1CL
i
_ ___
e to E
fisting
fa.~D+ 0.8
C
a'n e i
Ban
11 SI
e _ _
2100 2100
-- -- El. 2107.
2090 ~ 2090
1 _ _:

.': ', + ____ _

__
2
~
,~
!
I I
2 _
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00
_ r
F
2120
2120
,t _ _

2110
~ ,,
~
n~ ~
artwo
t ' _
,
_
2110
"t'
ta.1$ 2.6
_ _._
~r

~~ l: 210

9
~_~._ N _
- + RQpogE w.
_ _
2100 2100

__ I
~h
~ - -__
ll
+ L. ~'
1~B WI _ _

Ut f ~1NS OUt _.
!

2090
i _

+F

2090

__ _

,.
~
: .I

~., _ _

.

~

" _

-
_
-

_

___

', F _

I+~k _
__ .

-

- -__

Ala '~.. ~~, .~
.t-11 ~1
._._LJ ~ri
tl'. {
1~,-]. r
,..
.I
~ .-
..
. 11.1
~i
..
A._
_. ~
~

I
+..~
t

1
,+
17+00 18+00

~~

~0

0

~~
0
1

m c". 6'G~ s11.~'7 .,

I TOAi P. IR'~iillFt+=34~
~
~ .sW~+i+i~i!"~1~. .WIW' +1~.iIW ~~u:.G.s:ias.~~ ~
vr BD~I. ~ ~+J4:_rx.
a
NO
.1 NG. ~
E~
m
iv _. ~ ~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ i ~ ~
~ ~
" I ~ ~ ~ ROAD
WAY BIGN HYDPAUIICS
.. ~. ',~~ ~. I ENGNVEBI ENGINEER

I INCOMPLE E PLANS
.....~ • : ~ ~ ' - , ~. ' W NOT O~ POP /11 ACOIIIDITION
2080 ! ~ ~
~ PRELIMIN
W NOT ULR RY PLA
CONPI7llCPPIN 80

_ DESIGN SHEET 9

nnflue ce wi
t~
2070 -
__

___ 2070
- - - - _ - W pRb D9E~ ~.4 KFULL
_ _

----. _-
2060
'' ~ ' _
' ~ I ~ - ----
2060
fa.3 92.3
l: ~O6 :9 _

2050 , ~ ;', ;'' ~::. I', 2050
+, ,,
_ _ _
'~
'
~.r _ _ ,
'
_-

24
_

L
,

~
'

_

_

-

4
34 +00 35+00 36+00 37+00 38 +00 39 +00 40+00 41+00
+ ~r _, t _r ._ _ , _ _ _. ,a

~ _
2080 _
i'
', {;+
2080

2070 ' 2070
Sta. Y "~' ! 5.
~., 16TINCp RgUND ~Ol1fI ~r'7C6 'I~~1 f
>___ . .. _

} ~a

~, a~
..
-} ~ . ,

~ poop _

~
~IJ TN - ~
_..
1

~

'
2060 ' 2060
~b Parke Profri
--
7`ie
©~xis
ing
,, _
a,

_ El. 062.0
_
_ !.
_
__

-

~

_
w 2050 2050

w { ,_

Z
~„
-_ _

~

'

: _ _.

I' ~

_ _
----
b
«~ t
„~
«~
w~
~
_
~~
~,~
___
t I t

--
'
. I i . _ F

~~
»~
w~
~~
«~ 41 +00 42+00 43+00

G

i

~. ...., ! I ~ ~ _i MtO~LT REFERENCE N0. SXEEf N0.

.... ~~
I
~ ~

rr
^ ~ ~ . ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER HYDRAULICS
ENGINEE0.

__.
2120
~
_
~
~
~
~

', INCOMPLE
00 NOT U8H TDR
PRELIMIN
Do NOT UE6 E PLANS
/A ACGUOI'RON
RY PLA 0
7t
N
Tl
St to Ex
.11+0 ring
.5
DESIGN WNBIR
C17D
SHEET 10
'

_
2110
_
.: _ ~
1STINC3 G
OUND

-

- ,

110
opas ~ rHAtW ~
- ,
~
___
- - -
F ~
~K
___ _

zloo
i

' Ctla

a in

ankfial

SIr~ e
~
I
_ __
2100

_ ta,
El. 2 + .
0~,1
Sta.
~l.
3+88,
f 05.1

.

_ _
__

!090
..
~ I
I

~

_._._.
2090

__

_ . _.

I~

__
-.

,0

I

~,
,
:

,
;

~-

.

~

_

20 0
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 1 +
5 00

L
1

1

90
' DESIGN SHEET 11

2oeo 8 glr~ V 2 Pr ile ~ ' 2oao

~ i ng
S ,1Q+ 9.~
2p~0 b

---- -
- _ _
2070 _ P _ ~ 2070
__
--
----
i
__ __ _

~

'
:
;~
Sta.1 +37.3 ~`~ j
El. 20 9.5 nd U 2
-- - -
2060 t$. 13 73.9.. 2060

_~ ..

_! _ ~ __
, _ _ _ _ _ -
2 ~ ~~ .. . 2
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00

0

, .
.
~
mm
~- ,~ _
'
..
~. ~..
..
~ .
. ti
NtOJECT REFHIENCE N0. SXEEi N0.
Jr
.....
~ ,
~ 92 1 _..
~
m ~ ROADWAY DESIGN NYDRUILICS
'
~.
~,
.'
I ~I ~ DVGINff0. ENGINEE0.

' I
-: ~
-
'~ ~
~. ~
~ INCOMPLE E PLANS
-._.... . , ~ DO NOT VR PO& /R ACOllIB177ON
2080
l

i

, PRELIMIN
> RY PLA 80
W NOT 1
R WNRIHIIC11ON
- _ ' ' DESIGN SHEET 12
I_

2070 ,,
~ '~
'
~
2070

_._~._ tgTIN6 ~UN~

I
___~ -_.._ .
-~~

P~l'

~ __

,

_

~
___~
__
;~_

-

,.__..
-- ___

2060

~'

ICI U

i
--
2060

_ _ ~ Fr. zos~.' ~, ~~,
UT3
~
Spa 13+~8 4'

1

2050 ~ I ' ~ ! ;. 2050

~ _k
__

-_
2040
~
!
i-
2 4
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00
,. t ~ ~+.,t. _
~. __---
,1 .

__
r ..
;,
~~,,

':

t ,.

~ i t
____
__ ..

_

I

~

,

.

~
_..
_ . .
~
_:

'

_

.

..

_. ____

---

. ... :.
_.
_ . ~.

'~

..

__.

z
A~

I _:,

':

';. ' .
_.
~~

~~
~ , -.
I
~
'
~~ __ - 4

~~
.1 ~_
_ f.. }
Alb
AA
AA
AA

n

0

--~----T..- --,----T-----r---- --- r,-r ------~ --

~ '
?0.0icCT 0.EiEAENCE ND. 5HEFf Ni
,

__. .
~
'

I 0.0ADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER HYDIIAUIIGS
ENGINEE0.

'.
~
~
....
~ ~'_ INCOMPLE
00 NDT OBB P09 E PLANS
/A ACOW177DN

0
~
~
''
- PRELIMIN
no Nm ues RY PLA
cotmxucnox
, ,. I !~
DESIGN
SHEET 13

0
~,
'~

''.

I

~ I
.

~

0
_.

~~
~..

__.

__ 0`' -
}{,~ E `
p
-;

- _
-

, _

I

I

i

_
-
ZQ
~egr
~ t. 2 U7~
4.7
' Be
in Ste
pao
.. _.
~~

_.
~,
_
a,,}
I

',
- _.

.~ i
,.
__
a

,.
_.~
,
,.

---__
r h

_-
I
+.

~ ':
;:
I
t __
~,
~,~

___ _ ___

A . : : I
p . .. .. ... ... ~ ... .. . .. .
. .~. .. .. .. .. ~... ....

i

1 }}rr
t'
_ ~ ~ ~ Wi
~
i i. ~~ ±
~
r .__.. _.
~
~» ~ +N .. ~~I~a~
+o-a rl.i.- ..
}~ ..~ :~_I., ~L1iL}. ~ .~{F,.. 1 .a. ~
.a 4a w!-! !~ .y I ~
~ ' i.. { j:, 1 ~r. ,«!4a t~ ! ~ ~f. ..
.~ ,La,.-~.,t kl~ 1rt
i- y I
JI
~
BO

h~
~'

0

i

~i

w

[]

[~

n

31tl0 >w+] Ntll1 SN01 SI n3tl ^I+
~ ~ / / ~
Q ~ ~ ~
I
C~ _~ ~ /~+
'1
OFy~
~.-__
~---
I
----- --
r
+~
Q
~~ ~~
\ L
~~ yet;.
\~'
Otis ,
~ ~ ~, ,
~\ ~ x `~
~/ ~~ ~ ,~
\~ \ V 1 `C
ilk ~ci~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ '
`~ \\ ~, ~ I ~ ~,, `.,
~ p
~~' I ~
~~
I. _l,
/ ~ °
~1 L
,, , .~
/< , / a
/ //` ^f
//~~,/
~" ,
r~ ~ _
..
// ~ r -
J i
~ ~, ~ ~~-
„ ~ '
~/ - if ~ it
~ `~ ///~~~"'/// t ~~ ~ , ~r,
> ~
/~~ // xl, ~~ x T~1}?~~j, ~ ~'
~" F L 7
1 `~'
~/ / / ~ / r(~ ,~ J s t4' ~~ i t ~ t ' t ~..C; z ~ i ~+ ~ tip ~~
`i/%/L/ ~41~ S:~T;~~~~Fr ~it'r,~l,~,`~i`1t` „~.t.
rt i 1"++t ~ ~ ~ C
/ ~ r~ '.;r~i~ d tttFt kn~iY+ ~`;~~`rNs''~
'`~~ " F
~ ~'.. a
~ ~~~~ ~
~` ~" I' w
t~" 1':;' I ~ 'I
t~'s? ~' II,; ~
1 ~, Z ~
1'~
i I W
i ~ ~.~ I I
~,~'~ ~'~ I I ~ ~~
I' `'
. o,~.,
~ I II
~ I~ ~ , `~
- ti; ~,, 1 I I ~' ~-
.~-{~ 1 I
~~, I
5Zi2 , 44 ~ ''; ,.
`~ ,,~ .~
,~ ~ {
\~ I I ~ .
I IIt
~r ~
I I
O
~ ,/ +,~ ~ ~~ ~,~ ,~i c~ 1-y ~
~ I
1 _~ l
i+~ ~~~ s+' 3 t 1 ~` t .~ 1
~ , ~ w ~ ,z ~z to ~, t ,t , c , 1 co
/- ` a :~ '~~ ~ a ~~' ~ ''' ~ '' anti '
j c~~~$11C`r 1~,~t4~$~~~t~~~,+~~ ~.- ~ ~ ,~ti o i i -F o
/ z ~ ' " ti ~ w i i ~ ~
~ s ~ ~~t, a , ~~,.G. .f ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ , ti
o
O~dN ,,, '> m z.r /r~/ f i~, Z U ~w ~F = w z ~ ' i , I c°~
', ~
rr w &w ~~ a ~ ~° N N ~ 11 '7
~ . I ~ ~ C
~~ !I D I ~ ~~~ t ! ~' ~
~J ~ I ~ ~ ~
j ~~
55 nn``
~~ 1
JJJ ~~.: ~. 1 ~ ~ J o
r ' ~ j
U41~16r~8't4aR3B686\uaKi uo(IololsaMPa~Vf SZ \'b `N~Q ~
LG'<7Z/1Z/L °31V0 Ilama~uol °F73511 M
- -._- - - -
esz9-rsa re,a,+•o~ ooz9-rse rara, ~vd Nt/1 d N O I lb~l S 3 ~10~ 3 ~I -
- _ _ L09Ld ari' va~aroa s1r. w,os'avro .awa oro~u~aroL ;; ,,
__ - 9l 133HS NJIS34 ~" ''
' _N(~IIJ Nd 9NOJ NOI ISII .I,ON OO AuvUwa~'I'111ruoi~cw~,u~u~Fly
~ ~ ~~~;~~~.~~~~ OOL OS 0 OS rvvao0ad 1N3YV3~NVHN3 M131SAS0~3
- 3lVJS IYlNOZIiIOH u~alu}a~3 (~ A1Nf10~ NO~VYV
. __ Noliaaois3a oNVi13M 'a rrn3als ~133aa ivy
- -
_ _ _ _ .~.~
~~ ,~ -- ~ _
~~ ~ _ ~ _
~ ~
,~
~~,_.i
~-:.'-c-t._:~-c.~ ~, ~ ; ~ ~~_ °--~-- _ _--~' i'ce' ~
~,,:
.~ --
s ' ,/ _
___.- .
/ ~~ Iwo -~- ._ --~~... _. _ ,~ _.._.. _,,, - , ~ r ~ ~
- / cam, sir, ~-- _ /' ~~,;. ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ . ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r

31d° ~° °d° 5"°'S'"3d Nb'3d NOIld1S3~l033~1
- -- - - _
~ 65Z9-r58 r6161'+'oe OPZ9-r58 r6/61 old ~ "'
---- -- - - - -_..--- --- - L09LZ JK V6Wot1 5L1. olMS'oMX7 /oM,7 alowi01o~10[
LL 133HS NJIS30
- ~-- _ ,.
[r(IIJ~ 21J SNOJ 2101 ~1S(1 d.ON Q~Q Q 5
_ _ _ _ ~_ - - - - - -_ _ Aua~lwa7 I)l I~ uog~~ma~u~ ua61 y ~~ •,
_ _ _~ ~__ ~i~~~.~j_~ ]~~~ Wtl2i~021d 1N3W3~NtlHN3 W31SAS0~3 ,
__ 3lYJS lV1NOZibOH y~alu~a~3 (~ A1Nf10~ NO~tlW
Nplltlap153a oNtlll3xl '8 Wtl3a15 ~133a~ 1vJ
-- - - In + -- ~i. I 1
s
m
~ ,
' • \ \ ~,
I ~ o \ ~\ ~+
O i
O _
~ ~
\1
"-' \ '1 111
~nl \i ~I~
I ~ 1~` '~
~J
•
e
r\
\ /~

z,

o l I
n1
*~ o
ti
~' o
•' --- (~ ~
~' • / ,~
P
./- ~
~' // Q
__
ti ~
\\ ,,~~ -z -~ cv,, (~, j o
~~ /..h ~ 2 Z ro Q m ' ~ C
Qq Q4 2 f
\ ~\-~1\ ^^ F2 ~2 J J ~ g i C
`\~\J \' V ~ O 5w wO F ~uZ
\ \\ W i pW dK d O NO N N ' \ ~^
~~\~L ~ ~ - ~ _ ~ ~ c
~ ~, .~ i i ~
,`\ ~
y\ \~~ - a
\ \ a
UfiD'd7Q~~~3®6C6\uold u°/Io~olsa~No~\l4 SZb\~b 'N90 cr,
LOOZ/LZ/L '31b'0 qa,~+a vo1 ~F/35R ~
n
a
t lP 4v ~ \ \ I
,~ ~ \ ~
6 ~ v v ;
1 / _ \ ~ ~' f
/ 111 \
\ \~ , ~ r
\ N ~/ !f ~ r
~~\~ ~ ` N
o •
~\ ~ ~ ~' s i
~~~~ ~ ~ i

31tl0 NNJ NNO SNOTSIA3N T ~ DN
i 65Z9--S8 r6r6)'~'0,~ ppZg--SB t6r61 Fwd
- '. L09LZ JM u6NMH SW. oB^5'WX7 pJ~J aloo0.0~ pL
N 1,~L-pJiIN.LS NgOaa 11~07:1~T8S7I~1 ~T.L7ON !O~(Ip~~A_ 0 5 ,{uedwo~'Pll l~'uog"walul aa6jy
-- - ~ -. -1 - ,rY. C~ V~~l k W~~:l (1k ELF
_ 3lVJS lV1NOZIbOH u~alu~a~3 (~
--
A ~ I
! j.
I-
U 1 ~ ~~ ,~~ ' • ~''~
!r rr ~.
Q ~ ~ ~ ~t = _s ; ~
o~ r "~ ~
I ~' +~~~Uni~ ~ ~ : ~-,
~ 1 il; ~rf~~1 I ~ ~ ~
i , _ \ •
I •
1 ''
9 /
ICJ ~~ I
.? ~ I ~~ ~~ `If - ~ ~~~~ ~
I ~
/ I I
~~ ~ .
I 1 I I~~ •
R~I III I % ' .
-1 ~ i ~
I I ~ t if t:. ~' ~
~ II~II! g\ ~ ~ .' ~.
•
,~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ rI ~ ~ ~ ~~~.
I a
1
A
•I I• I
I II
I II
I I
1
I ~I ,`
~ I ~,.',
`~~
~~ ~ ~
I
~ ~ ~
~ / ~ ~ ~
I I I ~i
`. ~'' !
~~ ~s ~ ~ . .
•
1 II
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ' {~~ j
\I -
~ ` ~~`\ --
j'~~ ~ ~ _ ~ In
.e^ O O W
~~ \ a m - m
Q O I
JQ J~1 ~y 2 tttt
% K ~ 1
\ \ "~ Z U WW OQ W ~3 ~ ~
\ _\ / L1~~ ~ _ w N OZ a0 W ~ O
\ \ ~- ' W 'O+ hW dK d ~ NLL N N
~~~~~ ~ I ~ I ~ ~ ~{ i
~ 1 , ~..
__ L _ ~
- ~ ; 2i~. Q
` c+')
~.
1. ~ ~
.. i \ N
~r~, _ ~ ~~•~ 2/ rn
\ *•
N ~
~ a
0
N
N
C
v
a

a
uk1ll'lBAUP~a~3A6E6\uold trollo~olsaMPo~ICSZ \'b 'N~0 M
LOOZ/LZ/L '31Y0 1la.ea~uol ~H35I1 ~
N

31tl0 ~n+7 NNO SNOISIn3F1 ~i ~!"+
__._ _ _ 6s~-rser6,6,~xn~ ~-rs&t5K>,A*wd N`d~d NOIld1S3~i0d3~1
- __....__ - - - _.._ Lo9LZ Jrl'v6N,~8 SLr. a1~5'W70 ~epa~ aoooxl9roL
_ _ 6G 133HS NJIS3a
~N I L. 1I121.LRNOJ 2101 •1S(1 .LON O(1
_- _ - - ___ 6ueflwo~~p~~euop~walu~ao6jd
~~~~~~~~ OOL OS 0 OS IYtlii00Nd 1N3YY3~NVHN3 1Y31SASOp3 ~ `
3lV~S lV1NOZIiIOH yaaly~ae3 ~ AlNfip~ NO~tlW
-- -
NOI1na01S3a ONVl13M '8 rra3alS A33a0 1v0

i~ ~,
SB~.as '
~9 y _
16d ~~.

• ~~
~^
n.
`
12.15
v;;
s
INJ ry
;
_20
~
vv
.~ v
K
;~~ ~ ~

°>~~o. ~~Y ~~'~ Syr Y~7~~~
y~ 4
v,r
.t
S7 f.. ~~
yv~~ k ~~•
~

~~ -.. S ~
. J J
;~q`,l ~S~
f
~
~~ Jam;
r
L
*
\\
Q ~
,~,
o,~`fo~~-~-.,~
Q Ct~•! W
s ~~ ~ 9
s ~o ~`
m.
s~
I
s =
I _ \ i _ _
/ ~' ~~ ~ ~•
ti~° /
~ y, ~ ~~>
~~ ~
f~ ,~' W
{{{,~% ' Y
ti } J~f
`J). ,4 al /
~ i
w
~l ~~
~~,
}.
I~ ~.,~
..r,
.~;I.~
4r
tell}%, - ~ ,~
1, ~ ~t1~L~1~t11~'k p^ ~ S
;r
I ~ , . ~~~i ~ : A'~
~y ~~~'., ~~ V
,,,,r4 ~ ; ~~ ~ti ~~ ~ ~~.:- ~A
a\ ~ \ ~,\ ~ f \~ .\,
\~
~~\ ~
-. ~ ~
_~ , ~\ \
s ~~
e`~*.
o~
-~_ . \ \\ \
~ \ ~~
•• ~
~~
\`
1 ,~
~,-~1
O
i i ~
I ~gg
15
4 ••
a ~ ~~ e~
~ 4~~ ~~~
~ ,SG~j,
~p~A•
4
~1 l " e
t~ ~
0
1 e
14 1 0
~,, ~s
l ,~
~, ~~~ ~ ~
~~ : ~
:'~\~
e~
s .~
~`
1
! ' = a
~ ` ~ o o ~ °w i
z ~z ~"z z
~ ~` ~ ~~ ~ m w °W 5
1 'P W of oo w ¢ ~
~~'.."l ~l l ~. ( W ? a~ dK d QZ NO ~N N
t ~~ o
V{ I t tilt ~~ l .. 1 ~'^s J - i-
~1 ~~~
1~~ ~ tlt ~ Fli r ~ r4~~ I ~ ~ 111 I '-l~ il~ ~s ~ ~, ~~ ~ I ~ ~ ~~ M
~;~
~1, 1, u~~~l J ~_
' ~4 r~41`
l ,1i1 ~ 'iHi_l; 1141 N
~ 1~nt2 ~ I l
~~~ ~. c a ~y ai
\ ffit 1 t
\ ~
~': ~ h}~ ~
`...'d ~ '+n. wk.
e.
~ e` ~ O W ~
O N
~S ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~
J Q ~
-'~~` ~ % li < ~ Q ~ ~
}"~ ~ ~, <
~>` ~ o~ ~
zw ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ w m ~
`~'' ~ '\~
uJ~96~18~~T3®6Z6\uold uollo~olsa~O~o~ICSZS\~~ 'N;)0 M
LOOZ/LZ/L °31V0 Hama/•uo~ ~~/3SI1 ~
CV

31V0 ~n+a nao srvotsinae '. nti
___- - i
N I I :) 7NJ.SNO l ilOA '19i1 .LON U(I - - Q ~ S
~ '7 -~~~~I~T~~~~4~
_ __ _ _ - 31V~S lV1NOZIbOH
_. I
6529--s8l6l61'rod ppZ9-rsB l6r61 mud
to9ta av u6wroa str. ams'ava ~~~ aro.u~~o~ aL
6urdwn~ ~Dll I~'uopewalu~ ue61 tl
u~alu~a~3
N`d~d NOIlt/1S3~i033a _ <
OZ 133HS NJIS34
IYtlaJOad 1N3YV30NtlHN3 YY31SAS003 -
A1Nf10~ NOatl1Y
NOI1tla01S3a ONtll13M '8 rrtl3alS ~133a0 1tl0
11 11
,1 11
11
11
\1
11
1~~`'
1~
.~
11
11
\ ~. 11 11 ~..,
_ ,..J-- ~ 11 11 __
11
~,11 11
'1 1
11
11
11 1
41;
1
I I
,~
;~
- - = ~/
~~
I
~ ~ ~ I N
_ ~ ~ ,~ ~~\
to
is ~~ s ~~ ~ a ~ ~ ~,~
~ ~ ~ ~ N 1
\1`~_\ -'
~ \ ` ~ C~ 1
~ ~ ~~ \
~ N ~ N 1
~ ~ ` ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
\ ~ \1
~ 1 1
11 1 !!
11
11 ~
1 1 1
11 1
1 1
,!
i+
1 1 '; ~ ~
r 1 1
~ L /~ L LI I I
< < , - ~ ZpB~ ' ~
1 1 ~
1
' 1 ( ~ ~ dal
II Dill"/ ~ Ikl ~
11 Illf
~ 1 111
~ ~ 1 1j1 ~ ~ 7
111 III
r
~s' '' ~~~
1 ' 1 I I,
1 1 1 ~ ` 1
1, I I
r
Ii l l\ ` I , .
1 1 , 1
~ ~ ~ `~
1 ~ \ ~
\\ \ ~ \ 1
J \ ` \ I*
~ ~'t
\`
~~ \ p ~ ~ ~
•
t` ~ / ~
11 /
,'t ~ • /
~' z'
~~/1
1
`~ I~
I~
,E
` ~ /%/
% ~~
~ ~/
/ ~i
// ~~~
/ ,.
t ~
° ~
~ ~ ,,,
j~ ' ~'
~.
. ~ ~ ~`'a
! /~ei
0
_ /~~ LZLI
1
,~~,, ~
~~!~,
Z`
\'~ `~
v ~/
O
c~ `
~ ~
~s c'i~ ~ ~
~ \ ~
\ \ \
\ \
~~ `----
~, `
~g5
2
210
,- 2110
o-----~ o
0 0
3~u 3~i ° ~ m N
0 5w So ~ ~ ~z 5 ~ ~
v W~ w~ ~ ~ Sid ~ y • ~O
°w_ oz op ~ o ~
°i °w ° ~ oLL o o ~ N
4W dK d ° N N . \
- r i
• ~
I. ~ ~ ! I._a ~ ,_
rn
1 ~ ' ~
~~ ~~ ~
~~ ~ ~ , ~ ~~
~~ ~ '' m
I
~!I>>rS~8~R3®6Z6WoM uollolotsaMPo~IfSZb\~D ~N~O M
LOOZ/LZ/L '31N0 lla.ea vv/ 'x3511 ~
N

~,~.
31 no NF+i Nan SN01 SI n3H ~~!-
6529--SH r6r61 ~XO~ ppyg--SB f6~1
--
L09LZ ar play SL-. a1M5'aNX1 ~auaJ
- --~ - N(ILL: 1il)LLyNQ~;) NOI -Sil ,LON O(1 -~ Q 5
I - durs4wn~~[911ruoprwalu~uaA17
3lVJS lV1NOZRlOH
U
Q
DC
W
i `,
~ ~ r~
~,
~,) ~ .
~; ~..
N
O
Q
on
tr
I
t
1
~~
~ ~
~ ~
\ \
`m
\ ~\ .
~ ~ \
~ \
~, , ,
,~,
. ,\,
~o
I I ,~ ~~~
ro n' \
O
\
N
a
V
~~
~d N`d~d NOIlb'1S3~i033a
aroa7.o~lOL LZ 133HS NJIS34
rvva00ad 1N3M13~NVHN3 Y~31SAS0~3
A1Nf10~ NO~VMI
NOI1tla01S3N ONVl13M '8 nv3a1S A33a~ !v~
o p
O 2 ~ Y
Z Z m Z m
1rr1~~ W ~
o >w O 7 F o2 g
Z ~ °w~ °w~ t- ~ ~a ~' y
W h a: °° W ~ ~ m
~ ~ °i ~~ ° ~ o° 0 0
I.I.I '+ LLW hK d ~ NLL N N
~ I_I i _i `, .,
~ I
I. ~ ~ ! ~:
Z,o~
i
0
~ ` ~ ~
~ ' ~
( ! ~ r r ~ //
J+ ~ r \ r i ,
c. I I I / I ! ~ o
U I I I ~~ /
P i l 1 1 ~) i ~1
I I
~ I I '
7 1 I 1 / 1
f I
f ( ~~~
~~._-- _.-_ ~ i /
,, f
-_._._ _ ~'~ I I I
\ \ I A1'Y_?p6~ 96 ~ l L; ~ ~ I I I~
? ///
I 1 i I~ ~'r )5 1
l 1
\ V \ }" ~"/ ' I \ ~
~. ,, (~ I ~ 1 / 1
I I ,7 , 1 f 1 1 I
~1
II I II 1 i~ I I 4 ' I ' o' ~ ~ /!
I I , ~`
\ I\ II 11 II I 4 { / ( ( / /
~,+-\f\~ i1 I I ~IJ fL~ ~~ /I ~ 11 I, 1
r
1 "~ ~•~, I! - -
I ~I i ~ I I ' '~:~' I N
I I11 Itp ~
I l l l ~~ I I ~~ II j t'~ 2//s
// c'i
~,~ 1, - I I ~ ,f f • ' I ~ N QS
111 ..- I I f, f V
1Id \ ~
III f ' „ I ri s~j ~)S
II~II ~I i ~ I ~r3~~ ~c9
r
111 I
X11 lI~I f~ II 1 e,,f~
11 1 I~ I I ~ I { f f f
I I\ r f f
I, I I I
111 I `•
111 I I I I
I I I I I ~ r ~j • I I f ~ "•
r I I !~ ~,
U4lR9fB~S~C63~3B6Zbluop uollo~olsa~\DV~vf SZb\°b °NJO
LOOZ/LZ/L °31V0 I/ate •uol ~N3SI1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

APPENDIX 1
AQUATIC SURVEY REPORT
Q 7- 1 3 9 2

JUL-14-2004 08=23 NCDOI OHE-ONE 919 715 15~J1 N.~~

Alderman Environmental ~enrices, Inc.
' September I3, 2403
' PROJECT: Freshwater masse[ survey for A-9 WM, survey of Cat Creek
' Target Species: Federally litited endangered Appalachian elktve (Atasmidonta
raveneliRna)
BIOLOGIST: Doha M. Alderman
ASSISTANT: .Ioseph D. Alderman
i N.C. WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMIVIISSION ES PERMIT: NC - 2~a3 F.S 21
' U.S. F1SII AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ES PERMIT: TE06S956-I1
STATI4IV 2003Q~U~,2jma
LOCATIUN: Cat Creek, Little'I'ennessec River Basin, Macon County, North Carolina;
downstream and upstream from the Ferguson Road ASR 1148 bridge crossing within the
' mitigation project foot},rint; bridge location: 35.19812 N, 83.34120 W; see associated
reap at end of report.
SURVEY IyATE: September 6, z40~
SITE COi1~IMENT5: Fopr quaaity habitat, heavy sediment load, no buffers.
HABITAT:
' VtTATERBa17Y TYPE: Stream
FLOW: Run, slack
RELATIVE DEPTH: Very shallo~r
' DEPTH (%<2 FEF'1'~: 9$
SUBSTRATE: Silt, sand, gravel, cobble, boulder, bedrock
C4MPA~;TNI:SS: Normal
S_ANDIC'iRAVEL BARS: Present
r
l

' JUL-14-2004 ©8~z3 NCDQT OHE-QNE 919 ?'15 1501 P.03
HABITAT (CANT.}:
'
WQQI)Y DEBRIS: Low
BEAVER ACTIVITY: None
' WINDTHROW: None
TEMI'URARY POOLS: None
CHANNEL 1~VIDTH: 3 - 5+ meters
' BANK HEIGHT: ~ I.5-~~ meter
BANK STABILI'T'Y: Very stable to some erosion and undercutting
BUFFER WIDTH: None
' RIPARIAN VEfiETATION: Wooded (very little), shrub-brush, brass
LAND USF.: Natural, timber, rural, active pasture
PERCENT COVER: 5
WOODLAND EXTENT: Not extensive
NAT~IRAL LEVEES: None
VISIBILITY: Clear
' WATER LCVI;L: Nofitaal
WEATHF.,R: Sian-cloud, warm
' TECHNIQUES AND SURVEY TI ME:
TECHNIQUES: Visual and. taotile
SURVEY TIME: I .I person-hours
' FRESHWATER 11~USSELS:
None
BIQLOO:ICAL DETERMINATION: No Effect for federally listed
' species.

' JUL-14-20F34 ©8~z3
1
1
i
,.may,
V
r~
Z~
!iL
~/
I R
' I~
c
' a
~~
' ~ w
' d t~

NCDOT OHE-ONE
919 ?15 15U1 P.04
W
Y W
F- W Ltl.
~ 4~~
U~~
~ ~ ~ ~ j
~ ~ ~ .v
_ ~
--
0
v~
r > w
f m a Y
U ~
~~
:~
o
N
Tf1TAi P. A4

APPENDIX 2

EXISTING CONDITIONS DATA
ii

1

Cat Creek
Swartwoul Property
Macon County
FbW Cnw: ArtwMe Totltl. Georpq LaMford
Rlvv gain: Llgb'Tervresgae 5TH BS HI FS ELEV NOTE
Strgam Rwph: Cat Creek-Mitldle SWerlWOUt Tract TBM pi 4
73 104
73 100
00 F t
t
/ '
Oralanpq Ara: 1.y8 . . . ence pos -eas
o
str eam post ma rked a14.0
Oq4: 7/212003
DggoH bn: LONGITUDINAL PROFILE

Bfatlon
TW FS
TW WS (FSI
WS
~IiFLJ
aKF
TO~
LJ
L
~~
IJI Bk HN
Bk L
P
P Pool
Le
th Max Pool
D
ti Pool
Sl RIMe RitBe Glitle Glitle Run Run

U+00.0
7.15
97.58 6.57
98.ifi
5.23
99.50 .
398
100.]5
Top Riffle
104
]3
765 = r a a
t oo ~2 t~h
12 S~oE@ Len°tlt Sloo L°n9_Ih ,°2

0+120
1.19
97.54 66]
9606
541
99.32
4.18
100.55
Run .
104
73
159 0.0063

0+185
7.39
97.34 6.75
9].98
5.52
9921
Top Pool .
704]3
25
14
00148 ] 00123
0+20.0 7.52 97.21 fi.75 9].98 Pool 704 ]3
0+25.5 ].74 96 99 880 91 93 5 23 99.50 4 32 100.41 Max Pool 104.13 1.36 2
51
0+320 7.4] 9]26 fi.95 9].]e 5.36 99.3] Top Riffle 104.]3 . ] 0
0586
0+39.0 7.73 97.00 7.36 97.31 Run 104.73 .

U+434
8.0]
96.66 7.36
97.37
5.75
98.98
4.55
100.18
Pod C3
104.73
752
47
12
0
0034 4 0.0000
0+50.6 8 29 9644 1.3] 97.3fi 5.15 98.96 Max Pool 104.13 2.54 .
0+55.0 8.05 96.fi8 7.40 97.33 583 98.90 4.62 100.11 Top Glitle 104.73 1.55 7 0
0086
0+62.0 7.81 9692 ]46 9]27 Top Riffle 104.]3 11 00164 .
D*67.0 8.12 9fi.61 1.5] 91.16 6.04 98.69 4.I4 99.99 Riffle CS 104.]3 1.fi3
0+134 8.28 9645 7.64 97.09 Run 104.73 11 00218
0+84.0 8.84 95.89 ] 90 88.86 Top Pool 104.73 41 7 D
0000
0+81.5 9.27 95.46 7.92 96.81 6.31 9842 Max POOI 704.73 2
96 .
0+910 8.62 9fi.11 7.tl8 96.85 631 98.42 5.21 99.52 Glitle 104.73 146 . 6 0
016]
0+91.0 8.30 9643 7.98 96.75 Top Riffle 104.]3 25 00124 .
1+08.0 8.89 9584 8.22 9651 636 98.37 550 99.23 Riffle 104.]3 1.34
1+13.0 8.92 95.81 8.20 96.53 RIffle 104.73
1+22.0 8.76 9597 629 9644 6]0 9803 5.]1 9896 Run 704]3 1
45

1+31.0
9..34
95.45 8.60
98.16
Top Pool
104.]3 .
9
0
0000 9 0.0322
7 a34 0 9.81 94.92 8.52 96.21 Max Pool 104.73 .
7+400 9.30 95.43 8.58 96.15 Glitle 104.]3 9 0
0089
1+490 9.02 95.71 8.66 96.07 Run 104.13 .

1+720
9.80
94.93 9.14
95.59
7.57
91.16
6.21
9852
Top Riffle
104.73
1.61 23 00209
1+80.0 9.87 9486 9.24 9549 Riffle 104.73
Bk Htl Pool Maz PoolPOOI Pocl RHfle Ritflq Glitle Glitle Run Run

tw slope 0.0157 ws slope 0.0146 bkf slope 00136 Bk/Ht. PP=P Length Deotn Slooe Lengtb glow Len°tl• Slow Lengih Slooe

BKF W (it)= i].5
ax 1 34
1.69 25
47 7
14 2.51
2.96 0.0000
04099 7
25 OOOfiO
0.0300 6
9 00000
0.0100 4
23 0.0200
0.0540

BKF D (8)= 1.0 avg 153 36 10 2 67 0 0043 /4 0.0040 7 0.0050 11 0 0350

BKF Max D (f1f= 2.] Min ratlo NA 1.4 251 0.0000 0 0500 D.0000 7.5300
Max ratio NA 2.7 2.9fi 0.7300 2.2100 0 ]600 3.9000
avg ratio NA 2.1 2.67 0.3200 7.3500 0.3800 2.5800
41 55 22 54 7]2
Longitudinal Profile
Cat Creek-Swartwout Tract Middle Section
toi.oo
X
ioo.oo _I x x ~ X I

d
ss.oo
-- x
_
'~ 98.00 -. .~.._ --. -__ ._._- --.. _ _.. _._-. _ ~ -
I _-_. _---__
d
w
2, 97.00

tq

i _ _ _

I
_ _ .
95.00 __ __ i __ _ _
_ _
__ _ •
_ _
94.00
ow o a+to a,za a« oo 0.4o a•sa o+so aaa a+eo awo rag 1+w rza rao 1«4a 1+so rep Lla rea
Station (feet)
I-~~~ WS • BKF X i09 p Ri(AeCrossSecilon a Faol Cross-Section
K /fi]812/FieltlDalalSwartwcut_Tracl

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Cat Creek
Swartwout Property
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd and George Lankford
River Basin: Little Tennessee River
Watershed: Cet Creek
3Ueam Reac h: Swartwout
Drainage Area: 1.2 sp. miles (765.19 acres )
Data: 121920D3
Station:
Feature: C3#1 RrfAe beside ritling d n9)
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES BANKFULL (BKF)
(Feet) (Feet) (Feet) (Feel) Notes Hydraulic Geometry
0+00.0 100 4.74 95.26 RIGHT Width Depth Area
0+09.0 1D0 4.9 95.10 Feet Feet 3 .Ft.
0+1ti.0 100 4.91 95.09 0.0 0.0 0.0
0+22.0 100 S.OD 95.00 0.1 0.3 0.0
U+25.0 100 4.91 95,09 FENCE 0.8 0.7 OA
0+30.0 100 4.96 95.04 1.0 2D 1.3
0+34.D 100 4.90 95.10 1.0 2.0 2.0
0+35.0 100 4.97 95.D3 RTOB 0.7 2.0 7.4
0+3fi.0 100 5.37 94.fi3 1.3 1.9 2.5
0+36.1 100 6.99 93.c1 RBKF 1.0 1 fi 1.8
0+36.2 100 7.32 92 fib 0.6 1.5 0.9
0+37.0 100 7.fi9 92.31 O.fi 0.8 0.7
0+38.0 100 8.95 91.05 REOW 1.8 0.5 1.2
0+39.0 100 8.9fi 91.04 1.0 0.4 0.5
0+39.7 100 B.99 91.01 TW ws=8.33 2.0 0.3 O.fi
0+41.0 100 8.88 91.12 3.5 0.3 U.9
0+42.0 100 8.61 91.39 1.2 0.7 D.6
0+42.fi 100 8.50 91.50 LEOW 2.1 0.7 1.5
0+43.2 100 7.82 92.18 1.2 0 0 0.4
0+45.0 100 7.51 92.49 TOTALS 19.9 16.7
U+46.0 7 DO 7.38 92.62
0+48.0 100 7.24 92.7fi
0+51.5 100 7.27 92.73
0+52.7 100 7.67 92.33 SUMMARY DATA (BANKFULLI
0+54.8 100 7.I0 92.30
0+56.0 100 6.99 93.01 LBKF A(BKF) 16.] W(FPA) 120 TOTALS
0+57.5 100 6.26 93.74 W(BKF) 19.9 Slope 0.000
0+58.3 100 5.50 94.10 LTOB Max d 2.0 Sinuosity 1.01
0+60.0 100 5.79 94.21 Mean tl 0.8 Area= A
0+620 100 5.55 94.45 W/D 23.7 Width= W
O+fi8.0 100 4.45 95.55 LEFT EnVenchment fi.0 Depth= D
Stream Type G ankfull= BKF
Area from Rural Re Tona l Curve 24.5
96
95
94
m 93
Z
~ 92
Q
91
90
D
1 UH OF BANK (TUB)
Hydraulic Geom etry
Width Depth Area
(Feel) (Feet) (Sq. Ft.)
00 0.o D
1.0 04 0.2
0.1 2.0 0.7
0.1 2.3 0.2
0.8 2.7 2 0
1.0 4.0 34
1.0 4.0 4.0
0.7 4 G 2.8
1.3 39 5.2
1.0 3 fi 3.8
0.6 3.5 2 2
D.6 2.B 1.9
1.8 25 4.9
1.0 24 25
2.0 2.3 4.7
3.5 2.3 8.D
1.2 2.7 3.0
2.1 2.7 5.7
1.2 2.0 2.9
1.5 1.3 2.5
0.8 0.9 0.9
1.7 0.8 1.5
2 D 0.6 1.4
23.3 6011
Bank Erosion Hazard Index fBEHII
Bank
Erosion
Criteria Value Index Potential
Bank HdBkt HI 2 7.9 high
Root Uepth/Bank HI 0.25 6.5 high
Root Density (% ( 10 7.5 high
Bank Angle (Degrees) 88 ].5 high
Surface Protection (%) 5 10 extreme
Bank Materials SIIVCIay 0
Slralifcation 5
44.4
very high

SUMMARY DAT A fTOBI
A(BKF) 6D.6
W(8KF) 23.3
Maxd 4.0
Meantl 2.6
Cross Section 1
Swartwout Upper Section
Riffle~~Cross Section
(looking upstream-see photo)
5 10 15 2D 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 I
Station (feet) II
- _. -_. -_ _-_ __ - _ - _ I

~^^ r ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Field Crew: Amantla Totltl and George Lankfortl
River Besln: Little Tennessee River
Watershetl: Cat Lreak
Sbeam Reach: Swarlwout
Oralnage Area: 1.2 sq. miles (]65.19 acres]
Date: ]i15/2003
Statlon:
Feature: Ritlle (Erodi n Bend
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(Fee[) (Feet) (Fee[) (Feet) Notes
0+00 0 100 5.54 94 46
0+030 100 5.68 94.32
0+050 100 5.10 94.30 WFPA
0080 700 6.OU 9400
U+U]0 1(10 8.21 93.]9
U+UH_0 100 839 93.81 LTOR
U~085 100 6B1 93.19
UrU95 100 ].U1 92.99
U+1(1.3 100 7.23 92 ]]
Of110 100 ].80 92.20 LBKF
0+12.0 100 8.16 9184
0+14.0 100 8.37 9183
0+18.0 100 B Q2 91.58
U+17 4 100 8 47 91.53
0+18 5 100 8.41 91.59
U+10.0 100 838 9162
0+210 1UU 8.42 91.58
U+22.0 100 8.47 9153
0.13 3 100 8.69 91 31
U+24.0 100 B.19 90 81
1].24.7 1UU 9.48 90.52 LEOW
0+260 100 965 9f1.35
0+1].5 100 9.85 90.15 TOTALS
0+282 10f1 987 90.13 TW ws=9.43
0+29.2 100 9.a1 90.19
U+3U.0 100 9.47 9053 HEOWISLUMP
0+30.] 100 9.33 90.67
0+31.0 100 9.10 911.80
0+314 100 ].80 92.20 RBKF
0«31.6 100 66] 93.33
U+33.0 1UU 0.39 93.61 RTOB
U+34.1 100 6.31 93 fig FENCE
0+30 ti 100 (i.28 53 ]2
0+40.0 tUU 6.18 93.84
D+g4.0 10D 6.07 9393
0474 100 6 9440
0.49.0 1UU 5.83 94.1]
Ur500 1UU 5.73 94.27 WFPA
BANKFULL (BKF)
Hytlraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet Feat S . F[.
6a o6 9
t6 u4 6.2
20 Ofi 0.9
2.0 U.8 1 2
1.4 0.7 11.9
11 D6 U.7
t5 06 0.9
1U U.S O6
1.0 0 7 U.8
1.3 09 1U
9.7 14 On
0] 1] 1.7
13 19 23
15 1.1 29
U] 2.1 14
to za z.e
0.6 1.] 15
0 ] 1.5 1.1
03 14 0.4
U4 0.0 01
zoa zes
Cal Creek
Swarlwout Property
Macon County
TOP OF BANK (TOB)
Hyd raulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feel Fee[ S .FI.
00 30 09
05 04 01
1U 0ti 0.5
08 U8 B8
0 ] 1.4 0.6
1a 1a 1s
10 2.0 3B
2 0 2.0 4.0
14 1.1 29
11 20 23
15 20 J.0
1.U 2.0 2 U
1.0 2.1 2.1
1.3 2.3 2.8
97 z.e 18
67 31 z1
1.3 33 41
1.5 35 51!
U7 35 1a
1U 34
U9 3.1 1h i
U.7 29 CI
03 2.8 U9
U4
62 1J
93 Ob
oz
Banh Erosion Hazard Indez IBEHI)
Bank
Eroslon
Criteria Value Indez Potential
Bank HVBk( Ht 1 1 1 B moderate
Ront Uep[h~dank HI 0.61 2.4 law
Hoot Densely t`:~°) 55 3.9 low
Bank Angle (Degrees) 80 59 moderate
Surtace Prolectlon (%j 55 39 low
tlank Materiels SIIVGIay 4
22 motlerafe
SLOPB
S1 AIlON TW WS
0 93G tlGa
900 tfl.4 ~a„
900 11
0.012 a ~~
SUMMARY DATA fBANKFULL) 1.4 O.U 02
TOTAL 25.1] 52.1
AIBKF) 209 WFPA) 140
W18KF) 20.4 Slope f1012
Max d 2.1 Sinuosity- 1 Ot SUMMARY D ATA fTOBI
Meand 1.0 Area'A AIBKF) 52.1
W/U 19.9 Widen=W W(BKF) 250
Entrenchment 6.9 Uepln= D Max tl 3 5
Stream I e (; Benktull=BKF Meand 2.1
Area front Rural Regional C urve 24.5
Cross Section 2
Swartwoul Upper Section
RIHIe--Gross Sec[lon
95
94
93
m 92
Z
ii 91
90
89
U
Looking Downstream ,~1
j1 nom.

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 a5 Sa
BGtIOn ~fe9t)

Cat Creek
Swartwout Property
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd and George Lankford
River Basin: Little Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reach: Swartwout
Drainage Area: 1.2 sq. miles (765.14 acres)
Date: 7!15/2003
Station: 0+43.4
Feature: POOL
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(FEET) (FEET) (FEET) (FEET)
0+00.0 104.73 5.21 99.52
0+10U 104.73 5.31 9942
0+20.0 104.73 5.13 99.60
0+30.0 104.73 4.79 99.94
0+36 U 104.73 4.55 100.18 LTOB AT FENCE
0+36.0 104.73 4.69 100.04
0+39.0 104.73 4.70 100.03
D+q0.3 104.73 5.08 99.65
O+q2.0 104.73 5.38 99.35
O+q3.0 104.73 5.75 98.98 LBKF
0+44.0 104.73 6 09 98.64
0*44.4 104.73 6.46 98.27
O+q4.8 104.73 6.80 97.93
O+q5.7 104.73 8.07 96.66 LEOWITW
0+46.7 104.73 8.01 96.72
0+47.9 104.73 7.70 9703 REOW
U+49.1 104.73 6.99 97.74
0+5U 4 104.73 6.64 98.09
0+51.8 104.73 6.62 98.11
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet Feet S .Ft.
0.0 0.0 0.0
1 0 0.3 0.2
0.4 0.7 0.2
0.4 1.1 0.4
0 9 2.3 1.5
1.0 2 3 2.3
1 '2 2.0 2.5
1.2 1.2 1.9
1 3 0.9 1.4
1.4 09 1.2
1.2 0.7 0.9
U.5 0.4 0.3
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet Feet S .Fl.
aD oo Do
2 0 0.1 0.1
1.0 0.2 0.1
1.3 0.5 U.4
1.7 0.8 1.2
1.0 1.2 1.0
1.0 1.5 1 4
04 19 0.7
0.4 2.3 0.8
0.9 35 2.fi
1.0 3.5 3.5
1.2 32 40
1.2 2.4 3.4
1.3 21 2.9
1.4 2.1 2.5
1.2 1 9 2.4
0.5 1.6 0.9
1 5 0.6 1.7
4.0 0.5 2.3
5.0 0.0 1 4
D+53.0 104.73 646 98.27 SUMMARY DATA fBANKFULLI
0+53.5 104.73 6.16 98.57 A(8KF) 12.9
0+54.1 104.73 5.75 98.98 RBKF W(8KF/ 11.1
0+55.0 104.73 5.18 99.55 Maxa ~:t
0+59.0 104.73 5.08 99.65 Mean d
0+64.0 104.73 4.57 100.16 RTOB
0+66.0 104.73 4.56 100.17
0+70.0 104.73 4.53 100.20
0+76.0 104.73 4.66 100.07
D+66.0 104.73 4.62 100.11
U+g5.0 104.73 4.43 100.30
1+00.0 104.73 4.21 100.52
101
a
01 100
C
O
m 99
l
d
W 98
r
s7
a
96
0
SUMMARY DATA ITOBI
A(BKF) 33.7
W(BKF) 28.0
Max d 3.5
Mean d 1.2
Cross Section 3
Swartwout Middle Section
Pool--Cross-Section
Bank Erosion Hazard Index /BEH11
Bank Erosion
Criteria Value Index Potential
Bank HVBkf H( 2.2 8.16 very high
Root DeplhlBank H( i 1 very low
Root Donsity (%) 95 1.23 very low
Bank Angle (Degrees) 60 3.9 low
Surface Protection (%) 95 L2 very low
Bank Materials silUclay 5
Pool Cross-Section Looking Downstrea
K:/67812IField Dala/Swartwout Tract
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105
Station ffeetl

~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Cat Creek
Swar[wou[ Property
Macon County
Field Craw: Amanda Todd and George Lankford
River Basin: Little Tennessee River
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reac h: Swartwout
Drainage Area: 1.2 sq. miles (765.19 acres-)
Date: 7I15l2003
Station: 0+67
Feature: RIFFLE
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(Fee[( (Feet( (Feel) (Feel) Notes
0+00.0 104.73 4.02 100.71 FPA
0+12.0 104.73 5.46 99.27
0+22.0 104.73 5.46 99.17
0*32.0 104 73 5.33 59.40
U+42.0 104.73 5.01 99.72
0+450 704.73 4.92 99.81
U+51.0 104.73 4.74 99.99 FENCE LINEILTOB
0+54.0 104.73 5.16 99.57
U+55.0 104.73 5.45 99.28
0+56.5 104.73 5.62 99.17 LBKFCIF
O+Sfi.0 104.73 5.80 98.93
U+56.5 104.73 5.89 98.84
0+57.0 104.73 6.04 98.69
0+58.0 104.73 6.52 98.21
0+58.7 104.73 7.06 97.fi7
U+60.4 704.73 7.57 97.16 LEOW/WS
p+fi1.3 104.73 8.05 96.fi8
0+62.0 104.73 0.12 96.61
0+63.3 104.73 7.59 97.14 REOW
U+65.0 104.73 6.82 97.91
0+66.0 104.73 fi.59 98.14
D+66.5 104.73 6.52 98.21
0+67.3 104.73 6.07 98.66
U+68.fi 104.73 5.89 98.tl4
Ur73.0 104.73 5.62 99.11 RBKFCIF
0+78.0 104.73 5.11 99.62
U+83.0 104.73 4.75 99.98 RTOB
0+88.0 104.73 4.85 99.88 FENCE LINE
0+97.0 104.73 4.91 99.82
1+07.0 1114 73 4.96 99.77
1+12.0 104.73 4.73 100.00
1+20.0 104.73 4.02 100.71 FPA
1D1
100
99
Z 98
a`
s7
96
(1
5
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
(Feet) Feelj (Sq. Fl.
00 0.o D
0.5 U.1 U 0
D,5 U 3 0.1
Ds D.a az
1.0 0.9 U,7
0.7 1.a o e
1.7 2.0 2.9
D.9 2.4 2.0
0.7 2 6 1.7
1.3 2D 2.9
1.7 1.2 2.7
1,0 1.0 1.1
0.5 D.9 0.5
0.8 U.5 U.5
1.3 D.3 U.5
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
(Feet (Feet (Sq. Ft.
Doo Do ao
3.D0 U.4 0.6
1.DO D 7 os
U.4d U.9 0.4
0.52 1.1 0.5
0.50 1.2 0.6
0.50 1.3 O6
1.00 1.8 1.5
0.70 2.3 1.4
1.70 2.8 4.4
0.90 3.3 2.8
0.70 3a z3
1.3o z.9 a.o
1.70 2.t 4.2
1.00 1.9 2.0
0 50 1 B 0.5
TOTALS ~ 17.5 17.1 ~ f1.80 1.3 1.2
1,30 1.2 1.6
SUMMARY DATA IBANKFULLI 4.40 0.9 4.5
A(BKF) 17,1 W(FPA) 140 5.00 04 3.1
W(BKF) 17.5 Slope 0.015 6.00 0.0 1.0
Max d 'L7 Sinuasit 1.01
Mean d 1.0 Area= A
WAD 17.9 Width= W TOTALS :12.0 38.2
Entrenchment tl 0 Depth= D
Stream T e G3 BankhAl= 8KF SUMMARY DATA (7061
Area from Rural Re Tonal Curve 24 A(BKF) 38.2
channel has been modified W(BKF) 32.0
Max d 3.4
Mean d 1.2
Cross Section 4
Swarlwout Middle Section
Riffle--Cross Section
Bank Erosion Hazard Index f8EHl1
Bank Erosion
Criteria Value Index Potential
Bank HIIBkI HI 1.6 6 hiyh
Root DoplhlBank Ht 1 1 very Inw
Root Density (%) 96 1.2 very low
Bank Fveyle (Degrees) 82 4.1 moderate
Sudace Protection (%) 90 1.45 very law
Bank Materials SiWClay 5
18.75
law
Riffle Cross~Section Looklny Upstream
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 5fl 55 6U fi5 70 75 8D 85 90 95 1D0 1D5 110 115 12D
Station (feel) I

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Swartwout Property
Cat Creek
Macon County, NC
PEBBLE COUNT
Site: Cat Creek 7/15/2003
Part :Amanda Todd and Geor e Lankford Swartwout Tract Lon itudinal
Particle Count
Inches Particle Millimeter Riffle Run/Pool Total No. Item % Cumulativ
Silt/Clay < 0.062 $IC 8 4 12 12% 12%
Very Fine .062 - .125 ' $ 5 2 7 7% 19%
Fine .125 - .25 A 22 8 30 30% 49%
Medium .25 - .50 M 7 4 11 11 % 60%
Coarse .50 - 1.0 D 1 0 1 1% 61
.04 -.08 ery Coars 1.0 - 2.0 S 0 0 0 0% 61
.08 - .16 Very Fine 2.0 - 4.0 0 0 0 0% 61
.16 - .22 Fine 4.0 - 5.7 G 1 0 1 1 % 62%
.22 - .31 Fine 5.7 - 8.0 R 2 0 2 2% 64%
.31 - .44 Medium 8.0 - 11.3 A 0 1 1 1 % 65%
.44 - .63 Medium 11.3 - 16.0 Y 3 2 5 5% 70%
.63 - .89 Coarse 16.0 - 22.6 E ' 3 3 6 6% 76%
.89 - 1.26 Coarse 22.6 - 32. L 4 1 5 5% 81
1.26 - 1.77 ery Coars 32.0 - 45.0 S 4 0 4 4% 85%
1.77 - 2.5 e Coars 45.0 - 64.0 3 1 4 4% 89%
2.5 - 3.5 Small 64 - 90 C ' 6 2 8 8% 97%
3.5 - 5.0 Small 90 - 128 O 0 1 1 1 % 98%
5.0 - 7.1 Large 128 - 180 B 1 0 1 1 % 99%
7.1 - 10.1 Large 180 - 256 ' L 0 1 1 1 % 100%
10.1 - 14.3 Small 256 - 362 ° ' B 0 0 0 0% 100%
14.3 - 20 Small 362 - 512 L 0 0 0 0% 100%
20 - 40 Medium 512 - 1024 D 0 0 0 0% 100%
40 - 80 r - Ve L 024 - 204 R 0 0 0 0% 100%
Bedrock BDRK 0 0 0 0% 100%
Totals 70 30 100 100% 100%
Particle Size Distribution
Swartwout Tract (Middle Section) Longitudinal
110% - Cat Creek -Macon Count NC
100%
90%
c
t 80% --- - -- --
c 70% ~
m
~ 40%
U 30% -. _
20% -- -
10
0% I
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)
K:\67812/FieldData/Swartwout Tract

UTt Cat Creek
Swartwout Property
Macon County
Flald Craw:. Amanda Todd, George LanMord
Rlvar Basln: Lille 7enesaee STA BS HI FS ELEV NOTE
Stroam Raack: UT Cel Creek (UT1) TBM rlt O.DO 100 100.00
Dnlange Aru: 0.86 TP#1 2.56 95.64 6.92 93.08 cane
Data: 7/21/200$ TP #2 94.72 0.92 94.72 (ante past
Deeuf tbn: LONGITUDINAL PROFILE
Max Pool
Station TW (F51 TW WS IF51 WS BKF fFSI BKF TOB /FSI TOB Notes HI Bk Ht/Bkf Ht. P=P Pool Lanath Deolh Pool Slooe Riffe Length R6fle Stooe Run Lenalh Run Slooe Steo Length Steo Slooe
0+00.0 6.23 93.77 5.87 94.13 Top Riffle 1D0.00 9 0.0389
O+D9.0 6.49 93.51 6.22 93.78 4.30 95.70 2.82 97.18 ru 1DO.OD 1.68 18 0.0111
0+27.0 7.19 92.81 6.42 93.58 riffle tDO.OD 1 0.10D0
0+27.6 7.21 92.79 6.48 93.52 run 100.00 12 O.OOBi
D+40.0 7.12 92.88 6.58 93.42 4.68 95.34 4.31 95.69 riffle t00.OD i.t4 17 O.D300
O+q8.5 7.15 92.85 7.00 93.00 4.96 95.04 4.28 95.72 riffle CS 100.00 1.31
0*57.0 7.50 92.50 7.09 92.91 100.OD 11 0.0409
0*60.0 8.26 91.74 7.54 92.46 top pool 100.00 21 0.0043
0+72.0 8.29 91.71 7.54 92.46 max pool 100.00
D+89.0 8.03 91.97 7.63 92.37 6.18 93.82 5.26 94.74 lop riffle/run 1D0.00 1.5D 24 0.0183
1+13.0 8.31 91.69 8.07 91.93 100.00 22 0.0227
1+35.D B.BS 91.15 8.57 91.43 riffle 100.00 13 0.0046
1+48.0 8.95 91.05 8.63 91.37 6.71 93.29 6.49 93.51 r 100.00 1.10 23 D.0204
1+71.0 9.41 90.59 9.10 90.90 step 100.OD 30.0 D.055
2+01.0 6.73 88.91 6.39 89.25 3.47 92.17 riffle 95.64 t7 O.OD53
2+18.0 6.61 88.83 6.48 89.16 4.5fi 91.08 3.80 91.84 ru 95.fi4 1.34 13 D.0215
2+31.0 7.26 88.38 6.76 88.88 top pool 95.fi4 19 0.0042
2+33.4 7.70 87.94 fi.7fi 88.88 max pool 95.64 1.90
2+37.0 7.54 88.10 6.77 88.87 pool/glide 95.64
2+43.0 7.42 88.22 6.80 88.84 5.00 90.64 4.52 91.12 pool CS 95.64 1.20
2+50.0 7.15 88.49 fi.B4 88.80 top riffle 95.64
Max Pool
Bk HOBkf HL P_P Pool Length Daolh Pool Slooe Riffle Lanath Riffle Slooe Run Length Run Slooe
[w slope 0.0211 ws slope 0.0213 bkf slope 0.02211 min 1.10 43 19 1.90 0.0070 1 0.0090 11 0.0110
max 1.68 91 21 1.90 0.0110 24 0.1000 23 0.0440
BKF W (fl)= 16.0 avg 1.35 60 20 1.90 0.0080 13 0.04D0 17 D.0240
BKF D (f[)= 1.3 Min ratio NA 2.7 1.52 0.3283 0.4221 0.5159
BKF Max D (H)= 2.2 Max ratio NA 5.7 1.52 0.5159 4.6904 2.0638
avg ratio NA 4.3 1.52 0.3752 1.8762 1.1257
40 81 99 30 25D
Longitudinal Profile
UT1
Swartwout Tract
98.00
97.00. x i -_ -_
96.00 • x~
-~-------
95
00
p
i
d
.
, X
r

e 94.00

`
---

--

--
• ~
-

~

-
:~
~ 93
00 - - _
_ - -- - _ _ __ _ - _ - _ _ __
.
~ a a i
w 92.00 i a I x x
w 91.00
:0 90
00 - ---
- -_ -{ -----11'
I ----- F---- a a -~-- --__ __-- __ _-- -----~ ---- ------ x----
•
. ------

89.00
_ i
a
a .
.
88.00 --
87
00
.
0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30 0+40 0+50 0.60 0+ 10 0*80 0+90 1+00 1+10 1+20 1+30 1+SO 1+50 1+fi0 1.10 1+90 1.90 2+00 2+t0 2+20 2+30 2.40 2+50
Station (feet)
-TVJ • WS • BKF X TOB • Riffle Cross-Section D Pool Crass-Section
K:167612lFieldDatalSwartwout UT

UT1 Cal Craak
Swadwoul Property
Macon Gourily
Field Crew:
River Basin: Amanda Tw1d an
Liflle Tennessee d Georye Lankford
Watershed: UT Cat Creek
Scream Reach: Swarlwout UT1
Orainaga Area: 0.86 sq mi (551.1 5 acres)
Date: 7I1512U03
Station: 0+7].5
Feature: Rihle
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(FEET) (FEET) ( FEET) IFEETI
D+00.0 100.00 3.75 96.25 below road
17+00.5 100.00 3.53 96.07
o+oz.o mo.oo 4.13 9s.e]
O+114,2 10000 4.28 95.]2 LTOB
0+06.0 100.00 4.9fi 95.04 LBKf
0+07.5 100.00 5.49 94.51
0+09.0 100.00 5.85 94.15
0+10.5 100.00 5.89 94.11
0+11.3 100.00 6.31 93.69
0+12.3 1U0.00 6.88 93.12 LEOW/ws
0.14A 100.00 7.15 92.85 TW
0*16.0 10000 6.97 93.03
0*17.9 10000 fi.78 93.22 REOW
11+18.9 100.00 6.10 93.90
0+20 0 100.00 5.87 94.13
o+z1.o lno oo s.49 sasl
0+22.0 100.00 4.95 95.05 RBKF
0+24.0 100.00 4.55 95.45
mzs.o 1no.oo a.z7 ss.]3 RTOB
0+34.0 100.00 aso ssso
D*390 iDD.UO 4.64 95.36
0+55.0 100.00 3.93 96.07
0.2] 5.10 1.38
97
y 9fi
95
v
w
~ 94
a
Q 93
92
0
Nytlraulic Geometry
Witlth Depth Area
Feet Feet 5 Ft.
o.o 00 00
1.5 U.5 U.4
1.5 U.9 1.1
1.5 U.9 1.4
U.8 1 4 0.9
1.0 1.9 t 6
2.1 2.2 4.3
1.6 2.U 3.4
1.4 1.8 2.7
1.5 1.1 2.2
1.1 0.9 1.1
1.0 os o ~
SUMMARY DATA (BANKFUL LI Totals
TOP OF BANK (TOB)
Hyd raulic Geome4y
Width pepth Area
(Feet) (Feet) (Sq. FL)
o.o o.o 0 0
to o.] os
1.5 1.2 1.4
1.5 1.6 2.1
15 I.fi 2.4
U8 2.0 1.5
1.0 2.6 2.3
2.1 2.9 5 ]
1.6 2.7 4.4
1 4 2.5 3.6
1.5 1.8 3.2
1.1 is 1s i
1.0 1."t 1.4
1.0 0.7 os
zo 0.3 os
so o.o os
24.8 33.1
A(BKF) 20.1 W(FPA)
W(BKF) 16.0 Slope 0.02
htax tl 2.2 Snuosit 1.U6 SUMMARY DA TA fTOBI
Meand 1.15 Area=A AIBKF) 33.1
WID 12.8 Widttr- W WIBKF) 24.6
Entrenchment 3.4 Depth= D Max d 2.9
Stream T e Gb Ban MUll= BKF Mean tl 1.3
Area lrom Rural Re Tonal Gurv 19
Cross Section 5
Swartwout UT1
Riffle Cross Section
K167812/FinldOalalSwarlwout_UT
Bank Erosion Hazard Index IBEHII
Bank Erosion
Criteria Value Index Potential
Bank HI/Bkf Ht 1.]2 6.5 high
Root Depth/Bank HI 1 1 very low
Rout Density (% J 90 1.45 very low
Bank Angle jDegrees) ]0 5.8 nwderale
Surface Protection (% i 95 1.2 very low
Bank Materials silUclay 1l1
25.95
motlerate
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Station (feet(

UT1 GaL Creek
Swartwout Property
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd and Georye Lankford
River Besin: Little Tennessee
Watershed: UT Cat Creek
Stream Reach: Swartwout UT7
Drainage Area: 0.86 sq mi (557.15 acres)
Data: 711 512 0 0 3
Station: 2+72
Feature: POOL

STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
~Fee0 (Feet) (Feet( (Feet)
0+00.0 95.60 3.65 91.95
0+10.0 55.60 4.Od 51.54
0+12 U 95.6U 4.29 91.31 LTOB
0+14.0 95.60 5.00 50.6U LBKF
0*15.0 95,60 5.55 90.05
U+16.8 55.60 5.96 89.64
0+17.5 95.6U 6.48 89.12
11+19.0 95.60 6.92 88.68 LEW
0+19 3 95.60 7.41 88.19
0+20.3 95.60 7.42 88.18 TW ws=6.77
0+21.7 95.60 7,29 88.31
0+23.0 95.60 6.89 138.71 REW
o*zas ssso s13 es47
0+24.3 ss fio 5.67 fis.73
0+24.7 95 60 5.57 50.03
0+25.3 95.60 5.22 50.38
0+25.8 95.60 5.00 90.60 RBKF
0+270 95.60 4.52 91,08 RTOB
0+33.0 95,60 d.41 91.19
BANKFULL (BKF)
Hydraulic Geonrevy
Width Depth Area
Feet Feel S .Ft.
0 9 0
1.0 U.5 0.3
1.8
D
7 1 U
1
5 1.4
0
9
.
1.5 .
1 9 .
2.6
0.3 24 U.6
1.0 2.4 2.4
1.4 2.3 3.3
7.3 7.9 2.7
0.6 1.1 0.9
0.7 os o 7
o a os o.3
os o2 oz
os o 0 0.1
11.8 16.3
Hydraulic Geomevy
Width Depth Area
Feel Feet S .Fl.
z o o.o o.o
1.0 0.7 0.4
1.8 1.3 1.8
0.7 1.7 1.0
1.5 2.2 2.9
U.3 2.6 0.7
1 0 3.7 2.9
1.4 3 1 4.4
1.3
n 3.0
zs 4.U
1
7
0.7 tfi .
1s
oa 1.6 0.7
os 1.3 os
u5 os ns
1.2 0.7 t_0
0+36.5 95.6!1 4.47 91.13 SUMMARY DA TA IBankfulll TOTALS 15.0 24.3
0+40.0 95.60 4.95 90.65 AIBKF) 16.3
0+47.0 95.60 5.25 90,35 W(8KF) 17.8 SUMMARY DATA ITODI
U+55.0 95.60 521 90.39 Maxd 2.4 AIBKF) 24.3
0+58.0 95,fiU 4.78 90.82 Mean d 1.4 W(DKF) 15.0
0+68.0 95.60 3.88 91.92 Maxd 3.1
Mean d 1.8
Width Fpa=68
„ 93
v
92
.o- 91
A
w 90
to
f=' 89
ro
y 88
Q
87
0
Cross Section 6
Swartwout UTt
Pool Cross Section
K:\678121FieldDatalSwartwoul UT
Bank Erosion Hazard Index fBEHII
Bank
Criteria Value Index
Bank HUBkf Ht 1.7 8.4 high
Root DeplhlBank HI 1 1 very low
Root Density (%) 92 1.4 very low
Bank Angle (Degrees) 56 3.7 low
Surface Protection (% } 96 1.2 very low
Bank Materials SilUClay 5
19 law
CS Looking Upstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Station (feet)

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
UT1 Cat Creek
Swartwout Property
Macon County
PEBBLE COUNT
Site: Cat Creek 7/21/2003
Part :Amanda Todd and Geor a Lankford Swartwout Tract UT1 Lon itudinal
Particle Count
Inches Particle Millimeter Riffle Run/Pool Total No. Item % % Cumulative
Silt/Cla < 0.062 S!C 12 9 21 21 % 21
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 5 4 9 9% 30%
Fine .125 - .25 A 10 9 19 19% 49%
Medium .25 - .50 N 4 2 6 6% 55%
Coarse .50 - 1.0 D 0 2 2 2% 57%
.04 -.08 e Coars 1.0 - 2.0 S 0 0 0 0% 57%
.08 - .16 Very Fine 2.0 - 4.0 1 0 1 1 % 58%
.16 - .22 Fine 4.0 - 5.7 G 0 1 1 1 % 59%
.22 - .31 Fine 5.7 - 8.0 R 1 0 1 1 % 60%
.31 - .44 Medium 8.0 - 11.3 A 2 2 4 4% 64%
.44 - .63 Medium 11.3 - 16.0 V 0 0 0 0% 64%
.63 - .89 Coarse 16.0 - 22.6 E 4 2 6 6% 70%
.89 - 1.26 Coarse 22.6 - 32.0 L 1 2 3 3% 73%
1.26 - 1.77 ery Coars 32.0 - 45.0 S 4 1 5 5% 78%
1.77 - 2.5 e Coars 45.0 - 64.0 2 1 3 3% 81
2.5 - 3.5 Small 64 - 90 C 5 1 6 6% 87%
3.5 - 5.0 Small 90 - 128 O 8 3 11 11 % 98%
5.0 - 7.1 Large 128 - 180 B 1 1 2 2% 100%
7.1 - 10.1 Lar e 180 - 256 L 0 0 0 0% 100%
10.1 - 14.3 Small 256 - 362 B 0 0 0 0% 100%
14.3 - 20 Small 362 - 512 L 0 0 0 0% 100%
20 - 40 Medium 512 - 1024 D 0 0 0 0% 100%
40 - 80 r - Ve Lr 024 - 204 R 0 0 0 0% 100%
Bedrock BDRK 0 0 0 0% 100%
Totals 60 40 100 100% 100%
Particle Size Distribution
UT1 Swartwout Property- Macon County
110%
100% - - - -
90% --- --- ---
c
s 80% -
70% '
I ~ 60% ---- ~ -- ~I
~ a~ I
50%
~ 40% _ _ -_ -- - - ~
U 30% - - -
20%
10%
0%
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 ~
Particle Size (mm)
K:\67812/FieldData/Swartwout UT

r r r r r r it rr r r r r r r r it r r r
Cat Creek
Waldroop Property
Macon Counly
Field Crew: Amanda Todd, George Lenk(wd
RhNr BaWn: Little T@rmessa STA BS HI FS ELEV NOTE
Stream RMCh: Lgwer Gal Cree k Waklraop Trod TBM p1 3. /4 103.74 100.00
Dnlanaa Area: $.5S TP #1 3.09 102.03 4.8 98.94
Date: ]/2112003 TP#2 4./6 103.] 3.09 98.94
Deecri 'o LONGITUDINAL PROFILE TBM#1 100 3.] 100
Bk HLI Pool Max Peol Pool Riffle Ri(fla Run Run Glitle Glide
Station 7W IFS1 TW WS IFS] 1~S BKF ]FBI BKF TOB IFS] TOB No[ea HI Bkt ML P_P Lenuth Deoth Slooa Length Slone Lanath Slone Lenolh Slone
0+00.0 8.20 9554 7.88 9586 Top Riffle 103.]4 68.5 0.0085
0+28.0 B.Bt 9453 8.46 95.28 `~z $.70` 9804 5.67 980] Flow Gale 103.]4 101
0+580 9.22 94.52 Bfi2 95.12 ,. ,.$.BB 9].BB 5.10 9864 inlermetliale 103.]4 1.23
0*68.5 9.30 94.44 8.61 95.13 Top Pool 103.]4 98 45 0.000]
0+]2.0 9.]1 94.03 861 95.13 grain Tile 103.]4
0+81.5 9.92 9382 8.61 95.13 5.95 91.79 4.18 99.56 Max Pool CS 103.%4 1.45 46
1+130 9.08 94.66 8.64 95.10 Top Riffle 103.74 1] 00194
1+30.0 9.49 9425 8.97 94.]7 6.21 9]53 4.15 98.99 Run 103.]4 145 3] 00121
1+685 9.9] 93.]7 9.41 94.33 ,. 5,fi5,,,_,. 9]09 5.39 98.35 Top Ppal 103.74 1.38 BB 44 0.005]
1+840 10.63 93.11 963 94.11 Pool 103.]4
1+90.5 11.59 92.15 9.69 9405 Max POal 103.]4
2+00 0 1 t 01 92.73 9 fi5 94 09 Pool 103.]4
2+10.0 10.03 93.71 9.66 9008 Glide 103.]4 8 0.0088
2+180 9.97 93.7] 9.13 9401 Top RiMe 103.]4 36 0.0119
2+54.0 10.88 928fi 10.16 93.58 T:4$- ~'• 96.34 5.21 9853 Top POOI 703]4 163 46 24 0.0058
2+630 9.26 92.77 8.55 9348 Pool 10203
2+180 9.24 92.]9 8.59 9344 Top Glide 102.03 6 0.0083
2+84.0 8.98 93.05 8.64 93.39 Top Riffle 102.03 16 0.0062
3+00.0 9 fi4 92.39 8. ]4 93.29 Max Pool 102 03 33 21 D 0038
3+11.0 10.]0 9243 8.15 93.28 Paal 10203
3+210 9.5% 9246 13.82 93.21 Top Glide 102.03 11 O.OD36
3+320 9.19 92.84 8.86 93.1% Top Riffle 10203 19 00074
3+334 9.21 92.82 900 9303 6.15 85.88 5.52 96.51 Riffle CS 10203 1.21
3+51.0 9.]5 92.28 9.00 9303 _ 8.2#-:,~ 95.]9 5.13 96.90 Top Pool 102.03 1.32 25 0.0040
3+62.0 10.01 9202 9.06 92.9] intertnediale 102.03
3+160 9.84 92.19 9.10 9293 Top Glide 10203 g p,Opgq
3+850 9.64 92.39 9.14 92.89 !, $9$'z~; 95.65 5.37 966fi Riffle 102.03 f.31
Bk Ht./ Pool Max Pool Pool Riffle Riffle Run Run Glide Glide
Bki Ht. P=P Length Ueoth Slone Lanath Slone Length Slone Lenuth Sluue
Nv slope 0.0082 ws slope 0.00]7 1.01 43 21 4 60 0.0000 i6 000]0 3] 00060 6 00010
1.63 108 45 4.60 0.0040 69 00110 3] 0.01]0 11 0.0050
BKF W (fl)= 22.9 avg 1.3] 70 32 4.60 0.0020 31 00140 3] 0.0120 9 0.0030
BKF D (AI= 1.] Min ratio NA 1.9 2.69 0.0000 0.9074 0.]400 0.1296
BKF Max D (fl)= 2.9 Max ratio NA 4.] 2.69 0.4700 7.9500 2.2600 O.fi481
avg ratio NA 3.1 2.fi9 02200 7.5000 1 6100 0.4600
158 156.5 37 34.0 385
Longitudinal Profile
Cat Creek-Lower Waldroop Tract
100.00
ss.oo
- --
x i
-- ~

_..
x
..
7
x I
~
- ~. _._
~
~. x
it _ _
- _.. _
,
w 9
.00 ~
c
' i
~
I_ ~
_ _
__.
~ __-
' _
I _..~ _:.
x
~
x
96.00 I :,___
,
m
_. _. _
_._.__ _1__ _
E x
• __ •.
___ -___
.
~ 95.00 .. I
__ _
m
a 94.00 -- ~ + - -i -
~ • ~
93
00 ~-- +
I
. ~
92.00 - _. ,

91.00 -.
0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30 O+ _..
II_. ~~,
I
~'
aO 0+50 0+W 0.70 0+60 Or90 1+00 1+10 1+30 1+39 1+40 1.50 1.60 1.]0 1.60 1+90 2.00 2+10 2.20 2+30 2+40 2. ___. ',.

50 2+60 2+]0 2+80 2+90 3+00 3+110 3+20 3+30 3+40 3+50 3+60 3+]0 3.80 3+90
Station (feet)
-f TW • WS • BKF % 10B • Pool Crass-SUe~on pRiAl
a Croec-Secoon~
K:/67812/FieltlDalal W aldroop_Tred

Gal Leek
Waldroop Property (upper)
Macon County
Fleld Crew: Amanda Todd, George Lankford
River Basin:
Sheam Reach: Little Tene ee
Cat Creek ss
Oralerge Area: 2.20
Date: ]/2112003
Station: N(A
FeaNre: U r Reach below Fob cr antl be drock teaW re
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(FEET) (FEET) (FEED (FEET)
0+000 103.74 5.59 98.15 BANKFULL TOB
Or2t 0 111314 S.fi4 96.10 Hydraulic Geometry Hydraulic Geometry
U*26.0 103.74 5.]S 97.98 Witlth Oepth Area Wid[h Dep[h Area
0+2y.0 103]4 587 yl6] Fae[ Feel S.Ft, Fee[ Feet S.Ft.
0330 16314 8.05 9]65 0,0 00 00 0.0 00 00
d+3]0 103.]4 598 97.]6 0.8 UL 0.1 20 63 U3
0+410 103.74 593 91.81 12 U4 D4 3.0 05 1.1
0-4].0 10374 5.tl6 9].68 1.0 U.6 05 t0 O7 06
0+51 0 103.]4 5.79 5] 55 1.0 II ] ~ fi 1 0 O 9 0.8
Ur550 103.74 59] 97.77 LfOH 0.9 U.8 06 10 t0 1.0
0+5] U 103 74 6.18 97.56 1.1 1.1 1.U 1.0 1 ~ 1.2
080.0 103]4 6.63 9]_11 RUGS OF MO RSE PASTURE t.0 1.2 11 [0 14 '11
U+fi10 103.]4 689 56.85 1.2 15 1.ti U8 tti 12
O~fi20 10314 7.08 9666 73 1.8 20 1.2 11 20
0+63 0 103.74 7.31 96 43 Wfpa = 102.5 U.8 1.9 1 4 1.0 1 6 1.7
O~fi4C 10314 7.56 96.18 Ol 2.3 1.5 1+3 2.1 1.9
0*66.0 10314 7.67 56.07 LRKF O8 21 2.0 US 23 2U
O r66 8 10314 ].85 55.85 1.2 2.7 3.3 1.1 2.5 2.6
0+830 103.]4 8.116 9568 10 2.6 21 1.11 26 2.4
O+fi9.0 10374 6.20 95.54 1.3 2.7 34 12 30 3.4
D+)00 103]4 6.33 95.41 04 2.2 1.0 13 33 4.1
0]11.9 10314 S42 95.32 1.0 1 8 2.U U B 3.tl 2.8
0+72.0 103.]4 8.]3 95.01 0.7 15 1.1 0.] 31 2fi
0-]3.0 103.74 8.89 94 65 0.4 0 8 0.6 0.8 3 ] 3.0
U+74.2 103.]4 9.13 94.61 LIB 0.5 0 i U.3 1 2 31 4 4
U~]6.6 103.74 928 94.48 Ol 00 O.t 10 3.3 35
0+]6.3 103.]4 9.59 94.15 TOTAL 19.0 2].1 1.3 29 4.U
0+]70 10314 9.95 93.]9 LEOW 04 15 1.1
0+]7.8 103.]4 10.40 53 34 TW ws=9.91 1 U 1.9 2 2
U+796 103.]4 1036 93.38 U7 14 1.'t
080.0 10314 10.26 9346 O4 t U O S
0+81.3 103.74 10.32 53.42
U.5
07
64
0+81.7 10314 991 93.63 REOW V] 0.5 0.4
0+82 ] 10374 9.48 94 26 1 0 0 1 0.3
0+83.4 10374 9.1'2 94.82 TOTAL 31.0 553
0+838 103.]4 8.52 9522
Or843 103.74 8.04 95.70
0+85 0 103.74 ] fi5 96 U9 NHKF SUMMARY DATA (BANKFULL)
0.653 10374 7.56 96.18 6UMMARY DATA ITOB 1
0+86.0 103.74 7.31 9ti 43 A(RKF( 271 W(FPA) 150 A(HKF) 553
0+8]0 10314 7.11 96.82 WIHKF) tY ll Slope 0.6 WIBKFI 310
069.3 103]4 6)7 9697 Mexd 21 Sinuosh 101 Maxtl 3.8
0+90.5 103.74 0 46 9] 28 Mean d 1.4 Area= A Mean d 1.8
0 X923 10314 6.04 y77U FENCE/RTOR W/D 13.3 Wid N= W
U+y3.0 10)_74 5.97 9].77 EnlrencYanenl >5.5 Depth=U
O+yfi.O 103 74 5 ]9 97.95 Stream I e G Ranhfull= UKF
U+99 0 103.]4 5 57 96.1 ] Area from Rural Re tonal Curvn 36.84
1*010 10314 5 36 9tl 3fi
Cfo55 $ectlOn 7
Upper Waldroop Trac[
Riffle Cross-Section
99
u 98
0 97
m 96
w
n 95
n ~
Q
93
0 5
t0 15 20 25 30 35 90 45 50 55 60
Station (feet)
65 70 75 80
Bank Erosion Hazard Intlez 18EHI1
Bank
Cdlerla Value Intlez Erosion
Rank HURkf HI 1.3 4 63
Root Depth/Bank HL 1 1 very Icw
Root Density (% ( 60 t 9
a
Bank Angle (Degrees) 85 fi 85 liyn
Surface Protection (``/u) 80 1 ~~ ry I„w
Bank Materials silVClay .l
Looking al )tight Hank
B5 9D 95 1DD 'IDS 110
K16781ZFiel00ala/W altlmop Irac1

Gal Creak
Waltlmop Prupehy
Macon Gounly
Field Crew: Amantla Totld and Gaorge Lankford
Rroer ea.m:
Watershed: aide renneas
Cat Creek ee
Straam Reach: Waldreop Properly
Drainage Area: 2.5 sy mi
Date: 7!182003
Station: 0+81.5
Feature: POOL
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(Feet) (Feet) (Feet! IFeet)
D+00.0 103.74 4.87 906]
O+p7.U 103.]4 4.]] 98.97
U+140 103.]4 459 59.15
0+22.0 103.]4 4.43 99.31
0a27.0 103.74 4.58 99.1fi
0*29.2 103.74 4.93 98.81
0+30.9 103.74 5.41 98.33
0+33.7 103.]4 5.21 98.53 FENCE
0+35.0 103.]4 5.24 98.50 LTOB
0+36.0 103.74 5.57 98.17
0+37,7 103.]4 5.95 97.79 LBKF
0+38.4 103.]4 fi.47 97.27
0+392 103.]4 6.93 9fi.81
0+39.] 103.]4 7.35 96.39
0+40.5 103.]4 ].80 95.94
0+41.2 103.74 9.10 94.64
0+43.2 103.74 9.42 94.31 LEOW
0+44.2 103.74 9.88 93.86 TW ws=8.61
U+45.2 103 ]4 9.82 93.92
0+47.5 103.74 9.46 9428
0+49.0 103.74 9.46 94.28
0+50.1 103.74 863 95.11 REOW
U+51.0 103.]4 8.1 9564
0+53.0 103.]4 ].88 95.Bfi
0+53.2 103.74 7.29 9fi 45
0+54,2 103.74 6.55 9].19
0+55.0 103.74 5.95 9],]9 RKBF
0+56.0 103.74 5.27 5847 RTOB
0+57.0 103.]4 493 98.81
0+59.0 103.]4 4.]9 98.95
0+61.] 103.74 4.57 99.1]
O+fi3.0 103 ]4 4.14 9960
O+b4.5 103.74 4.18 99.56 FENCE
0+30.8
Hydraulic Geometry
Wltlih Depth Area
Feel Feel 5 .Fl.
0 9 n
0.7 C 5 0.2
0.8 1.17 U.6
0.5 1.4 OS
0.8 1.8 1 3
U.7 3.1 1 8
2.0 3.5 6 6
1.0 3,9 3.7
1.0 39 3.9
2.3 3.5 BS
1.5 3.5 53
1.1 2.7 3.4
1.9 21 4.6
1 0 1.B 2.0
02 13 0.3
1.0 O.fi 16
Bank Erosion Hazard Indez IBEHII
TOP OF BANK (TDB) Bank Erosion
Hytl raulic Geom etry Criteria Value Intlex Potential
Wld[h Depth Area Bank HllBkf HI 1.8 6.85 high
Feet Feet S . FL Rocl Deplhl6ank HI 1 1 verylow
O.D 0.0 0.0 Ro0l Density (%) 75 2.3 low
1.0 U.3 0.2 Bank Angle iDegrees) 85 6.9 high
1.] D.7 09 Surface Proleclien (% I 80 1.B verylow
0.7 1.2 O 7 Bank Malenals SiIVCIay 10
0.8 1.7 1.2 Slralikcailon U
0.5 2.1 0.9 29.05 moderate
0.8 2.6 1.9
0.7 3.9 2 2
zo 4z B.B
1.0 46 44
1.U 4.6 4.6
2.3 4.2 10.1
1.5 4.2 63
1.1 34 4.2
1.9 2 3 5.9
TO 2 b 2.8
0.2 2.1 0.5
1.0 1.3 1.7
0.8 0.7 0.8
SUMMARY DATA ITOBI
SUMMARY DATA IBANKFULLI A(BKF) 57.7
A(BKF) 44.0 W(BKF) 11.0
W(BKF) 17.3 Mantl 4.6
Max d 3.9 Mean d 2.]
Maand 2.5
GS Looking Upstream
100
99
98
0
97
w 96
a 95
Q
94
93
0
Cross Section 8
Lower Waldroop Tract
Pool--Cross Section
K l6]612lFiald DalaNJaldroup_Tracl
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 fi0 65
S[a[ion (feet)

Cat Creek
Waldroop Property
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd and George La nkford
River Basin: Eatle Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reach: Waldroop Property
Drainage Area: 2.5 sy mi (1 ,619 acres)
Date: 7!18/2003
Station: N!A
Feature: Riffle (Staion 3+3 3.4J
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(Feet) (Feet) (Feel) (Feet) BANKFULL (BKF)
0+00 0 102.03 5.11 96 92 Hyd raulic Geometry
0+10.0 102.03 5.23 96.80 Width Depth Area
0+22.U 102.03 5.36 96.67 (Feet) Feet) S . Ft.)
0+30.0 102,03 5.42 96.61 0.0 0.0 0 0
0+35.4 102.03 5.52 96.51 LTOB FENCE 2.0 0.1 U.1
0+38.0 102.03 5.89 96.14 2.D 0.1 0.2
O+q0.0 102.03 6.15 95.88 0.8 0.2 0.1
O+qq.0 102.03 6.28 95.75 LBKF LIN TP 1.2 0.7 0.6
0+46.0 102.03 6.35 95.68 1.3 12 1.2
0+48.0 102.03 6.39 95.64 1.2 1.7 18
O+q8.8 102.03 6.SU 95.53 0.1 2.2 0.2
O+SO.D 102.03 6.98 55.05 D.1 2.8 U.3
0+51.3 102.03 7 48 94.55 2.3 2.9 6.6
0+52.5 102.03 8.01 94.02 3.0 2.9 8.7
0+52.6 102.03 8.46 93.57 2.71 2.0 2.9 5.9
0+52.7 102.03 9.10 92.93 LEW 3.79 3.4 2.7 5.6
0+55.0 102.03 9.16 92.87 0.0 2.6 0.0
0+58.0 102.03 9.21 92.82 TW ws=8.88 0.9 2.2 22
0+60.0 102.03 9.20 92.83 0.5 1.2 0.9
0+63.4 102.03 9.00 93.03 REW 0.2 0.5 0.2
0+63.4 102.03 8.88 93.15 1.0 0.4 0.6
O+fi4.3 102.03 8.51 93.52 0.3 0.2 0.1
0+64.8 102,03 7.48 94.55 0.5 0.0 D.1
0+65.0 102.03 7.17 94.86 0.1 D.0 U.0
0+66.0 10203 6.68 95.35 TOTALS 22.9 39.1
0+66.3 102.03 6.50 95.53
O+fi6.8 102.03 6.31 95.72 SUMMARY DATA (BANKFULL)
0+66,9 102.03 8.28 95.75 RBKF A(BKF) 39.1 W(FPA) 100
0+67.3 102.03 6.15 95.88 W(BKFj 22.9 Slope 0.008
0+68.0 102.03 5.62 96.41 RTOB Max d 2.9 Sinuosity 1.01
0+69.5 102.03 4.63 9740 FENCE Mean tl 1.7 Area= A
W/D 13.4 Width= W
Entrenchment >5.0 Depth= D
S'Iream T e C4 Banklull= BKF
Area from Rural Rer Tonal Curv 40

98
m 97
0 9fi
w 95
w
m 94
a 93
Q
92
0
Hyd raulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet Feet 5 .Ft.
0 0 0
26 D4 OS
20 D6 7.0
40 08 2.8
2U 08 1.fi
2 0 0.5 1.7
0 8 1.0 0.7
12 15 1.5
1.3 20 22
1.2 2.5 2 7
D.1 2 9 0.3
0.1 36 03
2.3 3 6 8.3
3.0 3.7 11.0
20 37 74
3.4 3.5 12.2
0.0 3.4 0 0
0.9 3 0 2.9
0.5 2.0 1.2
0 2 1.7 0.4
1.0 1.2 1 4
0.3 1.0 0.3
0 5 0.8 0.4
0.5 0.6 0.4
D,7 0.1 0.3
SUMMARY DATA (7081
A(BKF) 61.3
W(BKF) 32 6
Max d 3.7
Mean d 1 5
Cross Section 9
Lower Waldroop Tract
Riffle--Cross Section
K I67812/F IeltlDalalW aldroop_Tracl
Bank Erosion Hazard Index IBEHII
Bank Erosion
Criteria Value Intlen Potential
Bank Ht/Bkl HI 2.6 8.7 very hiyh
Root DeplhlBank Ht 0.5 3.9 low
Root Density (%) 40 5-1 high
Bank Angle (Degrees) 50 3.4 low
Surtace Protection (%) 30 5.9 moderate
Bank Materials SiIUCIay 7
Stralilicailon 5
39
high
CS Looking Downstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Station (feet) J

Cat Creek
Lower Waldroop Property
Macon County
PEBBLE COUNT
Site: Cat Creek 7/18/2003
Party: Amanda Todd and George Lankford Lower Waldroop Tract Lon itudinal
Particle Count
Inches Particle Millimeter Riffle Run/Pool Total No. Item % Cumulativ
Silt/Cla < 0.062 SIC 1 1 2 2% 2%
Very Fine .062 - .125 S--- 0 0 0 0% 2%
Fine .125 - .25 A- - 11 6 17 17% 19%
Medium .25 - .50 N - 11 16 27 27% 46%
Coarse .50 - 1.0 D 2 8 10 10% 56%
.04 -.08 e Coars 1.0 - 2.0 S 0 1 1 1 % 57%
.08 - .16 Very Fine 2.0 - 4.0 - 1 0 1 1 % 58%
.16 - .22 Fine 4.0 - 5.7 G 5 1 6 6% 64%
.22 - .31 Fine 5.7 - 8.0 R 1 0 1 1 % 65%
.31 - .44 Medium 8.0 - 11.3 A- 6 0 6 6% 71
.44 - .63 Medium 11.3 - 16.0 Y _ 6 1 7 7% 78%
.63 - .89 Coarse 16.0 - 22.6 E 2 1 3 3% 81
.89 - 1.26 Coarse 22.6 - 32.0 L - - 1 0 1 1 % 82%
1.26 - 1.77 ery Coars 32.0 - 45.0 . S 2 3 5 5% 87%
1.77 - 2.5 ery Coars 45.0 - 64.0 4 2 6 6% 93%
2.5 - 3.5 Small 64 - 90 C 3 0 3 3% 96%
3.5 - 5.0 Small 90 - 128 O 3 0 3 3% 99%
5.0 - 7.1 Large 128 - 180 B 1 0 1 1 % 100%
7.1 - 10.1 Lar e 180 - 256 L 0 0 0 0% 100%
10.1 - 14.3 Small 256 - 362 B 0 0 0 0% 100%
14.3 - 20 Small 362 - 512 L 0 0 0 0% 100%
20 - 40 Medium 512 - 1024 D 0 0 0 0% 100%
40 - 80 r - Very L 024 - 204 R 0 0 0 0% 100%
Bedrock 13DRK 0 0 0 0% 100%
Totals 60 40 100 100% 100%
Particle Size Distribution
Lower Waldroop Tract
110% -_~ T _ Cat Creek -Macon County, NC
~, e
1 oo°ro

90% -- ' ---

c

80% - ---

--- ----
Y
a`> 70%
c
--
~
~ ~
' 50%
~
~ 40% - --

U 30%

e

20% --- -
',

10%
-
0%

0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)
K:/67812/Field Data/VVald roop_Tract

Cat Creek
Parker Tract
Macon County
FNklCrew: Amanda Todtl, George LenMord
RlwrBnln: LNBa Tenes6ee
Streprl Resch: GAt Creekf6rkerTrecl
Dralange Ana: 3.38
Da4: 722/2003
Daecrl Ion: LONGITUDINAL PROFILE
Stallv6 TW IF31 INL WB (F61 1lY& BKF IFSI 131SE TOB IFSI I49 tiaras
0+000 8VS 98.10 ].69 9848 4.68, 101.2] 394 102.51 top riffle
0+25.0 9].98 ] 9fi a 19 6.15 101.00 4.34 101 B1 run
0+54.0 b.51 91 fi4 82] 9].88 5.46 t00.fi9
0+]] 0 9.0] 9] OB 8.54 9].61 lop pool
0+91.0 943 98]2 8.fi4 9].51 5.63 100.32 5.10 10105 mini pod
0+94.0 9iI 96.88 8.fi2 9/53 S.B3 100.32 ax of mini pad
1+010 9.22 9893 B.fiS 9].50 8.16 99.96 5.26 100.b] Top RilSe
1+44.0 990 96.55 9.OU 9].15 e54 99.81 522 100.93 nine cs
1+550 942 96]3 9.10 9]05
1+680
1+]]
0 9.89
9B] 98.28 92S 9690
96
2b 9
25 9690 8.46 99.]1 tOfi.15 riffle
.
2+00.0
9 B4 .
.
9fi 31 9.34 9fi 81 nRb
rMla
2+110 9.90 9fi.25 939 9fi.]6 8.34 ''. 9991 603 100.12 run
2+235 101] 9598 961 9854
2+300 10.31 9590 9.69 9848 mini pod
2+35.0 10 B4 95 31 9.62 96.53 ax of mini pod
2+45.5 104fi 9599 9.64 96.51 ::6.46 99 fi] 6.26 99.89 b rmetlaie
2+4b5 t0 d2 95]3 9.8] 9fi 4B 651 99.64 851 99.fi4 pool cs
2+Sfi0 10.29 95 Bfi 9.69 9646 gltle
2+)10 102] 9598 9.)1 9644 madiaie
2+)BO 10.12 9603 9.)6 96.39 "8.]7. ,; 9944 6.38 99.]] lop nMe
Nv slope 0.00]4 ws sbpe 0 0058 bki sbpe 0
0KF W (111= 19.1 avg
BKF OIiI)= 25 Mln repo
BKF Mex 0 (ft)= 4.3 Max rallo
avg ratio
sTA BS Rl rs eLfiv NOTE
ram zl
TPp1 8.15 tnsls
100
fi.15 1oo9o groundwatergauge
100
Mnx pool
yl Bk HUBkf Ht.
10fit5 1.39
10fi.15 t 2]
106.15
10fi.15
10fi.15 1.20
106.15
106.15 130
106.15
106 i5
1Ofi.15 2.B]
108.15
10fi 15 P_P

53 Pool Length

1]
24 Deoth

.]9 pool Slooe

004fi Riffle Length Riffle Slooe
]] 0.0110

] 00090

3 00083
10fi.15 109
10fi.15
10fi.15
10fi 15
106.15 106
10615
t Ofi.15
10fi.15
t Ofi.15 1.10

41

.19

aa Pool

0 001 ]
Bk HUBkf Ht.
10fi
2.8]
141
NA
NA
NA P_P
54
90
]2
29
4.]
3.B pool Length
t]
40
29 Deoth
2.]9
3.I9
3.29
1.13
1.53
1.33 Pool Slooe
00000
0.0030
0.0020
0.0000
0.51]2
0.2fi00 Riffle Length Riffle Slooe
53 00090
]] O.O1fi0
66 0.0120
1.6400
2.]588
2.0800
0
Longitudinal Profile
Cat Creek-Parker Tract
104.00
103.00
102.00
a°ti 101.00
0 100.00
.~
a~i 99.00
w
~ 98.00
~ 97.00
Q
96.00
95.00
94.00
0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30 0+40 0+50 O+fiO 0+)0 0+80 0+90 1*00 1+10 1+20 t+30 tag0 1.50 t+60 1+]0 1+80 1*90 2+00 2+10 2.20 2.30 2+40 2+50 2.80 2•]0 2+BO
Station (feet)
tTW • WS • BKF X TOB D Riffle Cross-Section • Pool Cross-Section
_ ___ _.
K:/67812/Field Data/FieldData/Parker Trac[

Cat Creek
Parker Tract
Macon County
Field Crew:
River Basin: Amantla Tetld
Little Tenessee and Georye Lankfartl
Watershed: CatCreek~Parker Tract
Stream Reach: Parker Tract
Oralnaee Area: 2.60
Data: 11222003
Station: 1+44
Feature: Rafe
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
1FEET1 (FEETI (FEET) IFEETI
6+060 1661s 4qe 10169
11+060 1061fi 4.53 101.fi2
U+1E0 tOti.15 445 101.5]
0+2ti0 10615 4.50 10155
0+35 (1 106 15 4 85 101.30
0+36 0 10fi 15 4 94 101 21 LTOR
0+315 1Ufi.15 522 10093 LTOB IIn1
0+3tl0 10615 S34 10081 LRKF Tint
0+39.0 10fi 15 5.]9 100.36
0+40 0 106.15 6.28 99 8]
0+40 5 10fi.15 6.54 99.61
U+40.9 108.15 8 68 5919
0+42 0 106 15 ] ]4 58 41
U+433 10615 82b 9]8] IB
0a4q.0 106.15 658 5]57
0+44.5 106.15 946 9fi 6] WSlIEOW
0+45.4 106.15 9 52 9fi 63
U*J06 106.15 960 9855 TW
0+413 106.15 9 55 96.80
U+46 5 106.15 5.49 6fi 66
0+4tl.6 10615 908 9]0] REOW
O+SU.] 1(16.15 6.I0 5]45
0+51.0 10fi.15 b 30 97.85
0+519 10G IS 618 578] IB
0+53.0 1Uti 15 ] 5] 58.58
0+54.1 10fi 15 B 93 9912
0+550 1f16.15 654 99 fit
0+560 106.15 569 100.46
0+5].1 1(Ni.15 534 100 dt RRKF
0+5].5 106 IS 522 t0U 93 RTOD
0+61.0 1Ufi 15 50] 101 OB
U+660 106.15 4.96 101.1]
0+]20 106.15 4.]U 1111.45
O+bUO 106.15 446 1016)
0+90 0 106 15 4.41 101 tiB
1+000 tOG 15 4.64 10151
1+10.0 106.15 433 101.82
1+200 10615 45] 101.56
1+33o mal5 4sa 1a1 a1
1+350 108.15 4.65 10150
103
102
y 101
100
w
r 99
Q 98
97
96
0
ws-946
HYdrauhc Gea retry
Width DepM n Area
Feet Feet 6 .Ft.
a9 nn o0
1U 05 0.2
1U U9 U]
05 1L 05
O.A 15 11.5
11 24 22
13 29 35
07 32 22
OS 41 18
U9 4.L 31
1U 43 4.2
09 42 38
12 4.1 50
03 3] 12
19 34 6.7
U3 30 U.9
00 20 27
n tz ze
1 1 1.6 2.1
09 12 13
10 0.3 06
Hydraulic Geo etry
Width Depth m Area
Feet Feet S Ft.
a6 D9 00
U5 U1 UO
10 U6 03
10 1.1 UB
05 13 05
04 1fi 05
11 25 23
13 31 3fi
U7 J4 22
0.5 43 19
0.9 43 39
10 44 43
U5 43 3.5
12 43 52
0.3 3.9 1.'[
19 35 ]U
U3 3t 10
09 31 L8
11 23 3U
11 1.1 22
09 13 14
1U 05 0.5
15 00 04
SUMMARY DATA IBANKFULLI SUMMARY DATA ITOBI
A(BKF) 4] I WIFPAI 150 AIRKF) 49.5
WIRKFI IO 1 Slope 0.006 WIBKFI 20 0
Max d 4.,f 3lnuosiry i Max tl 4 a
Meantl 25
Mean tl '2.5 Area- A
w;D ] ] wmm= w
Enlrenchmen[ 1.1 Dep;n= D
Stream T e NNG4 RanMUll= BKF
Area fiom Rural Re tonal Curve 41
'LACK OF INDICATORS/RECENT CHANNELIZATION
Cross Section 10
Parker Tract
Riffle Cross-Section
Bank Erosion Hazartl Intlex fBEHl1
Bank Erosion
Criteria Value hltlex Potential
Rank H1/Bkf H; 15 59 nwderale
Root OepRJRank Ht 1 1 very low
Root Density (%1 95 1.2 very low
Bank Angle (Deyreesf 60 39
l
Surface Protec11cn 1°~) 95 1.2 va
ry low
Bank Matenah silVclay 3
162
low
K'l5]6IL/HCItlDaf4lPaMer T1ac1
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 fi0 65 7D 75 BU 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140
Station lfeeq

~ ~ a. ~ r ~ ~ . ~ r r~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Cat Creek
Parker Tract
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd and George Lank ford
River Basin: Lltlle Tenessee
Watershed: Cat Creek-Parker Tract
Stream Reach: Parker Tract
Drainage Area: 2.fi0
Date: 7!22!2003
Station: 2+46.5
Feature: Pool
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(Feet) (Feet) (Feet) (Feet)
o+ooD t9zzs ss ssss
0+08.0 102.26 5.72 96.54
0+16.0 102.26 6 00 96.26
0+26.0 102.26 5.88 96.38
0+33.0 102.26 5.98 96.28
0+38.0 102.26 6.51 95.75 LTOB
0+39.0 102.26 6.63 95.63 LBKF Ilnt
O+q1.0 10226 7.01 55.25
0+41.8 102.26 7.39 94.87
0+42.6 102.26 7.86 94.40
O+qq.0 102.26 8.51 93.75
O+q 5.3 102.26 949 92.77
0+455 102.26 9.76 92.50 LEOW
0+46.0 102.26 10.16 92.10
O+q7,8 102.26 10.23 92.03
O+qg.0 102.26 1042 91.84 TW w s=9.71
0+50.3 102.26 10.30 91.96
0+51.5 102.26 10.22 92.04
0+52,4 102.26 9.91 92.35 REOW
0+54.0 102.26 8.90 93.36
0+55 4 102.26 7.90 94.36
U+560 1U2.26 7.39 94.87
0+57.2 102.26 6.63 95.63 RBKF
0+60.0 102.26 fi.02 96 24 RTOB
0+69.0 102.26 5.86 96.40
0+75.0 102.26 5.45 96.81
0+82.0 iD2.2fi 5.78 97.08
0+89.0 102.26 5.18 97.08
O+g5.0 102.26 5.57 96.65
1+00.0 102.26 5.34 96.92
7+05.0 102.26 5.09 97.17

58
97
~ 96
n 95
w 94
i"
n 93
Q
92
91
0
Hydraulic Geometry Hydraulic Geometry
Witlih Depth Area Width Depth Area
Feet Feet 5 .Ft. Feet Feet 5 .Ft.
D.0 D.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2.0 0.4 0.4 3.0 0.5 0.8
0 8 0.8 0.5 1.6 0.9 1.1
0.8 t.2 0.8 1.4 1.3 1.fi
14 19 2.2
1.3 2.9 3.1 1.3 2.0 22
0.2 3.1 0.6 D.2 3.U 0.5
0.5 3.5 1.7 0.5 3.3 1.6
1.8 3.6 6.4 1.8 3.6 6.2
1.2 3.8 4.4 1.2 3.7 4.4
1.3 3.7 4.8 1.3 3.9 5.0
1.2 3.6 4.4 1.2 3.8 4.6
09 3.3 3.1 0.9 37 3.4
1.6 2.3 4.4 1.6 3.4 5.7
1.4 7.3 2.5 1 4 2.4 4.1
0.6 0.8 0.6 0.6 1 4 1.1
1.2 0.0 0.5 1.2 0.9 t.4
TOTALS 182 40.3 28 0.1 14
TOTAL S 22.0 44.9
SUMMARY DATA 18KF1
A(BKF) 40.3 SUMMARY DATA ITOBI
W(BKF} 18.2 A(BKF) 44.9
Maxd 3.8 W(BKF) 22.U
Mean d 22 Man d 3 9
Meand 20
'LACK OF INDICATORSIRECENT CHANNELIZ ATION
Cross Section 11
Parker Tract
Pool Cross Section
Bank Erosion Hazard Index 1 8EHI1
Bank Erosion
Criteria Value Index Potential
Bank HI/Bkf HI 1.5 5.9 moderate
Root Depthleank HI 1 1 very low
Root Density (%) 95 1.2 very low
Bank Angle (Degrees) 60 3.9 low
8urtace Protection (%) 95 1.2 very low
Bank Materials SilllClay 5
K167a121FIeItlDalelPa`ker Tract
CS LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 55 100 105
Station (fee[)

Cat Creek
Parker Tract
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd an d George L ankford
River Basin: Little Tenessee
Watershed: Cat Creek-Parker Tract
Stream Reach: UT2
Drainage Area: 0.47
Date: 7/3112003
Station: N/A
Feature: TRIB FROM PON D
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(Feet) (Feet) (Feet) (Feet)
0+00.0 100.00 5 25 94.75
0+08.0 100.00 5.42 94.58
0+18,0 100.00 5.57 94.43
0+27.0 100.00 5.47 94.53
0+35.0 100.00 5.22 94.78
0+42.5 100.00 4.98 95.02
0+47.0 100.00 4.98 95.02 LTOB
0+52.0 100 00 5.13 94.87
U+61.0 100.00 5.14 94.86
0+64.0 100.00 5.14 94.x6
0+66.0 100.00 5.49 94.51
0+67.0 100.00 5.90 94.10
0+67.2 100.00 fi.09 93.91 LBKF lint
0+67.7 100.00 6 52 93.48
0+68,0 100.00 677 93.23
0+69.1 100.00 7.62 92.38
0+69.7 100.00 7.95 92.05
o+sss 100.00 a.ts s1 ea IB
0+704 100.00 8.50 91.50 LEOW
0+70.6 100.00 9.21 90.79 TW WS=8.50
0+71.0 100.00 9.15 90.85
0+71.5 100.00 8.62 91.38 REOW
0+72.3 100.00 8.45 91.55
0+73.0 100.00 8.16 91.84 IB
o+7a o 100.00 7.os szsz
Hyd raulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet Feet S .F[.
o.o oD o0
U.5 0 4 0.1
0.3 0.7 0.2
1.1 1.5 1.2
0.6 1.9 1.0
0.2 21 0.4
Q 5 2.4 1.1
0.2 31 06
0.4 3.1 1 2
0.5 2.5 1 4
o.a z4 zo
0.7 21 1.6
10 1.0 t5
07 0.5 05
0.7 0.0 0 2
0+74.7 100.00 6.56 93.44 SUMMARY DATA IBANKFULLI
0+754 100.00 6.09 93.91 RBKF A(BKF) 12.9 W(FPA) 150
0+76.2 100.00 5.55 94.45 W(BKF) 8.2 Slope 0.01
0+77.5 100.00 5.12 94.88 Maz d 3.1 S'inuosi[
0+7g.0 100.00 4.93 95.07 RTOB Mean d 1.6 Area= A
0+82.0 100.00 5.05 94.95 WID 5.2 Width= W
0+85.0 100.00 S.t 94.90 Entrenchment >18.3 Depth= D
O+aa.O 100.00 4.88 95.12 Stream T e NA Bankfull= BKF
0+92.0 100 00 4.81 95.19 Area from Rural Re Tonal Curve 13
0+97.0 tOD,00 4.62 95.38
1+00.0 100.00 a.51 ss.as 'LACK OF INDICATORSIRECENT CHANNELIZATION
1 +08D 100.00 3.77 96.23
Tan _.ynn nn 2Zd _- _..27.15.
Hyd raulic Geometry
Wid[h Depth Area
Fee[ feet 5 .Ft.
o.o o.o 0 0
5 0 0.1 0.4
90 0.2 t4
3.0 0.2 0.5
2.0 0.5 0 7
1.0 0 9 0.7
0 2 1.1 0.2
0.5 1.5 0.7
0.3 1.8 0.5
1.1 2.6 2 4
0.6 3.0 1.7
U 2 3.2 0.6
0.5 3.5 1.7
02 4.2 08
0.4 4.2 1.7
0.5 3.6 2.0
0.8 35 2.8
D.7 3.2 2.3
1 D 2.1 2.6
0.7 1.6 1.3
0.7 1.1 0.9
0.8 D 6 0.7
1.3 0.1 0.5
1.5 0.0 0.1
32.0 27.1
SUMMARY DATA ITOBI
A(BKF) 27.1
WIBKF) 32.0
Maxd 42
Mean d 0.8
CROSS SECTION 12
UT2
RIFFLE CROSS-SECTION
98
v
v
96
0
v 94
w
92
90
0
Bank Erosion Hazard Index lBEHII
Bank Erosion
Criteria Value Intlex Potential
Bank HUBkf Ht 1.4 5.2 motlera[e
Root Depth/Bank Ht 1 1 very low
Root Density (%) 50 4.3 moderate
Bank Angle (Degrees) 55 3.6 low
Surface Protection (%) 60 3.5 low
Bank Materials SIIUCIay 0
17.6 low
Looking across UT2 at right bank
K./67812/Field Uata/Parker Trac[
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125
Station (feet)

Cat Creek
Parker Tract
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd a nd George L ankford
River Basin: Little Tenessee
Watershed: Cat Craek-Parker Tract
Stream Reach : UT3
Drainage Area : 0.24
Date: 7/31!2003
Station: N/A
Feature: UT3
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
_ (Feet) (Feet) (Feet) (Feet)
0+00.0 100.00 5.77 94.23
0+05.0 100.00 6.11 93.89
0+10.0 100.00 6.19 93.81
0+15.0 100.00 6.33 93.67
0+18.0 100.00 6.65 93.35 LT08
0+18.7 100.00 6.88 93.12
0+19.7 100.00 7.33 92.67 LBKF
0+20.6 100.00 7.66 92.34
0+21.4 100.00 8.22 91.78
0+22.0 100.00 8.30 91.70
0+22.7 100.00 eso s1.4o
0+23.0 100.00 9.30 90.70 LEOW
0+23.7 100.00 9.40 90.60 TW WS=9.05
0+24.3 100.00 9.29 90.71 REOW
0+24.4 100.00 9.00 91.00 TOTALS 6.7 6.9
0+24.9 100.00 8.92 91.08
0+25.6 100.00 7.65 92.35
o+2s 4
100.00 7.33 92.67 RBKF SUMM ARY DATA !BANKFULL' TOTALS 9.0 12.2
0+27.0 100.00 6.78 9322 A(BKF) 6.9 W(FPA) 150
0+28.0
0+29.4 100.00
100.00 6.24
5.68 93.76
94.32 W(BKF)
Max d 6.7 Slope 0.01
2.1 Sinuosit SUMMARY DATA !7001
A(BKF) 12.2
0+31.0 100.00 5.60 94.40 Mean d 1.0 Area= A W(BKF) 9.0
0+35.0 100.00 5.47 94.53 W1D 6.5 Width= W Max d 2.8
O+q0.0 100.00 5.43 94.57 Entrenchment 22.4 Depth= D Mean d 1.4
O+q 5.0 100.00 5.45 94.55 Stream T e NA Bankfull= BKF
0+50.0 100.00 5.44 94.56 Area from Rural Re Tonal C urve 8
*LACK OF INDICATORS/RECENT CHANNELIZATION
CROSS SECTION 13
UT3
RIFFLE CROSS-SECTION
96
m
c
94
m
to
w
2. 92
m
¢ 90
0
BANKFULL
Hyd raulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Fee[ Feet 5 .Ft.
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.9 0.3 0.1
0.8 0 9 0.5
0.6 1 A 0.6
0 7 1.3 0.8
0 3 2.0 0.5
0 7 2.1 1.4
0.6 2.D 1 2
0.1 1.7 o z
0.5 1.fi 0.8
0 7 0.3 0.7
0.8 0.0 0.1
TOP OF BANK (7001
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
(Feet ) (Feel) (Sq. Ft.)
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.7 0 2 0.1
1.0 0.7 0.5
0.9 1.0 0.8
os 1s 1.9
0.6 1.6 1.0 '
0.7 1.9 1.3
0.3 2.6 0.7
0.7 z6 1s
0 6 2.6 1.6
0,1 2.3 0.2
U.5 2.3 t2
0.7 1.0 1.1
0.8 0.7 0.7
o s o.1 0.2
Bank Erosion Hazard Index fBEHl)
BaryY. Erosion
\ ^.Criteria Value Index Potential
Bank HUBhN-LL moderate
Root DeplhlBank Ht ~ ~ very low
Root Density (%) J,Je! 1~ooer moderate
Bank Anyle (Degfpe') low
Surface Protec(on (%) - low
embank Materials SiIVCIay 0
0 low
K'/67812lField DatalParker Tract
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Station (feet)

1
1
1
Cat Creek
Parker Tract
--
PEBBLE COUNT
Site: Cat Creek 7/22/2003
Part :Amanda Todd and Geor e Lankford Parker Tract Lon itudinal
Particle Count
Inches Particle Millimeter Riffle Run/Pool Total No. Item % Cumulativ
SilUClay < 0.062 S/C 4 3 7 7% 7%
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 6 6 12 12% 19%
Fine .125 - .25 A 17 11 28 28% 47%
Medium .25 - .50 N 6 4 10 10% 57%
Coarse .50 - 1.0 D 0 0 0 0% 57%
.04 -.08 ery Coars 1.0 - 2.0 S 0 0 0 0% 57%
.08 - .16 Very Fine 2.0 - 4.0 0 0 0 0% 57%
.16 - .22 Fine 4.0 - 5.7 G 0 1 1 1 % 58%
.22 - .31 Fine 5.7 - 8.0 R 1 0 1 1 % 59%
.31 - .44 Medium 8.0 - 11.3 A 0 3 3 3% 62%
.44 - .63 Medium 11.3 - 16.0 V 1 1 2 2% 64%
.63 - .89 Coarse 16.0 - 22.6 E 1 2 3 3% 67%
.89 - 1.26 Coarse 22.6 - 32.0 L 6 4 10 10% 77%
1.26 - 1.77 ery Coars 32.0 - 45.0 S 4 2 6 6% 83%
1.77 - 2.5 e Coars 45.0 - 64.0 8 3 11 11 % 94%
2.5 - 3.5 Small 64 - 90 C 4 0 4 4% 98%
3.5 - 5.0 Small 90 - 128 O 2 0 2 2% 100%
5.0 - 7.1 Large 128 - 180 B 0 0 0 0% 100%
7.1 - 10.1 Large 180 - 256 L 0 0 0 0% 100%
10.1 - 14.3 Small 256 - 362 B 0 0 0 0% 100%
14.3 - 20 Small 362 - 512 L 0 0 0 0% 100%
20 - 40 Medium 512 - 1024 D 0 0 0 0% 100%
40 - 80 r - Ve L 024 - 204 R 0 0 0 0% 100%
Bedrock BDRK 0 0 0 0% 100%
Totals 60 40 100 100% 100%
Particle Size Distribution
Parker Tract Longitudinal
110%
100%
90%
c
r 80%
a`~ 70%
60%
d
.~
~ 50%
E 40%
U 30%
20%
10%
0%
0.1
K:/67812/fielddata/parker_tract
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~
Cat Creek
Preserve Tract
Macon County

MI Cnw: odd, GeorBa enklar
WVaI Y•In: LMIa T•naekea 85 rs NOTE
9tra•m Raaoh:
Wtlanpq Ma: Cat Crcelr-Raaarve Trap
3.03 fi 34
Taxi
im
sw
iao woolen sake
GRa: Trz1T~odd
Mscd an LONGITGGINAL PROFILE
Bk RL/ Pool Maa POOI Pool Rifle Riffle Run Run Glide Glitle
wu°" ~~ _ ~~ _ axr ir=s ~ •oa irsi Ta@ _ Bkf Rt, P-0 Le I ~ J^BB ~ Slona Li^3L Slooe ~@9h SI°m
Y~~ 4.r4i.: via
~~ ?.1 a ,. na tie re oooaa ~~ emv
a,ma ie ee else ie ra sa ea Iola sale sse as ae neae~nk iu e as Bk Ntl Pool Max POOI Pool Rifle Riffle Run Run Glitle Glltle
~'~ ~ Le"aro oautn '~~ ~~ SI°°° L9B0111 '~$ LenY1h Blom
n«awce amn ws mpe Door.
wing ev9 sa zo ii is
'
e.r ~
~
o
n
- Min mOO
? 5 0.0000 0.fi903 27811 0.2]fi1
.
a.
i
l Max ratio 0.5522 2.2008 S.i902 0 9fifi4
avg ratio rv. ~r
21 lea
0 0.2)fit
2aio x.3005
11 4-0035 0.6903
40A d6~0
Longitudinal Profile
Cat Creek-Preserve Tract i
1oz.oo
1 D1 sD
101.00 ~ _ '
-
-
- __
__
looso- -- -
100.00 _i
-' ' !..
_ _ __ _
__._
_.
. _.
i
,
.._ __
.
y 99
50 - _ ~ I
.
~' 99.00 _
c 98.50 _.. ___ _ -_
_.. - - i
__.
__-_
_.
rv 98.00 • ~ I
97.50 -- _. __.. _ l.__ __°___ _ --' •
-_-_
_
____
_..

~ 97
00
~ x ~ _._ .-.__. __. '____..
. • ,
.
.
y
96.50 __ ._.. _. ~ __;._..
__.. ~
_... , ~
_~
.__
- -__ _.
_
9fi.D0
'a -
-
`
95.50. _ .___ _-
95.00 ~ • I
94.50
.
• i
9400 _ .. _.. __ __. '. _ .... ._.. _{. __.
93.50
93.00
o.oo o.io oso o..w a.ao oso weo e.m o.eu u.m naa ,.m ~.ee i.m ~.xa aee vao ,..o i.eo am ..aa e.io e.ao e.ao z.4e eso z.eo zno ..eo z.a, ,.W e.~a ~•eo a.x ~.ao so a.ea a.ro e.es s.w aoo a.ia aao a,a~ ..xo a.w a.¢a a.ro
Station (feel)
. -TW WS • BKF-% TOB p Rifhe Cross-Sepgn • Pool GOSS-Sepion
K:/fi7R12/rieldDatalPreserve Tract

r a. ~ r r i ~ r . ~r ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~
f:at (;reek
Preserve Haci
Ma~:on (:ounty
Field Crew: Amantla Totld a nd Georq e Lankford
River Basin: Liltlu Tennesee
Watervhad: Cat Creak
Stream Reach: Preserve Tract- upper
Drainage Area: 3.40
Oate: ]12112003
stahaa: o+s1
Pasture: Pad
STATION NI FS ELEVATION NOTES
{FEET) (FEET) (FEET) (FEET)
0+00.0 10634 3]] 102.5]
5+050 10634 3.96 102.36 FPA
0+155 10634 4.56 1U1.]tl
U X200 158.34 4.Sfi l5'I ]b
w23o t5a.3a 4.]a m165 Lroe
0+24.0 108.34 5 22 101.12
0+24.3 tOfi.34 ] 35 98 B5 LDKF (Iinl)
0+24 ti 10(1 34 9.46 96.94
5+25.5 10034 9.52 5602 LEGW
0+256 108.34 562 98 ]2
0+2] 0 106 34 15.19 96 15
0+20.5 10fi.34 10.4] 956]
U+'29 0 156 ~4 10.16 95 56
5+30.5 100:54 15.53 9541 PN ws=9.54
0+31 d 106.34 15.]5 95.59
0+32.2 15(1.34 15.51 9583 REOW
U+345 10634 8.tl9 5]45
5+30.0 10fi 34 9.00 5].34
0+38.6 156.34 8 89 9] 45
U+422 106 34 6.18 9b 16
0+440 106.34 0.04 90.30
5+4].] tOfi 34 ].80 Btl 4fi
0+49.5 10634 ].38 50.5fi
D+5:1.0 106.34 ].39 90.55 RBKF Utlice
6+55.3 10fi.34 6.90 99.36
5+56.3 100.34 fi.90 99 44
U+030 106.34 6.tl1 59.53
5+ss.3 1ns.34 z56 9e zs
0+fi9.tl 156.34 ] OS 59.25
5+]3.5 15fi.J4 fi.51 99 B2
U+]]4 15(1.34 5.93 100.41
U+620 10634 0.2L 101.12
O+b4.4 156.34 5.15 101.19
O+tl8.0 106.34 q4] 101.6]
0+934
0+96.5 106.3Y
156.34 348
2]0 102.b6
103.64 FPA
105
104
y 103
-"e- 102
0 101
> 100
w 99
~ 98
'~-' 97
Q` 96
95
94
0
'better march to regional curv
BANKFULLOKCe'
Nydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet( (Feet) (Sq. F[.1
00 00 00
03 U3
09 21 19
03 22 5]
12 2tl 30
1.0 31 19
1.0 34 32
10 35 3.5
10 34 3.5
12 3t 39
18 15 41
45 1E fit
U0 15 12
34 08 39
16 f10 13
3] 05 21
16 U0 64
3.5 0 ~ 0.0
¢UMMARY DATA ITOBI
AIRKf) 421
W(BKF) 28 ]
Maxd 35
Meand 15
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
(Feet) (Feat (Sy. Ft.
so 05 05
l5 os 5z
U 3 2.] t1 5
03 47 11
09 4.b 42
0.3 49 1J
12 55 62
1.0 6] 56
10 6.U 55
la s2 e1
10 60 fit
I2 SB ]I
18 41 69
40 43 tfitl
5d 42 34
3.4 34 12.9
1B 33 51
3] 31 11.9
1 8 2.5 5.2
35 2] 53
23 2.L Sfi
30 22 6.0
4] 21 59
33 23 I3
3.5 23 01
41 to ea
35 11 52
4ti 05 38
24 O4 11
s1u nsn
SUMMARY DATA ITOBI
A(BKf1 1]5.0
WIUKF) filC
M11ax d e
Meand 2 H
Cross Section t4
Preserve Upper Section
Pool--Cross-Section
0 ~ - X91"I'Till4~"'FTi~. ;i.~.
~~-~ ` ~~
~.~
1(7(,, 4
4~ I iv~~ 1µ '_.
r
a rt ~ 4;
t
Bank Erasion Hazard Index lBEHII
Bank
Criteria Value Index Erosion
Bank HvBkf HI 1.5 5.9 moderate
Rooi DopthlBank Ht 0.11 8 33 very high
Root Denselyt%1 4].] 655 moderato
Bank Angle (Degroesl 100 8.3 very high
Surtace Protectlun l%) 0 10 extreme
StraliM1raliat 5
eaox Material: savday n
42 O8 er hi h
5 10 15 2U 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Station (feet)

~ ~ r ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Cal Creak
Praserve Tacl
Macon Gounly
Fieltl Crew: Amanda Todd and George Lankford
River eaein: Ladle Tennessee
Waterehad: Cat Creak
Stream Reach: Preserve Tmc1
Drainage Area: 3.40
Date: 712112003
Station: 1+Bfi.5
Feature: Riffle
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(FeeO (Fee[) (FeeU (Feet)
O+D0.0 106.34 4.05 102 29
0+07.0 106.34 4.72 1D162
0+21.0 106.34 S.fiB 100.66
0+27.0 106.34 5.99 100.35
11+33.0 106.34 6.43 99,91
0+3I.0 100.34 7.11 99.23 LTOB
0+42.0 106.34 8.33 98.01
U+47.0 1Ufi.34 8.77 97,57
0+52.0 106.34 8.75 97.59
0+57.0 106.34 8.18 98. tfi
D+60.0 106.34 8.52 97.82
U+fi2.U 10634 8.20 98.11 LBKF
0+63.4 106.34 6.34 98.00
D+ssD 1o63a 6.7s szse
O+ee.U 106.34 9.26 97.08
0*ti9.7 106.34 9.70 96.fi4
0*71.6 10fi.34 10.05 9629
0+72.7 106.34 11.00 95.34 LEOW
U+73.5 10634 11.12 95.22
0+75.0 106.34 11.19 95.15
0+76.3 10634 11.41 94.93 TW ws=10.94
0+76.8 1G6.34 10.95 95.39 REOW
0+77.8 106.34 10.41 95.93
0+78.1 106.34 11.2] 95.07
0+80.0 106.34 9.01 97.33 RTOB
0+81.0 106.34 B.58 97.76
0+84.0 106.34 8.25 98.09 RBKF
0+85.0 106.34 8.34 98.00
1*U6.0 106.34 ]fi5 58.69
1+15.0 106.34 6,76 99.58
1+20.0 106.34 5.99 100.35
1+25.0 106.34 5.99 100.35
1+27.0 106.34 5.37 10057
1+32.f1 106.34 4.fi8 101.66
1+37.0 106.34 4.48 107.86
1+a7.D 1D6.3a 4,z7 1oz.o7
i+57o 1ne34 a.D6 mz.z6
BANKFULL (BKF)
Mytlraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet Feet 5 . Fl.
D.D o0 0.0
1.4 0.1 0.1
1.6 0 6 0.6
3.0 1.1 2.4
1.7 15 2.2
19 18 3.1
1.1 2.8 2.6
0.8 2.9 2 3
1.5 3.0 4.4
13 3.2 a.D
os 2.e is
1.D zz 25
U.9 3.1 2.4
1.3 0.8 2.5
1U Oa 0.6
3.0 0.0 0.6
TOTALS 22.0 31.9
Mytlr aulic Geo netry
'
Width Depih Area
Feel Feel S . Fl.
o.o ao Do
5 0 1.2 3.1
5.0 17 ].2
5.U I.6 8.2
5.0 1.1 6.8
3.U 1.a 3.]
2 U 1.1 2.5
1.4 1.2 1.6
1.fi 17 23
3.0 22 57
1.7 zs 4.D
1 9 2.9 5.3
1.1 3.9 3.8
D.8 4.0 3.1
1.5 4.1 6.1
1.3 4.3 5.4
os 3a zD
1.0 3,3 3.6
0.9 4.2 3.4
1.3 1.9 3 9
1.U 1.5 1.]
SUMMARY DATA IBANKFULLI 3.0 1.1 3.9
AIBKF) 31.9 WjFPA) 120 1.0 1.2 12
W(BKF) 21.0 Slape 0.01 21.0 0.5 18.6
Max d 3.2 Sinuosil 1.13 TOTALS 69.0 107.1
Mean d 1 4 Area= A
WlD 15.2 Width= W
Ertrenchrnunl 5.5 Depth= O SUMMARV DATA ITOBI
SfrearnT e C Bankfull=BKF AIBKF) 107.1
Area from Rural Re Tonal C urv 49 W18KF) 69.0
Max d 4.3
Mean d 1.6
Cross Section 15
Preserve Upper Section
Riffle--Cross Section
Bank Erosion Hazard Index BEH11
Bank
Criteria Value Intlex Erosion
Bank HUBkI Ht 1.1 1.9 low
Rout DaplhlBank HI (1.45 4.4 moderate
ftuol [)cosily (%) 10 8.4 very hign
Bank Angle (Degrees) 110 8.7 very high
Surlaca Proleclien (%) 5 10 extreme
Bank Malenals' SIIVCIay 10
43.4 a hi h

CS Looking Upstream
103
102
m 101
0 100
99
m
W 98
m 97
96
a
ss
sa
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 BO 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155
Station (feet)
K167812IFieldpalalPreserve Tract

Cal Creek
Preserve Tract
Macon County
Field Crew: Amanda Todd and George Lankford
River Basin: Litlle Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creak
Stream Reach: Preserve Tract-UT 4
Drainage Area: 0.17
Date: 12/903
Station: Small Trib on Preserve From Waldroop property and
Feature: Junk and
STATION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES
(Feet) (Feel) (Feet) (Feet)
0+00.0 100.00 3.96 96.04
0+10.0 100.00 4.37 95.63
0+1q.0 100.00 4.51 95.49
0+19.2 100.00 4.78 95.22
0+22.0 100.00 5 O6 94.94
0+22.8 100.00 5.22 94.78 LBKF/TOB
0+24.0 100.00 5.46 94.54
0+24.3 100.00 5.80 94.20
0+25.5 100.00 8.62 93.38 LEOW/TW
0+26.4 100.00 6.54 93.46 ws=6.48
0+272 100.00 6.54 93.46 REOW
U+26.0 100.00 5.72 94 28
0+30.0 100.00 5.54 94.46
0*33.0 100.U0 5.38 94.62
0+36.0 100.00 5.22 94.78 RBKF
O+qq.O 100.00 5.57 94 43
0+50.0 100.00 5.64 94.36
0+55.0 100.00 5.56 94.44
0+60.0 100.00 5.48 94.52
97
m
m
~- 96
c
0
.~
a 95
w
Z
m
94
a
93
0
5
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area
Feet Feei S .Ft.
0 0 0.0 0.0
1.2 0.2 0.1
0 3 0.6 0.1
1.2 14 12
0.9 1 3 1.2
0.8 1.3 1.1
0.8 0.5 0.7
20 0.3 0.8
3.0 0.2 D.7
SUMMARY DATA IBANKFULLI
AiBKF) 6.2 WIFPA) 100
W(BKF) 132 Slope
Max d 1.4 Sinuoslt
Mean d 0.5 Area= A
W/D 27.9 Width= W
Entre re n 7 6 Depth- D
Slr Tyl~- ~iikr FKr
Area from Rura R~. r __
Hydraulic Geometry
Width Depth Area Bank Erosion Hazard Index fBEHII
Feet Feet S .Ft. Bank
0.0 0.0 0.0 Criteria Value Inde~c> Erosion
\
1.2 0.2 0.1 f3Jn1LHl18k1 H1
0.3 0.6 0.1 Rool Depthll?agk Ht
12 1.4 1.2 DONE
0.9 1.3 1.2 Root Denyty'(% )
0.8 1.3 1.1 Bank Angle(4egrees)
U.8 ~ 5 0.7 Surfac~Protection (% )
2.0 D.3 0 B Bank Materials
3.0 0.2 0.7
SUMMARY DATA ITOB) Looking upstream
A(BKF) 6.2 ~,w r
W(BKF) 13.2 ~r'~i7 ~.~ '71
Max d 1.4 I rV gq.L ~
Mean d 0.5 +~~, ll r~ ,~ Nti 4! _ t
10 15 20 25 3U 35 4D
Station (feet)
K I676121F field Data/Preserve_Tract
45 50 55 6U
~ -.d'iu. ,,~
f ~
1
~rro r~rfiF~ ; MS
~/ '~". ~ t
.F'a .. K~ hi; - ... y,.
.'r ~ ~.,;;~''i.
.~
Cross Section 16
Preserve UT4
Riffle Cross-Section

Gar G,xek
a trawl
I/ia ari Cuunty
Fiem crew:
River Basin nmantla Toae and ceor9e Lankrora
: Liale iennessea
Walera6etl: Cal Creek
Stream Ree ce: Prxserva Tract
Dratnape Area: :i.a0
Dam: 12x903
Sta4on: Lower
Feature: RA6e Gross-Sec
tion k3
STA LION HI FS ELEVATION NOTES BANKFULL (BKFI
(Feet) IFaet) IFeetl (Feel) Hytlraulic Geometry
0+000 100.00 489 5511 Witl1H DeP1M1 Area
U+o4.0 1W W 5.1] 4.8,1 Feet Feet S . Ft.
0+06.0 100 00 5 39 94 61 0 0 0.0 D.0
0+iD0 1W.00 554 94.46 2fi U1 02
0+165 10000 6.05 9'3.55 2S U.6 OB
0+184 1W U0 8.20 9980 LiOB 2.0 0.9 1a
0+20.0 1 W GO 8.4] 93 53 1 6 1 0 t o
0+21.0 iWA0 695 9305 0] 13 OB
D+11.0 t0o 00 7.29 92 ] 1 t 0 1 0 11
0+23.0 100.00 7.50 92 50 t 4 1 ] 'L2
0+26.0 1IX100 7.76 9224 U.8 1] 13
0+21.0 1W 00 ].90 92.10 1.5 18 20
0+28.2 100.00 i BB 92.12 1 0 2 0 1 9
0+29] W 00 8.10 51.90 O B 22 1]
0.304 10000 8.30 9110 U1 2.5 05
0+314 10000 8.51 9109 LBKF 14 2fi 35
U+34.0 10d OG 8.68 9174 11 2] 19
0+36.5 1G0 00 89] 91 03 1 0 2 ] G ]
0+38.5 tOllO0 9 YO 90.60 U.9 2fi L 4
D.40.0 100.00 955 x045 0.3 2.2 IY.1
0+40] 1W.00 91b 50.22 05 L2 1.1
D+423 10G.OU 9.91 900Y 1J 19 2.0
0+4].1 1W 00 10.10 8980 G4 19 4.8
0+44.5 100 00 10 19 8981 LO 1 6 3 5
0+48,0 1W.00 1029 89]1 05 21
0+4].0 10000 1G4b 89.52 IEOW TOTALS 29'] 432
0+4] B 1 W 00 10 71 89.28
0+46.0 1 W.00 11 65 00
0+49.4 1WO0 11.06 8tla4 SUMMARY BATA IBANKFULLI
0+505 10000 11 iT tl883 A1UKF) 432 W1FPA)
fi3
U+51.5 10000 1121 86)9 TW W(BKF1 31ope 001
0+52.4 10000 1112 088b ws=1 061 Maxtl Slnuosll 1.13
0+52 ] 000!1 10.]1 8029 Meml d l 5 Mea= A
D+53.2 10000 10.6] 0933 REOW W/D 104 Wltlrli= W
0+60.6 10000 10.45 0955 Enlrencllmem G 1 Deprn= D
0+5].U 10000 10.41 05.55 S11aam I e G dnnhfull= 8KF
0+590 1W,00 10.0] 89.9 ! Araa from Rural Re Tonal Curv 49
0+81.1 10000 8.5tl 9102
0*fi2A B 55 91 45 RSKF
U+62.8 10000 tl.VV 9150
O+fi48 101100 803 919]
O+fifi 0 100 00 ~ 8] 91 13
O+fiS0 10000 ]1B 92 tl1
0+]0.0 100 00 7.8] 9G l3
0+]18 t W 00 fi 59 9.f 41
6.33 HI<1B
0+7fi0 10!1.00 5l5 54.15
0*]9U 10000 540 94 fio
O+tl4.0 100011 495 9505
96
:. 95
= 94
j 93
m 92
W
Z• 91
~` 90
89
I 88

Hytlraulic Gaemelry
Wldt6 Depth Area
Feot Fee S Ft.
90 9G on
1b 0.3 U2
1U U.d U5
10 11 09
10 13 1.2
30 18 43
1.0 l] 16
tL 1.] 20
15 19 2]
o] z1 is
10 2.3 21
2fi 25 fit
15 28 65
20 32 60
15 3.3 45
0] 3.6
tfi 3] 5B
14 60 54
08 4.p 32
15 4.1 61
10 43 42
08 45 3.5
02 48
1~ 49 68
11 50 54
10 50 50
0.9 4.9 4 5
0] 45 14
GS 45 2.2
14 4a 6.1
42 102
20 3.9 81
2.1 28 ]0
1:3 23 35
00 2.2 09
1] 18 15
15 1] 6
20 10 2]
10 1]
18 04 15
1.1 01 03
546 146]
A(SKFJ 14G]
WIUKhI 54 6
a~ tl
2]
Cross Section 77
Preserve (lower)
Rittle--Cross Section
Bank Eroslan Hazertl Index (BEHII
Bank
Lriterw Value Intlax Erosion
dank HI/Ski qtr 1 9 7.4 Mgn
Root Uep111lBank IfI 1 1 very law
Roal Densely [Y'.) ]b 2.t low
dank Angle (Degrees) 10 1.9 very low
Smiece Pruleclwn (50) 65 1 ] very low
Bank Malarlals SIIUGIay 0
14 1 low
GS Iwking upslreenr

hai]N 11/FieldDaapreseive Irscr

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Cat Creek
Preserve Tract (upper)
Macon County
PEBBLE COUNT
Site: Cat Creek 7/21 /2003
Part :Amanda Todd and Geor a Lankford Preserve Tract Lon itudinal
Particle Count
Inches Particle Millimeter Riffle Run/Pool Total No. Item % Cumulativ
Silt/Cla < 0.062 SIC 4 7 11 11 % 11
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 3 1 4 4% 15%
Fine .125 - .25 A 1 4 5 5% 20%
Medium .25 - .50 N 7 8 15 15% 35%
Coarse .50 - 1.0 D 7 9 16 16% 51
.04 -.08 e Coars 1.0 - 2.0 $ 0 2 2 2% 53%
.08 - .16 Very Fine 2.0 - 4.0 2 1 3 3% 56%
.16 - .22 Fine 4.0 - 5.7 G 1 2 3 3% 59%
.22 - .31 Fine 5.7 - 8.0 R 0 0 0 0% 59%
.31 - .44 Medium 8.0 - 11.3 A 6 1 7 7% 66%
.44 - .63 Medium 11.3 - 16.0 V 3 3 6 6% 72%
.63 - .89 Coarse 16.0 - 22.6 E 5 7 12 12% 84%
.89 - 1.26 Coarse 22.6 - 32.0 L 4 2 6 6% 90%
1.26 - 1.77 ery Coars 32.0 - 45.0 S 4 3 7 7% 97%
1.77 - 2.5 a Coars 45.0 - 64.0 2 0 2 2% 99%
2.5 - 3.5 Small 64 - 90 C 0 0 0 0% 99%
3.5 - 5.0 Small 90 - 128 O 0 0 0 0% 99%
5.0 - 7.1 Large 128 - 180 $ 0 0 0 0% 99%
7.1 - 10.1 Lar e 180 - 256 L` 0 0 0 0% 99%
10.1 - 14.3 Small 256 - 362 B 0 0 0 0% 99%
14.3 - 20 Small 362 - 512 L 0 0 0 0% 99%
20 - 40 Medium 512 - 1024 D 0 0 0 0% 99%
40 - 80 r - Ve L 024 - 204 R 0 0 0 0% 99%
Bedrock BDRK 1 0 1 1 % 100%
Totals 50 50 100 100% 100%
110%
100%
90%
c
y 80%
c 70%
60%
50%
~ 40%
v 30%
20%
10%
0%
0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size (mm)
K:/67812/FieldData/Preserve Tract
1000 10000
Particle Size Distribution
Preserve Tract Longitudinal

1

1

1
1
J
APPENDIX 3
PHOTO LOG
1

Photo Log
Cat Creek, Macon County, North Carolina
~~
~.~*

;~~,
,_:
;~-=Y
,,
;. _,
~~_-
®~ ~~ -

.~; ~,
~ s
h i'p
~~ ~` ~
~

JY ~i

y ?
~
~
ups
~
~.
,C
~ 1 ~`

t ,~
~ $.
- - ~'~ i
~+~~. ~
~~~
~V ~~~~s
'~:. ~~ s~
F ~
~..
y ~ j ~ _ ii
~ '~. ~: t,
~ ~ ~ ,
~ ~

s~ _;
~_.
~~-r
"~ ~_ ..
_^

~~

r.

~1

rl

_ ~},~
f n' +~ b
' ,~ + '
_:,4.
r
_'

t

t

;~
;~e
~+> ~ .
~ &~v
~, .
~,

;'~
~~;. , ~ ,

1

1

. ~ _:
~ ~ ~.~-
,~ ,
~~ ~ - • _ ~ _ ;rf
_,: =. ~ -~
w 0 4
~~
~ ~ ~''.
}~+~-.~~ .. ~.4 ~. is ',~,~~ S ~ zr-.-
r,
~ =5
~~
~=.
', ~ r~
s rx
k'~., ,..

1

i
1

1

t

APPENDIX 4
MORPHOLOGY TABLE

~

F"
bA
N

N

Vi

7
O~

~D
00
~
Vl
~

M

Q
O
00

d
N
M
O
-•
CO
Vi M

O: ~O

O .fir ~

O O
7
N _

O
•••~
N
N

Q

Q
Vi
O
O
--~ O
00
7 O
V1
7
Vl
0
>
Q ~
^ b O ^ r
N [~ ~ ~ .-i Z N '~ O V 7 M
V7
O O
O
O O
O ~+ ~
^ M
O O Z Z ^ ~
^ O O .r
O O

C
~ 4V n cXd ~ r ~ '.". `D ~ U ._' ~ Obi M N

O
~
O
~p
t~
X O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0
.~
X
0
0
Z
V Z

C
y C
- -
~ N
~ r V ^-~ W O N
0i M
~ ~O
N ~O
•~ ~, O '~ ~ ~ 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 -~ 0 0
W
d
>
~.
~

>
00
O~
M
N
N

~D

\
i~
N

N
~
O~
00

7
N

Vi

r
h

1~
~O

7
.~.+
p

N
N
M
M
O
O

O
N
O
O
O.
N
O
N
O
O
~

N
a\

V]
7

N
N

~

7

N
O
M
~
O
M
~

O
~

O
~
y
Q
N ,~
N
N
M
.~
N
M
^
•-~
~
~

O
•-+
M
O
O
M
l
00
C
O •
~
d M N iA V1 O O O
L
a

y
O
~
~
~
~
~ ~1
~ --~
~ ~O ~ N l~
O
M
~
~
Ctl z M ~ - N ~ ~ O
O O
O O
O O
O N V~ O O
t
U

q
~
K
~
~ ~
M co
^' vi
O O
O O
O N
O
~
vNi
O
N
•~ ~. O O N
N M
N
O
O
O
O O N O O
W
F„ bL r 00 M l~ M 7 .~ M Q d O~ O
O N N N O N O ~
~O 7
00 R
M M
~O d d O O M_ _M

'~ >
Q
~ 00
~ O
.: O
N
O
N Vl
00 OD
O
^
z O
N
'~ M
.,,~
~O M
~
C
R
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
.i
.:
O
O
Z
~• ~p `p
~••~
O
O
O
^
O
~
O
~' 7
N X ~
~ 00 l~
~ N
N O r
O ~ ~
O [~
N M
~O •~
~ N
~
Z O ~
C. ~", O N ~ O
O O O
O O N N O O
V

y CC ~ N O~ ~ - oMO N ~n
•,^~, ~c
G O M d' N O
O O
O O
O O
O - 0 0 0
W
N
E, ~
>
N N
O~ O
M ^ ~
•..i M
? ~
~? ~-•~
N M
e
Q r
O~
Q O\
00 M
7 l~ 7
1~ ~ ~
O M
N 7
O ~,
N ^
.r N
[~
~O
Q
d O O _M M

^
ice. Q ~ N ^ M V1 M O .. h
.. Z ..: Z N ~p N N
Vi 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O ^ N O O Z Z N N O O
O O
xtl ~ N O ~ O N O ~ r 0 l~
R '~ 7 c
~ N
~ O M ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ - O
Z O O O O O
V
C ~ ~ V 00 M

• ~~cc~ W V M ~
~ 0 0 0 0 v1 7 v'1 7
Ye .G O N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0
W
~
Y ~
> 00
R 7
M OO
^ D`
l~ 00
7 00
b r
M ~
Q\ O
M
Q M
l~
Q `O
Vl 7
00 M
N ~O
N .Ni
0 N
0 „^.
0 M
0 00
0 7
00 ~D
N ~O
7 00
M M
~ O
~ O
N ~
0 N
0 ~
0
C °~ ~ N M ao Vl N ,.. ~. ~. .. Z •-~ M N l~ O O O O N .~ O O O ~ N N 0 ~ "'~
0.
~

d
C
C _

~
~

~

X
ro

~O
'~

O
~

~

N

~

MO

~

~O

O~
~

O
0

N
~n

O
O
Z N ~ N 7 ~ QOi 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O N N O --~
~ Q
z

C
m
C
~
~ ~O
~O l~
N T
O 0
O 0 0
O
~
~
0
0

k
~
O
N
~
~ O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0
'~
-
0
0
W
blI
> ~
N ^
~ M
O~ ~
M 7
O M
~ 7
N [~
M
~ .•
r M
r M
N 1~
O ~~„~ ^'
C 7
O N
O N
O M
O 0
V~
~D N
N ~O
7 M
,.:i r
~ O
~ r r
~
y Q N ~
M ^ N ^ M P,~ .-: .--i .-n N ^i M ~
N r O O O O ..i .: O O .-+ M ~O ... O
O O
O .•-i
C
C
~ o ,~
r
V y
V
V1
Xd
~
~ ~
O' ,~
'~
O _
r
0
~p
•d
N c O
N
~
~ oo
O O O O O O~
- N
N V
C
O
~-
y d
z ,c O O O O

k

W
C ^

~

~
-
~
N
7
l~
O
O
O
~O
O _

O

~

~

O

-
O - ~
- M
V O
O O
O O
O O
O O O O O

~ M
O N
N
O
N
N N
h
M
7 M
00
N

7
^
00
~
1~
N
O\

00
~
N N
0
0 O
7 00
0 R
N M
N
M
t~
~
~
M
M
O [~
~O M

~D

~

~ O

N _M

N

O
~ Q
~
N
.--i
N
N
M
~
^
..i
O
.•-i
.w
O
7
Mr 00 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0
'-:
~--~
O
..r
~
O~
7
7
O
O
~
•
y . O O
~
w
C •%
O
t ~ ~
V
~
~
O
~
~
r
00
~
O
~
~
~
~
O
=; z
~~

r! C
~
n
oo T
M O~ r ^' N
7
0
0
O
W ~ O N ~ M
cF 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O O O O O
y C
O bD
> 4\
~ ~ R
00
N ~ ~O
Vi ~ 00
[~ N
M
Q l~
V1 ~O
~ 7
r V)
O~ 00 ~O ~
O O
O M
O O
O V1
f+; 00
Vl N
M 00
M ~
~ O
~ N
N M
~•-~ V1
~•-~ ..r
C
Q ^ ~ O N ^ N O .•+ 7' N N O ..i M M 0 0 0 0 .r N O O M ~ r 0 0 ..+
..l L
O O O

d
~
U
N
ro
N
O
N
~
O _
N
~
1~
~
Cd ^ ~ - N O O O N M O O
V C N 7 O O O O
z
e~
c

~

O

O

O
ti R C O
M vi
M oo
~D ~

~n O

O O

O N

O O

O
O M
~n O
O O
O
W tj ~ O ~ ~' N O O O O O - 0 0
y O
p
~ b4
> vi
~ .~
^
~•-~ t~
~O ~
~ ~D
00 ~
~ M
4\ M
~
Q t~
Vl ~O
~ 7
r M
a N
~ .--i
~ o0
O 7
O ~n
O V1
O V1
M a0
N N
M a0
M ~
~
O O
r O
0p _~ yOi
~
„
d~ Q N r ~D ~ O '~ N N O .~ M M 0 0 0 0 '~ N O O ~ ~ 4C 00 O
O O
O ,,,~
V U
C
d O
C
7
N
~
N
O r
N ~
O, O D, V O
N
O~
h
~
CC W
'= V ...i ~ '-'~ N N ~ O
O O
O O
O O
O N M O O
U ~
~ O
O
s
LL
}'
•~ O ~ O
M ~n
M o0
~D 7

~n ~O

O OO

O ON

O 00

O ~n
O M
~n O
O O
O
W 3 ~ O --~ 'n N O O O O O - 0 0
4. ~ o o 0
t •C .
b 0. ~ 3 ro N U U L
~
~ Gl
' • 'b
3 ~ U
~ ro 4~ L~+

u
N d ~
ro
`~' ~
w
~
t
°~.. ~
~
~ ~
~
cn ~,
E ~,
w

a i ~ ~ ~ ro L ~ ~ ~ E b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~, 3 ,~
~, a' ~ , ~
w oi~ u
~ ~ ,~ c ~ ~ a p, 3 ~ ~ .d c ~ cC `n ~ ~ ~ ~ d > Q ¢ CC Y ~ v

o ~
~
A a.
A i
~
~~
o
~
b
b
~
w
3
3 ~
a
w y
S
~ ~
~
¢
U ~
°' ~
~ d ~ ~
a
~ own
a „
o ro
~
~ N G ~
Q s a ~
~ U o ~ 0 0 o ~
c a ~
C ro o a ¢, c ~ a, o ° a E ~ ° U
.-~ v~ ° ~

G
b
p
v
~

~
U
a
.b
C
ro
.~

d
•`""
G
O
a
v
~
~
ti
b
b
b
h
~
.-~
O
•~
a-
i
R
~
w
~
~
O
ti
~
O

~
~
s.
...
~
~
~+
T
C
>,
~ _
rn
~ ~ ~ ~ °' ~ C ° ro ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro ° ° ° ° ° `" ° ~ :b '" ~ ° :ti o ° v ~ ro ~ ro ~ c
L w
w w
~Q W W 3 K
W ~ x c
a
W o
a ~ ~ a .
U u; ~ ~ ~ a o
a o
a i
.
a o
a o
a c~ o
a r.~ C7 R: a! o
a C7 v~ b o
o
v Q > .
U > 3 ~n
3
O
r y
O y
O ~
O
C ,~,
W
O ti
~. ~
v~ U
O .~
~ O
~ L
b w
O
O ~'
U U
~ O
t >
.'C.,.
V C
A. ~y
~' t
U ~'
U •b
O U
G. .L.~
~ h
«~ ro
O ~•
N G
.~ U
~ 3
b
~y O
}.., M
U U
b 'C
b
~ C
C
-0 3
•3 0
3 ~
~ O
ai .~
.D ~
~ ~
N 'C
A 'd
C ro
O
ro
U ~ i/1
L" U
~ ~
i ~
~ O
U
~ >
> '.+
ro
~ _V
S.: ~
C
3 ~
o ro
~~ M
~ ~
R a=.+
U
~ `
•C eroi
~3 on
3 ~'
o .o
~_ ~
3 ~
U
~ x
V C
w

C ~
> O
O O
~ O
1/
Q O
7 O
0 O
0 O
Q
Q
Q
Q VI
N O
M O
V 00
0 ~O
0 00
7 00
0 ~
7 „Ny O_ N
O N 00
O N ~D O~ 00
~
Q
Q
N
Q r
~
O~

Q )
N
Z
O
~
M
~.,~
Z
z
Z
Z
a
7 V~ i
fry 0
r 0
':
M
~
O 00 O O O O O
... N
"'~ .~
O l
O z z ~ N Z O ~
(~ N ~p N i
O X 0 0 0 0 G
C
.
a~ ~ ~ ~ ° o ° ~ ~ ~ o o o o o o o ± = ~
L U M ~c
L ~ oo ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~
~ ~
v .-' .~ O ^
~
~ U ^. ~ i O O O O
C
v
~'"
a
G
O
~
O
M
~
in
^
^
~,
r
o
oo
o
~
~

00
~

0
~

0
~

0
~

0
~
o,
O
^
~
Q,
o
~ _
~ N ~ N M O N ~O ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+' Y ~ a0 f7 M1 .. p "" M O O R ~ M fV O O ~ 0 .N.i ~p r O ^: 0 0 7 7 N 7 y 0 p ppp r N ~
~ y Q ~ ^ N a N ~ ~ 'r ~--i N M N O M O~ N N 1~ ~ ~ 0
O O 0
O O "'i N O O „
N ~ N N O O ~
L 0
0 C
U
~
d 7 M X p ~ oOG ~ W ~C ~ ~ W Ori O ~ O ~ ~
W
a ` .r c
d
~ ~ ~ 7 d' N M M M
oo ~ ~ N ^ N M
O O
;
~ ^ O O O O M
V C
C
.fl
d
L
w ~
G
MO
0
0
~
oc
~O
~n
ao
oho
~
~ _
O
N
0
O
~
O~
O
V
a
~
N
~
~
~
~
^
~
,~
N
~ o
a 0
o
o 0
o
o
~
o
o
~ -° a o 0
.~ ~
b ¢. b ~ cUd fJ ~ V L
~
y ^o w ~ ro cy ~
H Q w z w `i' ~
u ro L m ~ ~ ~ a

~
r 'c's
ro
w
--
~
~°-
~
~
o
d
~
v
~
'"
C
'ro
°
`~'
~
,c
'3
ro 3 3 °'
s
,.~
w ~'
p
a cC ~ cG ~ ~~ '~ cq ' a - °D > ~ 01
,~ ~ u.
~
C~
s
G
~ ;,~ n.
v o.
~ >
cc :b
G ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ,
,
~
~ ~ d
>
d
d
CL .~ on
~ ~
o
c y
v, Q ~
°' ~
E
~ ro
~ t
~ c b ~
b ~ U
3
3 ~
a U ~ o y b4
~ v
n
v v ~
ri. d
~ v
a
is °n
~ C
„ a
o w
o
' s
v
o
~ Q
~
v
b y
' .
x ~
~ u
w
$
a m
~ w
°
i
i
i w
o eq
~ o
°'
c
~ .
°
o
o
°
v
o
o
°
a
8
E
v
a
~
~ ..
~,
~'
~ ; ~ ~ , , ~
~ b °' ~ ~ `x° x° ~ ~ ro c°i ~ ~ ~ ° ° ° ° `" ° ~ :b `~ ~ ° :b `r a ~ ~ c
G cr.
m w
m cz,
m w
m 3 F
w 3 x' m $
n. ~ `
~ a. ,
U r~ ~ ~ ~ cC o
a o
a ~
a o
a o
o. c~ o
a ~ C7 "
a_ rx o
a c7 ~
v~ °
b o
o
-d Q ~
> ,
U ~
J 3 rn

bL
> ~ M O~
~O O
.• .•~
M N
N C O
~
.r M
7 M O~ ~O N a V1
r.
O N
~ 1~
~D O~
l~ r7 00 ~
O O
O N
O 0
O 7
R N
7 ~O
N O
7
Q l~
Q ~' 7
7 r
N Vl
N
~

^ Q ~ b O ~-. .--i h ~ 0 .-i .r .w N ~ ap M O~ N N [~ N ~ 0 0 0 0 ^' N O O Z Z N N O
O O
O ..
~
'fl ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ d. ~ ~ ~ ~ M N l0 ~ O M O ~ N M V

~
O
U ~
+
O

~

7

M

_-

V

N

M

M

oo

N

t~

0

0

0

0

-'

M

O l

O
d
tom.
~L ~ M
O~ M
oo N
~ `D
co ~
~ N
vi M
oo V
co ~n
~ 7
N O_ N
O ~ N
O N
~ Vl
O O
N 7
~ M ~ ^ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~O O
O O O
O O O ^ O O
bL
>
Q;
~ Vl
l~ Vl
'. ~
N N
~„~ ~
f7 Vi
~O
ti M
7
~?
O~ O~
~-+ O~
O~ O
N Vl
~-.
O N
rl t~
b O~
~ M
7 N
^; ~O
O M
O 00
O 7
O 7
7 N
R ~O
N O
'7
Q pp
Q N
7 N ~_
Q a [~ O .: M ^ ~ O .. "" '~ M N 00 M O~ N N [~ N n 0 0 0 0 "" N O O Z Z M M O O .+
M O O

.d 7 N ~ W W ~ ~ ~O ~ ~ M ~ N ~ O M O ~ N M V

O
U
O ~~cc
G
~
M
N
~t
N
M
M
oo
~
oNp
O
O
O
O
'-'
M
O l
O
a
0
L
a ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ W 0~o N r ~ O N
0 O ~ O O V
~ ,,, ,,, ~ ~ o 0 0
~ M r p
O V~ N N Obi ~
OD M
7 M O~ ~ ~ n
• V~
^+
O N
.~ t~
b O~
r r N .Ni O ~ O 7
7 N
~Y ~p
N O
7 Q Q "" S O O N
>
Q .-i N ~
D .: M N
n ~ ~ .r ~ ~ ..i .r.
i M O~ N N [~ p O O O O ^' N O O '~ Z M M O O '~
N 7 N ~„~ M „
w 0 0 0 0

7 1~ X ~
l~ ~
O O. M ~
~ N O ^~ °
M O ~ M ~ ~ O M M ~
~
U ~
O ~y
~
~
~ ~
~D 00
7
N ~D
M
M M
Co
7 00
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 ~
^ N
M M
O ~
O
O
d
4
a
~
~
~
O
~t
~ r
~ V
~ oG ~ ~ m ~ M U
~ O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 ~ ~
N ~ - ~ ^ ~ N oo O O O O O - O O
;D Q' h
N ~ N N ~ n .r 7 ~: ~: N ~p M ~ O N ~ r o0 ~
~ Q Q Q Q 7 ~ N 7 Q Q Vl N O O O
~ Q N Q N ~..i /~ N .r .-i "'i ..i ~ ~ ^ M O~ N N l~ ~ 0
0 Z Z Z Z ~..i N O O Z ~. .r. ~ O O .-i
y~ N O O
H
~y
7
7
i
S
w
~
~
N
M
~
N
O
-~
0
~
¢
Q
Q
Q
O
M
M
~O
~ ~"~ M' c
,c ~ ~ O V N ri <+i oo ~ ~ z z z z ~ M 0 0
y
O
o.
~ ~ M ~ ' ~ ~ ~ Q Q Q Q ~ ~ O V
p„ ~, ~ ~ vii OG
,--, ~O
~p V
1
^ GO
^ ~ ~ ~ ~-. z Z Z O ^ O O

bA Vi O~ N .r M ~
M
~ M 00
M r ~ N r ~ 7 ~ """ ti N 7 N ~D O O 0`
O b VNi
>
Q
N M .: N ^ N
/~ N
N V;
.~ .w ~p
.~-i .
.'i .r' ~ V
'i M
~ ~-.
M O
O~ ~-.
N ~
N [~
1~ ~
' r
ma O O O O 7
^" 7
N N
O 7
O Z z ~ p
p
~ O O .i
~ ~ U
! „
y 0 0 0 0 ' O O

L
M1VI

~

~
X
W
M
~
~
M
~
~
N
O
^~
~
~
~
U
N
1~
M
O
M
M
~O
'O
y
U
N ~
'~ M
,. O
~ N
N ~
~
N ~
M ~
M M
o0
~ 0o
r O
O O
O O
O O
O ~
^ N
M M
O V~
O
O
d
~
~
~
a ~ O+ ~ N oo ~ ~ 00 ~ M ~ O O O O ~ ~ ON
,~ ~ M V ..-. ~O ^ .~ ~ ~ ~F O O O O O - O O

n' bA
> ~O
~-+ 00
00 ~ ~
M!
~ N
N N
Vi 7
V?
..w M
7
M
O: 7
O 01
l~ `D
~ N
..
O N
~+ r
~p O~
l~ n
~O N
~
Q
Q
Q
Q 7
7 N
7 ~O
N O
7
Q
Q O
~ O~
~ [~
O ~D
O
^;
C ~ Q N M ~,., N /~ N nr ..+ ~ ~ ~ ,~ O~ M O~ N N l~ ~ O z Z '~ Z .~ N O O '~' z '~ ~
'O .
r O O
~
ed
3 ~

7

VI

cXd

M

~

°

~

~

~

v;

Q

Q

Q

Q

~

O ~
'
U
N
~
O
~
~ 00
V
N ~
M
M M
00
~
~
Z
Z'
~-+
Z
^ N
M M
O Vl
O
y ~ N
y ~
O
O
0.
~
iC.i
py ~
C
~
'-'
M
~
~
M
~
co
~
~
N
v~
M
o0
~
0o
M
M
r
~

Q

Q

Q

Q
N
~
vl
O
O
N
~
7 M 7 ^ ~p .~ ^ ~ M Z Z Z Z O -~ 0 0
~
~ bA V~ C~ M 00 O~ N ~D l~ M 00 N M
N .~+ O
~ M N r a
~ M
O ~ 00 O M M 7 N ~O O O V~ N

>
Q

~
~
~i
N
l\
-i
C
i
.y
7
i
M
~

N
uj
~•
O
~
~D
l
~
~
0
0
0
0
7
t7
N
V
Z
Z
7
VOl
O _
O
ri
/~ . .- .- .- ~ M M M O~ N N l 7 „y 0 0 0 0 "" N O O O O
L
CC

~ ~ V O ~O ~ O O ~
F"
~ `C
U O ~ ~ ~ O
~ ~
V N ~
M M M
oo ~
N O O O O ^ N
M M
O O
.
~ V 0 0 0 0
'O
d
d ~ OOi o°o ~ 0~0 ~ vNi ~ oho V ~ ,"' ~ p p ON+ O ON

0.
~ l~
N N
N ~
D\
^
~
^
^
~ [~
N
O
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
C
O
' b-0
> N
~O 7
ry
~
.
N OQ
..w N
N
r
r N
M
.r
N M
7
M M
O 'V'
M 0:
B ~
..
O N
.. r
~p ~
t~ M
N N
b r
0 M
0 ~
0 ~
0 7
7 N
7 ~O
N O
7
Q
Q
a
M ~
M .~-~
N
~
~
~ Q '. N . .w /~ rr .i N N M '7 M O~ N N 1~ 7 ~ 0 0 0 O '~ N O O Z ~-. ~ 00 O C "'
3 L
n
O y
'~ Y
CG
7
N
~ V1
N ~
~G ~
M
~ O~
~
~
~
M N
N N
~ O
N ~
O l~
M ~C
O
~

~
~
U
"'~
~
~
n
~
~
0
7
N

^
M
M
00
O
v~
M
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
^ N
M M
O ~n
O
~
a ~ N ,_,
0
L
a~
~
^
~ M
r
oG
~
Vl
W
W
~
O
O
O
O
O
~
~
O
~
~ O
M ~
N
O
'-
~
-
^
~ O~
N
,'~,
O
O
O
O
O
^
0
0
C
~ b~
> N
~p 7
N
~
N 00
~y N
N
A N
M
.r
N M
7
~! M
~ ~
M! O~
~ Vi
.+
O N
.-i l~
~p 01
[~ ~
N N
~
Q
Q
Q
Q 7
7 N
7 ~O
N O
7
Q
Q
pOp
~ V01 7 N
O
y aEi Q ~--~ N '~ /~ "~ N ~ M 7 M O~ N N l~ ~ N z Z z Z r N O O Z z 7 7 0 0 ,..
a
c
o. i
y
.
W 7 N ~ N ~p ~ ~ ~p ~ ~ ^,. N ~ Q Q d Q ~ ~
d
n U ~ -++
~~-
G ~ ~ O ~ N M M ~
~
00 ~ M 'z' z Z Z ^ N
M M
O O
=
C N
o. c
~°, 3
0. ~ ~ M
~ ~, O 7 ~ ~ o
O ~ ~ O z z Z Z p ~ p p
~ M N N

~
p
a~
¢, N
CL

S"
'
t L
y
~ ¢'
~ ~ ~
Cn
a
.+ .y ~ V Uj
y ~

4

r 'd ~

~ `~ N
`+- ~
V ~

~ ro d
L
i d W-„ ~ U ~ ~ ~ 1
.. ~ y
~
E E on ~.. ro c w
~ `~ L .w..
~ y ~ ,
,
3 3 s _ ~

~
~
'
"
A
o
.U
,~
a
~
.c
~
x
2
~'
°~
~
v'
;b
~ia
cC
~
w
~
a
E
s
b
~3
ro
~
v
>
`
b
.y
~
ro
'~
~
r1
ro
v°i

v
^
~
w
~w

,_

--

~
ors
¢
3
°
°

~
cu
Q
~
°' .

~ _

~

m

a ~
cn ~
Q P.
~
Ll ~

~ C
v
E E
_
~ E
.~
~
a
~ v
b ~
b
~, ^
U ro

3

3 C
v
a ~
U
s
o
o
y bA
o ~
u
a ~

o .
,
w
~
~
a ~
d
v Q

~
m
a C

~ y
on
~ ^
m ~
a.
o v
L
o
'N s N G
ro X Q s a ~
~ .
~ o
L v
~
4 o m_ w
o ~ ~ ~ w
o 0
c o
a o4 ~ o °.
~ ~
¢, a.
o o ¢, o _o „
~ £ ~ c .a ,~ ~ ° y''
C
y .b O a~ cd
~ ~
~ ^d
N ~
~ ..L
Q .
C O
Ci L
~ ~
G ti
C b
~' b
L, b
L, n
~ ~
~l O a~ v i1
m
u
m O
y ti [n O
C/] V] L
a+ ~ ~ ~ >, ^ >. ~ n
E w w ~ b ~ °' ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c`tli c`tli ~ ° ° ° ° ° `~_' ° ~ ~° w ~ $ ~ o ° h b ~ ~ ~ ro c
O m oa m w
w 3 m 3 x w a ~ ~ a .
U r~ ~ ~ ~' a o
a o
a L
o. o
a o
a cG o
a ~ U ri o: a C7 v~ -o o
o
v Q > .
U > 3 v~
^r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ r

APPENDIX 5
' SOIL DATA AND USACE WETLAND DATA FORMS
1
1

7
1

Cat Creek Soil Profiles
Swartout Tract
Profile 1 (Soil Boring B-30)
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-6 7.5 YR 4/4 --
6-12 10 YR 3/6 --
12-20 7.5 YR 4/4 --
20-27 7.5 YR 5/6 --
22-35 7.5 YR 8/1 7.5 YR 6/6
7.5 YR 5/8
Swartout Tract
Profile 2 (Soil Boring B-31)
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-4 7.5 YR 3/3 --
4-13 7.5 YR 4/4 5 YR 4/6
5 YR 5/2
13-15 7.5 YR 3/1 5 YR 3/4
15-26+ 10 YR 7/2 5 YR 4/6
Swartou t Tract
Profile 3 (Soil Boring B-32)
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-4 7.5 YR 2.5/2 --
4-21 7.5 YR 5/2 2.5 YR 4/4
21-27 10 YR 5/1 7.5 YR 4/6
27-41 10 YR 2.5/1 --
Swartout Tract-Upper Field
Soil Boring B-33
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-20 2.5 YR 4/4 --
20-24 5 YR 4/4 5 YR 4/6
24-33 7.5 YR 4/1 7.5 YR 5/8
33-47 7.5 YR 2.5/1 7.5 YR 6/2
7-30-03
Project 67812
Mottle Abundance Texture
-- Loam-small cobbles and rocks
-- Loam-small cobbles and rocks
-- Sandy loam-gravelly
-- Sandy clay-gravelly
25%
4%
Cobble layer at 12 inches
7-30-03
Project 67812
Mottle Abundance Texture
-- Loam
20% Silt loam- micaceous
10%
15% Silt loam
45% Sandy clay
Mottle Abundance
12%
35%
7-30-03
Project 67812
Texture
Loam
Silt loam
Silt loam
Silt-partially decomposed
organic material
Gravel at 40 inches
Mottle Abundance
7%
20%
5%
7-30-03
Project 67812
Texture
Loam
Silt loam
Sandy loam
Sandy loam-small gravel

1
1
1
Parker Tract
Soil Boring B-46
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-20 5 YR 5/6 5 YR 3/3
7.5 YR 3/4
2.5 YR 4/8
20-26 2.5 YR 4/4 7.5 YR 5/1
7.5 YR 3/4
2.5 YR 4/8
26-39 7.5 YR 4/1 7.5 YR 5/2
Parker Tract
Data Point DP-1 -Hydric
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-3 7.5 YR 3/3 --
3-6 7.5 YR 3/3 7.5 YR 4/1
6-11 7.5 YR 7/2 5 YR 5/8
11-17 7.5 YR 6/1 10 YR 5/8
17-26+ 7.5 YR 4/1 --
Parker Tract
Data Point DP-2 -Hydric
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-8 7.5 YR 3/2 --
8-12 7.5 YR 4/2 7.5 YR 3/4
12-18+ N 3/- --
Parker Tract
Data Point DP-3 -Non-hydric
Depth Matrix Mottles
0-15 7.5 YR 3/4 --
15-18 5 B 4/1 7.5 YR 3/4
18-26+ 7.5 YR 6/1 5 YR 4/6
7-30-03
Project 67812
Mottle Abundance Texture
20% Silt loam
-- -saprolite-rocklike
-- -saprolite-rocklike
30% Silt loam-
-- -saprolite-rocklike
-- -saprolite-rocklike
5% Silt clay-small rounded gravel
and partially decomposed
organic material
10-2-03
Project 67812
Mottle Abundance Texture
-- Silt loam
25% Silt loam-
20% Clay loam
30% Sandy clay
-- Sandy loam
10-2-03
Project 67812
Mottle Abundance Texture
-- Silt loam
10% Silt
-- Silt loam-
10-3-03
Project 67812
Mottle Abundance Texture
-- Silt loam and loam
10% Silt clay loam
35% to 45% at 26 in Sandy clay

Preserve Tract 7-31-03
Data Point DP-4 - Hydric (Wetland)
Depth Matrix Mottles
Mottle Abundance Project 67812
Texture
0-2 5 YR 3/3 -- -- Sandy clay loam
2-15 5 YR 2.5/1 5 YR 5/1
5 YR 6/6 40%
8% Silt clay loam
15-31+ 5 YR 5/1 5 YR 2.5/1 45% Sandy loam

Preserve Tract -
8 1-03
' Data Point DP-5 -Non-hydric (Non-we
Depth Matrix Mottles tland)
Mottle Abundance Project 67812
Texture
0-2 7.5 YR 3/2 -- -- Silty clay loam
2-9 10 YR 3/6
9-14 5 YR 3/2 __ __ Loam
Silt loam
14-25 5 YR 3/1 5 YR 3/3 3% Silty clay loam
1 25-34+ 5 YR 5/1 5 YR 4/6 10% Clay-massive

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator: George Lankford
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No X
[s the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes X No
Is the arcs a potential Problem Arca? Ycs X No
(If needed, explain in remarks.)
Date: !0/2/2003
County: Macon
State: NC
Community ID: Hydric Soil 3
Transect ID: Parker Tract
Plot ID: DP-1
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator
Andro 0 on vir inicus Herb FAC-
Juncus e usus Herb FACW+
Solida o canadensis Herb FACU
Vernonia noveboracensis Herb FAC+
Aster unicezrs Herb OBL
Diodia vir iniana Herb FACW
Cy erns stri~osus Herb FACW

Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 71
Remarks: Area mowed in July/Augzest
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks:)
Stream, Lakc or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surtace Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in.
Depth to Frcc Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Lcavcs
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: !0 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Community ID: Hydric Soil3 Projcct/Sitc: Cat Crcck
Transect [D: Parker Tract Date: 10/2/2003
Plot ID: DP-1
SOILS
Map Unit Namc Drainage Class: oorly or very oor[y
(Series and Phase): Nikwasi, fine sandy loam, 0-2%
-- Confirm Mapped Type?
Yes
Taxonomy Subgroup: mesic Cumulic Kumaquepts X No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 7.5 YR 3/3 -- -- Silt Loam
3-6 7.5 YR 3/3 7.5 YR 4/1 25% Silt Loam
6-11 7.5 YR 7/2 5 YR 5/8 20% Cla Loam
11-17 7.5 YR 6/1 10 YR 5/8 30% Sand Cla
U-26+ 7.5 YR 4/1 -- -- Sandy Loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Rc gimc Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditio ns Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERbIINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present'? X Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? X Yes No
is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland° X Ycs No
Remarks: Data Point located near Parker gauge ! - at a bearing of 315 degrees at ~ 0 feet
Site is on. fairway of abandoned golf'course. There is evidence of soil manipulation across the site.

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Cat Creek Date: 10/2/2003
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT County: Macon
Investigator: George Lankford State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No X Community ID: H dric Soil 3
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Ycs X No Transect ID: Parker Tract
Is the area a potential Problem Arca? Ycs X No Plot ID: DP-2
(If needed, explain in remarks.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator
Rubzrs ar utus Herb FACU
Juncus e sus Herb FACW+
Solida o canadensis Herb FACU
Vernonia noveboracensis Herb FAC+
Cv erzts stri ostrs Herb FACW
Dichanthelium clandestinum Herb FACW
Clematis vir iniana Herb FAC+

Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 71
Remarks: Area mowed in July/August
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks:)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in.
Depth to Frcc Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Lcavcs
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 11 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

ProjccdSitc: Cat Crcck Community ID: Hydric Soil 3
Date: 10/2/2003 TransectlD: Parker Tract
Plot ID: DP-2
' SOILS

f

1

1

Map Unit Namc
(Series and Phase): Nikwasi,line sandy loam, 0-2%

Taxonomy Subgroup: mesic Cumulic Humaquepts Drainage Class: oorly or very oorly
Confirm Mapped Type?
Yes
X No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-8 7.5 YR 3/2 -- -- Silt Loam
8-12 7.5 YR 4/2 7.5 YR 3/4 10% Silt
12-18+ N 3/- -- -- Silt Loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Rcgimc
Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in SurFace Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils' List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? X Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? X Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? X Ycs No
Remarks: Data Point located near wetland point A-2~ - at a bearing of'152 degrees at 30 feet
Site is on. fairway of abandoned golf course. There is evidence of soil manipulation across the site.

f

1

DATA FORi~i
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Applicant/Owncr: NCDOT
lnvcstigator: George Lankford
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No X
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Ycs X No
Is the area a potential Problem Arca'? Ycs X No
(If needed, explain in remarks.)
Date: !0/3/2003
County: Macon
State: NC
Community [D: Non-hvdric soil
Transect ID: Parker Tract
Plot [D: DP-3
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator
Plante o lanceolate Herb FAC
Solarium carolinense Herb FACU
Cvrilla racemi ore Herb FACW
Tridens./lavus Herb FACU
Verbesina alterni olia Herb FAC
Andro 0 on vir inieus Herb FAC-

Percent ofDominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 50
Remarks: Area mowed in July/August.
Herbaceous vegetatio present only
.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks:)
Stream, Lakc or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Dritt Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in.
Depth to Frcc Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Lcavcs
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >26 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

Project/Sitc: Cat Crcck Community ID: Non-hydric soil
Datc: 10/3/2003 Transect ID: Parker Tract
Plot ID: DP-3
' SOILS

C
r

Map Unit Namc
(Series and Phase): Nikwasi, fine sandy loam, 0-2%

Taxonomy Subgroup: mesic Cumzdic Humaquepts Drainage Class: oorl or verv oorly
Confirm Mapped Type?
Yes
X No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-15 7.5 YR 3/4 -- -- Silt Loam and Loam
15-18 5 B 4/1 7.5 YR 3/4 10% Sil Cla Loam
18-26+ 7.5 YR 6/ 1 7.5 YR 4/6 35% to 45% with de th Sand Cla

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Rcgimc
Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Hydric Soils Present`? Yes X No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Ycs X No
Remarks: Site is on fairway of'abandoned golf course. There is evidence of soil manipulation across the site

e
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(198'7 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Cat Creek
NCDOT
tnvcsttgator: George Lankford
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No X
[s the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Ycs X No
[s the area a potential Problem Arca? Ycs No X
(If needed, explain in remarks.)
Date: 7/31/2003
County: Macon
State: NC
Community ID: Wetland-Old Pond
Transcct ID: Preserve Tract
Plot ID: DP-4
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum Indicator
Dichanthelium clandestinum Herb FACW
Eu atorium er oliatum Kerb FACW+
ster uniceus Flerb OBL
Mimulus rin yens Herb OBL
Im atiens ca ensis Kerb FACW
Pol gonum sa ittatum Herb OBL
Juncus e sus Herb FACW+
Clematis virginiana Vine FAC+

PercenC of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100
Remarks: Area is within a small breached pondhed
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks:)
Stream, Lakc or Tidc Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in.
Depth to Frcc Water in Pit: 4 (in.) Water-Stained Lcavcs
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

0

i~
Projcct/Sitc: Cat Creek Community ID: Wetland-Old Pond
Date: 7/31/2003 TranseetlD: Preserve Tract
Plot ID: DP-4
SOILS

u
1
1
Map Unit Name Drainage Class: n/a
(Series and Phase): Udorthents-Urban Land complex, 0-5% Confirm Mapped Type?
X Yes
Taxonomy Subgroup: Udorthents No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 5 YR 3/3 -- -- Sandy Cla Loam
2-I S 5 YR 2.5/1 5 YR 5/1 40% Sil Cla Loam
5 YR 5/6 8%
15-31+ 5 YR 5/t 5 YR 2.5/I 45% Sand Loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Mois[urc Rcgimc Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Law-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Area upslope from top of bank slope into old pond.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? X Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? X Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? X Ycs No
Remarks: Site is in old breached pondbed beside fairway of abandoned gof course.
There is evidence ~f soil manipulation across the site.
Data Point is locate ~S. feet from wetland paint W-8.
1

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
NCDOT
Investigator: Ceor~e Lankford
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No X
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Ycs X No
Is the area a potential Problem Arca? Ycs X No
(If needed, explain in remarks.)
County: Macon
State: NC
Community ID: Non-wetland
TranscctlD: Preserve Tract
Plot ID: DP-5
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Spccics Stratum indicator Dominant Plant S ccics Stratum Indicator
Dichanthelium clandestinum Herb FACW
Rubus ar utus Herb FACCI

Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 50
Remarks: Area is near a small breached pond.
Area recently mowed and only short herbaceous vegetation present.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks:)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surtace Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in.
Depth to Frcc Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Lcavcs
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >34 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

Projcct/Sitc: Cat Crcck Community ID: Nan-wetland
Date: 8/1/2003 Transco ID: Preserve Tract
Plot ID: DP-S
SOILS

1

1

Map Unit Namc Drainage Class: n/a
(Series and Phase): Udorthents-Urban Land complex, 0-5% Confirm Mapped Type?
X Yes
Taxonomy Subgroup: Udorthents No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 7.5 YR 3/2 -- -- Silty Cla Loam
2-9 10 YR 5/6 Loam
9-14 5 YR 3/2 Silt Loam
14-25 5 YR 3/1 5 YR 3/3 3% Silt Cla Loam
25-34+ SYR3/I SYR4/6 l0% Cla -massive

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Rcgimc Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleycd or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Area upslope from top of bank slope into old pond.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Hydric Soils Present? X Yes No
is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Ycs X No
Remarks: Data point is outside of old pond and is in the fairwcrv of abandoned go f course.
There is evidence of soil manipulation across the site.
Data Point is locate ~2lfeet.from wetland point W-7.

1
1

0

t

1

APPENDIX 6
HYDROGRAPHSAND
PRECIPITATION DATA

IIIIIII~ ~ I~ IIII~ I~ III. r r I~ ~ ~ I~ I~ ~ ~ I~ I~ I~ III
Cat Creek Mitigation Site
Macon County, NC
10
9
a
~ ~
t
C 6
C
;O 5
Q 4
.~
~' 3
a
2
1
0
i~l ~ Daily Precipitation
- - - - - -Range of Normal
~! • Monthly Total
i
30-Day Rolling Total
.1 - ~
..
~, ' --'
II
I
II
'~•
i
I
J
4 February
F M A M
J J A
2003 Pricipitation
S O N D

i. ~ ~ i>• ~ i~ ~ it ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ w ~^^~
5
~ 0
s
C -5
C
~ -10
W -15
L
Q~
~.+
3 -20
c
~ -25
O
i
-30
-35
Swartout Tract -Upper Field

J F M A M J J A S O N D
2003
3 February 2004
Gauge S9 Gauge S10 Jurisdictional Water Table Soil Surface

5
~ 0
s
C -5
:.i
C
~ -10
++
w -15
L
3 -zo
C
~ -25
'Ln
V
-30
-35
Swartout Tract -Lower Field -West
i
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2003
Gauge S1 Gauge S2 Gauge S3
Jurisdictional Water Table Soil Surface
3 February 2004

~ i~ i~ ~ a• ~ ~ r i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Swartout Tract -Lower Field -East
5
N 0
C -5
C
~ -10
W -15
L
3 -20
c
~ -25
0
L
V
30
-35
J
'U~~~~u ~\ ~~~~~ ~ ~~AI `A I ~NI' ~~ I t 1 `~\
,~1 ~ i ~I
-11 I I I i

I

i I
l ~

~ ,,
'~
V
i

I
i,

I
I
i 1' I
i VI
N ~
~ ~

<------------------- Growing Season --------------->
3 February 2004
F M A M J J A
2003
Gauge S4
Gauge S7
Soil Surface
S O
Gauge S5
Gauge S8
N D
Gauge S6
Jurisdictional Water Table

i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Parker Tract
5
N 0
t
V
C -5
C
~ -10
W -15
L
Q~
.1.+
3 -20
c
~ -25
'L^
V
-30
-35
I ~ i
i
'~

4
` r
~
I I v I ~
~ I
<-------------------Growing Season --------------->
J F M
A M J J A S O N D
2003
Gauge P1 Gauge P2 Gauge P3
Gauge P4 Jurisdictional Water Table Soil Surface
3 February 2004

~ ~ II. . ~ ~ . . III ~ III tl~ III ~ ~ ~ III r r
All Gauges in Swartout Tract
5
0
.-. -5
N
N
s
C -10
.:~
C
O
'~. -15
tC
W -20
L
~+
3 -25
C
~ -30

-35
J
8 January 2004
F M A M J J A S O N D
2003
Gauge S1 ---Gauge S2 Gauge S3
Gauge S4 Gauge S5 Gauge S6
Gauge S7 - ---Gauge S9 Gauge S8
-- --Jurisdictional Water Table

1
1

~~~

1
1
1
APPENDIX 7
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT
1

l
1
1

r

CIS'
1
1
ENTRAINMENT CALCULATION FORM
Stream: :z' ~ ~- Cat Cr`~ek Reach: " "~ Sw~rtwot-t field
Team: ' - AJT acid GILL Date: - ;Jun-03
Information Input Area
>'43 _ D50 Riffle bed material D50 (mm)
'~._ <14' ' D~50 Bar sample D50 (mm)
6~4 " D; Largest particle from bar sample (mm) 0.20 (feet) 304.8 mm/foot
"Q~12 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
1:46. de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
~t.59" R H draulic Radius of Riffle Cross Section ft
1.65 gs Submerged specific weight of sediment

Calculation of Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
3.07 Dso/D~so If value is between 3-7 Equation 1 will be used: t+~; = 0.0834(D50/D~so)-0872
1.40 D/D If value is between 1.3-3.0 E uation 2 will be used: t~ - 0.0384(D/D °88'
0.0313 t~~; Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress Equation used: 1

Calculation of Bank full Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.85 d~ Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d~ =~D1
Se

1.46 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)

Calculati on of BKF Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.0070 S~ Required bankfull water surface slope (ft) S~ _ ~D1
de

0.0120 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft)

Sediment Transport Validation
0.00 Bankfull Shear Stress tc =g RS (Ib/ft2) where the Density of water = g = 62.4 Ibs/ft3

40-400 Moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress (predicted by the Revised Shields Diagram by
Ros en, 2002)

0.27 Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of D; (mm) (see Revised Shields Diagram,
Ros en, 2002)
Note: If available bankfull shear stress exceeds D100 of bed, de radation potential exists.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ^~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~
Swartwout Tract
Cat Creek
Macon County, NC
RIFFLE SAMPLE
River Basin: Little Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reach: Swartwout Tract
DA (sq mi): 1.13
Date: 9/11!2003
Sieve Size mm 1.18 2 4.75 9.5 12.7 19 25 LP1 LP2
micro dia 100 61
Tare Wei ht Ibs 0.81 1.03 1.12 1.2 1.23 1.28 1.29 wei ht 9.39 0.57
Pave Sam le Wei ht Ibs 0.83 1.05 1.19 1.24 1.51 1.76 2.79 wei ht 1.29 0.93
Sub av Bample Wei ht lbs 4.17 2.88 3.56 3.08 3.78 3.84 8.34 dia 60 53
Pave Net Wei ht Ibs 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.28 0.48 1.5 12.37
Sub ave Net Wei ht Ibs 3.36 1.85 2.44 1.88 2.55 2.56 $.05 24.81
Pavement 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% 4% 12%
%CumulativePavement 0% 0% 1% 1% 3% 7% 19% 100%
0/a Sub avement 13°h 7%a 10%0 8°/a 10% 10% 32%
%CumulativeSub avement 13% 21°k 31% 38% 48b/o 59°/a 91% 100%
Particle Size Distribution for Entrainment Calculations ~
Cat Creek Swartwout Tract- Madison County, NC ~
taa%
90 %
- -

]0% ---

_... _ _._. _
An
E 50% -

U -- _
a° 00°0 --
--

e°oo
~

,
~ P
2°% ~
°% _

°% , 1
;
° ,°°
Material Slze (mm)

u

r
C

ENTRAINMENT CALCULATION FORM
Stream: UT Cat Creek ~ Reach: Sviartwout UT
Team: AJT and GLK Date: Jun-03
Information Input Area
28 D50 Riffle bed material D50 (mm)
20 D~50 Bar sample D50 (mm)
6f~_0 D; Largest particle from bar sample (mm) 0.20 (feet) 304.8 mm/foot
O.p2 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
1.7$ de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.33 R H draulic Radius of Riffle Cross Section ft
1.65 gs Submerged specific weight of sediment

Calculation of Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
1.40 D /D~ If value is between 3-7 E uation 1 will be used: t~ ° 872
so so q ~; = 0.0834(Dso/D so)
2.14 D/D If value is between 1.3-3.0 E uation 2 will be used: t~ -o.ss~
so q ~; = 0.0384(D;/Dso)
0.0286 t;~; Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress Equation used: 2

Calculation of Bank full Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.46 d~ Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d~ =~D1
Se

1.78 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)

Calculati on of BKF Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.0052 S~ Required bankfull water surface slope (ft) S~ _ ~Di
de

0.0200 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft)

Sediment Transport Validation
1.65 Bankfull Shear Stress tc =gRS (Ib/ft2) where the Density of water = g = 62.4 Ibs/ft3

50-500 Moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress (predicted by the Revised Shields Diagram by
Ros en, 2002)

0.27 Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of D; (mm) (see Revised Shields Diagram,
Ros en, 2002)
Note: If available bankfull shear stress exceeds D100 of bed, de radation potential exists.
1

Swarlwout Tract
UT to Ca[ Creek
Macon Coun[, NC
RIFFLE SAMPLE
River Basin: Little Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reach: UT Swartwout Tract
DA (sq mi): 0.86
Date: 9/11/2003
***JUST WITH SUBPAVEMENT SAMPLE 1
Sieve Size mm 0.062 0.075 0.106 0.25 0.3 0.6 0.85 1.18 2 4.75 9.5 12.7 19 25 LP1 LP2
micro 75 106 250 300 600 850 dia 75 70
Tare Wei ht Ibs 0.81 1.03 1.12 1.2 1.23 1.28 1.29 wei ht 1.98 1.01
Pave Sam le Wei ht Ibs 0.83 1.05 1.24 1.34 1.5 1.65 2.86 wei ht 0.98 1.06
Sub av Sample WeI ht (Ibs) 3,47 2.04 2.67 2.23 3.2 3.29 12.4 dia 60 75
Pave Net Wei ht Ibs 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.14 0.27 0.37 1.57 5.5
Sub ave Net Wei ht Ibs 2.66 1.01 1.55 1.03 1.97 2.01 11.1 23.39
Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 3% 5% 7% 29%
Cumulative Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 3% 5% 10% 17% 46% 100%
Sub avement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 11% 4% 7% 4% 6% 9% 48%
%CumulativeSub avemen 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 11% 16% 22% 27°k 35% 44% 91% 100%
Particle Size Distribution for Entrainment Calculations
UT Cat Creek Swarlwout Tract- Madison County, NC
i°°%
~ -~
'.
80 % - - _
~
]0 % _-
I _
_. _.
~
fi0% I
~

40"u
E I _ _I ._ _ y __ L

20% _. _.
1.
1D% I -._ _ _

D% I
-
-10% I. I
Material Sixe (mm)
I

ENTRAINMENT CALCULATION FORM
Stream: :,'C.ai-Creek Reach: 1Naldf
Team: A,1T and GtCL Date: ,lun-U3
Information Input Area
33 Dso Riffle bed material D50 (mm)
12.7 Dso Bar sample D50 (mm)
85.0 D; Largest particle from bar sample (mm) 0.28 (feet) 304.8 mm/foot
0.008 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
1.78 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.73 R H draulic Radius of Riffle Cross Section ft
1.65 gs Submerged specific weight of sediment

Calculation of Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
2.60 Dso/Dso If value is between 3-7 Equation 1 will be used: t~~; = 0.0834(Dso/Dso)-o.s~2
2.58 D/D If value is between 1.3-3.0 E uation 2 will be used: t~ o say
sa q ~; = 0.0384(D;/Dso)
0.0286 t;~; Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress Equation used: 2

Calculation of Bank full Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

1.64 d~ Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d~ =~Di
Se

1.78 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)

Calculati on of BKF Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.0074 S~ Required bankfull water surface slope (ft) S~ ° t ~;gsDi
de

0.0080 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft)

Sediment Transport Validation
0.86 Bankfull Shear Stress t~ =gRS (Ib/ft2) where the Density of water = g = 62.4 Ibs/ft3

20-200 Moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress (predicted by the Revised Shields Diagram by
Ros en, 2002)

0.38 Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of D; (mm) (see Revised Shields Diagram,
Ros en, 2002)
Note: If available bankfull shear stress exceeds D100 of bed, de radation potential exists.

~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Waldroop Tract
Cal Creek
Macon County, NC
RIFFLE SAMPLE
River Basin: Little Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reach: Waldroop Tract
DA (sq mid: 2.5
Date: 9111/2003
Sieve Size mm 0.062 0.075 0.106 0.25 0.3 0.6 0.85 1.18 2 4.75 9.5 12.7 19 25 LP1 LP2
micro 75 106 250 300 600 850 dia 73 70
Tare Wei ht Ibs 0.81 1.03 1.12 1.2 1.23 1.28 1.29 wei ht 1.82 1.06
Pave Sam le Wei ht Ibs 0.82 1.06 1.24 1.43 1.78 1.67 1.68 wei ht 2.57 1.31
Subpav Sample Weight (Ibs) 5.71 3.36 4.16 3.9 4.7 4.3 10.87 dia 85 SO
Pave Net Wei ht Ibs 0.01 0.03 0.12 0.23 0.55 0.39 0.39 4.6
Sub ave Net Wel ht Ibs 4.9 2.33 3.06 2.7 3.47 3.02 9.38 32.74
Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 1 % 3 % 5% 12% 8% 8%
Cumulative Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 % 0% 0% 1% 3% 8% 20 % 29% 37% 100%
°/v SUb avement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0°/v 0% 15°/v 7% 9% 8°/v 11% 9% 29%
Cumulative Sub avement 0°/v 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 22% 31% 40°/v 50% 59% 88°/a 100°k
Particle Size Distribution for Entrainment Calculations

100% Cat Creek Waltlroop Tract• Madison County, NC
.
I

BO% ~
- __
I II

fi0°o I

I I
Y
n 50%
_.-__
~
_--

_I

li'
r1!

~._.
1 _
'
E I I

___
._
i~
I y_..
~ ~
•
30 i i..
__
1-~,-_ r

OY
I I. I
o
0
1 01
1
0
~
Material Siza (mm)
~ ~ ~ ~

t
1

1
1

1
1
ENTRAINMENT CALCULATION FORM
Stream: ~, ~~Gat Creek. ~. -~:.;; - ~ Reach: ~ ~ ~~ ~ Petlie~
Team: ~ AJT and GK~f. ~ Date: ~ 1-Jun
Information Input Area
23 Dso Riffle bed material D50 (mm)
~~ ~ 3.5 ' D"50 Bar sample D50 (mm)
~5©.0° D; Largest particle from bar sample (mm) 0.16 (feet) 304.8 mm/foot
-f1.006 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
'.'[.6 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
`1:84 R H draulic Radius of Riffle Cross Section ft)
1.65 gs Submerged specific weight of sediment

Calculation of Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
6.57 Dso/D~50 If value is between 3-7 Equation 1 will be used: tY~; = 0.0834(Dso/D~so)-0 872
2.17 D/D If value is between 1.3-3.0 E uation 2 will be used: t~ 0887
so q ~; = 0.0384(D;/Dso)
0.0313 t#~; Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress Equation used: 1

Calculation of Bank full Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

1.41 d~ Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d~ =~D~
Se

1.60 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)

Calculati on of BKF Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.0053 S~ Required bankfull water surface slope (ft) S~ _ ~Di
de

0.0060 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft)

Sediment Transport Validation
0.69 Bankfull Shear Stress t~ =gRS (Ib/ft2) where the Density of water = g = 62.4 Ibs/ft3

20-150 Moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress (predicted by the Revised Shields Diagram by
Ros en, 2002

0.21 Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of D; (mm) (see Revised Shields Diagram,
Ros en, 2002)
Note: If available bankfull shear stress exceeds D100 of bed, de radation potential exists.
1

~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Parker Tracl
Cat Creak
Macon County, NC
RIFFLE SAMPLE
River Basin: Little Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reach: Parker Trect
DA (sq mi): 2.6
Date: 9/11/2003
Riuvn Riso Imml n nay n m~ n Ana n oa
micro 75 106 250 300 600 850
Tare Wei ht Ibs 0.81 1.03 1.12 1.2 1.23 1.28 1.29
Pave Sam le Wei ht Ibs 0.87 1.04 1.27 1.35 1.56 1.5 5.08
$ubpav Sample Wef ht Ibs) 9.67 3.7 4.48 3.59 4.16 3.44 5.5
Pave Net Wei ht Ibs 0.06 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.33 0.22 3.79 7.42
Sub ave Net Wei ht Ibs 8.86 2.67 3.36 2.39 2.93 2.16 4.21 27.15
Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% 2% 4% 3% 51%
Cumulative Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 3% 5% 9% 12% 63% 100%
°k Sub avement 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0 % 0 % 0% 33 % 10% 12% 9 % 11 % 8% 16%
Cumulative Sub avemen 0% 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0% 0 % 33 % 42% 55% 64 % 74 % 82 % 98 % 100°k

toot

w„ Partlcie size oiatriearoo for envammene cammanoaa
Gt Craak Parker Tract- Matlison Coun[y, NG

i
so%

i
--

wi

50
b

1

__ I __._ _

_ {{I
I..
. _..

I
__-
__
E
K w
]OA

20°A

-__.... I...
~

~

f
_ r
~'
_
~
_
I .

_ _
/~
V~~
~I'1
_-
_

___

_

.I.

10 I
I
u of 0. 1 10 100
Maur1al51za (mm)
LP1 LP2
die 65 54
wei ht 2.08 0.63
wei ht 0,33 0,24
die 50 37

1

1

ENTRAINMENT CALCULATION FORM
Stream: 'Cat Creek Reach: Preserve ~~~:
Team: ' AJT and GKL Date: Jun=03`
Information Input Area
13 D50 Riffle bed material D50 (mm)
9 D"50 Bar sample D50 (mm)
31.0 D; Largest particle from bar sample (mm) 0.10 (feet) 304.8 mm/foot
0.005 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
1.4 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.84 R H draulic Radius of Riffle Cross Section (ft)
1.65 gs Submerged specific weight of sediment

Calculation of Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
1.44 D50/D"50 If value is between 3-7 Equation 1 will be used: t~~; = 0.0834(DS0/D~50)-°.s'z
2.38 D;/D50 If value is between 1.3-3.0 Equation 2 will be used: t~~; = 0.0384(D;/D50)-o.sa~
0.0286 t;~; Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress Equation used: 2

Calculation of Bank full Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.96 d~ Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d~ =~D~
S
e

1.40 de Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)

Calculati on of BKF Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample

0.0034 S~ Required bankfull water surface slope (ft) S, = t ~;gsDi.
d
e

0.0050 Se Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft)

Sediment Transport Validation
0.57 Bankfull Shear Stress tc =gRS (Ib/ft2) where the Density of water = g = 62.4 Ibs/ft3

18-200 Moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress (predicted by the Revised Shields Diagram by
Ros en, 2002

0.13 Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of D; (mm) (see Revised Shields Diagram,
Rosgen, 2002)
Note: If available bankfull shear stress exceeds D100 of bed, de radation potential exists.

Preserve Tract
Cat Creek
Macon County, NC
RIFFLE SAMPLE
River Basin: Little Tennessee
Watershed: Cat Creek
Stream Reach: Preserve Tract
DA (sq mi): 3.63
Date: 9/11 /2003
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Sieve Size mm 0.062 0.075 0.106 0.25 0.3 0.6 0.85 1.18 2 4.75 9.5 12.7 19 25 LP1 LP2
micro 75 106 250 300 600 850 dia 33 30
Tare Wei ht Ibs 0.81 1.03 1.12 1.2 1.23 1.28 1.29 wei ht 0.15 0.08
Pave Sam le Wei ht Ibs 0.84 1.05 1.23 1.33 1.5 1.36 1.44 wei ht 0.23 0.19
Subpav Sam le Wei ht (Ibs 3.52 1.66 2.13 1.77 1.7 1.86 1.38 dia 31 $1
Pave Net Wei ht Ibs 0.03 0.02 0.11 0.13 0.27 0.08 0.15 1.02
Sub ave Net Wei ht Ibs 2.71 0.63 1.01 0.57 0.47. 0.58 0.09 6.48
Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 2% 11% 13% 26% 8% 15%
Cumulative Pavement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0°/a 0% 3% 5% 16% 28% 55% 63% 77% 100%
-" % Sub avement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 42% 10% 16% 9% 7% 9% 1°/a
Cumulative Sub avement 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0°/a 42% 52% 67% 76% 83% 92% 94% 100%
Particle Size Distribution for Entrainment Calculations
Cat Creek Preserve Tract- Madison County, NC
100% I I I
I
90% ___ -
I _ I l
I
BO% - '~
___. ____-__
___
~
'
F..
l° % I
I

_ _..

_. _
60% - I
I
i

A sc%

_.

F._.

._._ I
1
I

-

-

_.

__.._

I
~
ao% __ __. _.. _ - ~. ~_ i
e 30%
l
20% _ _. -i _._ I _...i __ _. i
_.

0
__ 11
_ ~
%- 1 0.1 I
1
ib I 0

-10% I
i
Ma[e°al Sixe (mm)