20140422 Ver 1_Year 6 Monitoring Report_2021_20220223

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20140422 Version* 1
.........................................................................................................................................................................
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 02/23/2022
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/23/2022
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* 0 Yes O No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Jeremiah Dow [e-mail]
Project Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20140422 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Hudson Property
County: Beaufort
Document Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Hudson_95361_MY6_2021.pdf 5.75MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature:*

Year 6 Monitoring Report
Hudson Property
DMS Project ID #: 95361
DMS Contract #: 004638
DWR Project #: 20140422v1
USAGE Action ID# SAW-2012-01394
Beaufort County, North Carolina
r
~ - , . -^n
4 t 1. 6-- "#
? t fir-- •, zg
, w �,. r 1 x
il kt
__,.. ,....,,,,,Iftvitz7,.1..—i.r .i,t.,:i,v,, ,, __ _:. ,,, , .., , , ,, . „, ,
w y
*,,,,,. , .6,„_ , ,„.„ ,,,,,,„ ,.... ,, ,,,:„.. .. „_ot „3., _
,,x.„i„.8.- - -.- '
Submitted: February 2022
Submitted to/Prepared for:
NC Depailcuent of Environment and Natural Resources
D ivision of Mitigatn Servic
1652e Mail Service io Center es
Raleigh,NC 27699-1652
Environmental
Qualit
Prepared by:
ALBEMARLE RESTORATIONS, LLC
P.O. Box 176
Fairfield,NC 27826
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]

A ' a Ecotone,Inc.
ecotone 410.420. ( )
a � 410.420.6983 6983(F)
ecological restoration
February 21, 2022
Jeremiah Dow
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones St.
Raleigh,NC 27603
RE: Hudson Monitoring Year 6 Report
Dear Mr. Dow,
Ecotone LLC has addressed the comments made on January 11, 2022 by DMS for the above
referenced project. The following is a point-by-point response addressing those comments.
Additionally, an updated copy of the MY6 Report will be submitted.
1. CCPVs should be georeferenced PDFs in the report. Additionally, the resolution is low
on the CCPVs and some labels and features are difficult to read. Please submit higher
resolution, georeferenced CCPVs exported from ArcMap (or ArcGIS Pro) in the report.
Ecotone Response: All CCPVs have been updated with higher resolution images (pages
11-16).
2. DMS personnel walked the site on January 6 and observed dense pine in the upper
portion of Reach 1. Is there any plan to thin pine in this area in MY7?
Ecotone Response: This isolated stand of pine is a small percentage of the overall tree
coverage in the project site. Considering the hardwood stem survival count, there is not
an immediate need to thin the pine stand referenced here, but continued monitoring of
tree survival will inform possible need for action in the future.
3. Please submit a feature characterizing the 20 ft. of erosion located along Reach 3.
Ecotone Response: Erosion is now marked on CCPV of Reach 3 on page 14 of the report.
4. The figure for monitoring well 2 has numeric values on the x-axis instead of dates.
Ecotone Response: Figure 4 on page 56 has been corrected to show dates on the x-axis.
Thank you for your consideration of these monitoring report comments. We appreciate your
assistance with our project thus far, and we look forward to working with you to complete the
review process. Feel free to contact us at 410-420-2600.
Sincerely,
,;/,/teA, S af2C
Laura S. Calvert
Ecologist
Ecotone, LLC
FOREST HILL
129 Industry Lane
Forest Hill,MD 21050
www.ecotoneinc.com

Table of Contents
Contents
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY 1
2.0 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1
3.0 PROJECT SUCCESS CRITERIA 1
3.1 Stream Restoration Performance Standards 1
3.2 Stream Channel Restoration Stability Performance Standards 2
3.3 Planted Vegetation Performance Standards 2
4.0 SITE CONDITIONS AND DESCRIPTION 2
5.0 MITIGATION COMPONENTS 2
6.0 DESIGN APPROACH 3
7.0 CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING TIMELINE 3
8.0 PLAN DEVIATIONS 3
10.0 METHODS AND REFERENCES 4
APPENDIX A: PROJECT BACKGROUND TABLES 6
APPENDIX B: VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA 10
APPENDIX C: MY 5 VEGETATION PLOT DATA(2020) 26
APPENDIX D: MY 5 STREAM MEASUREMENT AND GEOMORPHOLOGY 29
APPENDIX E: YEAR 6 HYDROLOGIC DATA 51
Figure 1: Vicinity Map 5
Figure 2: Monthly Rainfall Data with Percentiles 54
Figures 3-12: Stream Surface Water Hydrology (Wells 1-10) 55-63
Table 1: Project Components and Mitigation Credits 7
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History 8
Table 3: Project Contacts 8
Table 4: Project Information and Attributes 9
Table 5: Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment(Reach 1-4) 17
Table 6: Vegetation Condition Assessment Table 21
Table 7: Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities 27
Table 8: Bank Pin Data 39
Table 10a: Baseline Stream Data Summary(Reach 1-4) 42-45
Table 1 la: Monitoring Data—Dimensional Morphology Summary 46
Table 1 lb: Monitoring Data— Stream Reach Data Summary(Reach 1-4) 47-50
Table 9: Verification of Bankfull Events 52
Table 12: Verification of Baseflow 53

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
The Hudon Property stream restoration project 13.49 acres located within a larger 106-acre
property owned by Charles Hudson. It is located in Beaufort County, NC and the Tar-Pamlico
River Basin (USGS 03020104). Mitigation components include five stream reaches totalling
2,891 linear feet contained within a Conservation Easement. Construction was completed in 2015
and planting completed in 2016. The first of seven monitoring years was initiated in 2016. Year
6 monitoring was completed on October 25,2020.
2.0 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The project goals of the Hudson Property stream restoration project per the approved mitigation
plan are as follows:
• Improve and sustain hydrologic connectivity/interaction and storm flow/flood
attenuation.
• Reduce nutrient and sediment stressors to the reach and receiving watershed.
• Provide uplift in water quality functions.
• Improve aquatic and terrestrial habitats(complexity, quality).
• Improve and maintain riparian buffer habitat.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Implement a sustainable, reference-based, rehabilitation of the reach dimension, pattern,
and profile to provide needed capacity and competency.
• Support the removal of barriers to anadromous fish movement and to help improve
nursery and spawning habitats.
• Strategically install stream structures and plantings designed to maintain vertical and
lateral stability and improve habitat diversity/complexity.
• Provide a sustainable and functional bankfull floodplain feature.
• Enhance and maintain hydrologic connection between stream and adjacent
floodplain/riparian corridors.
• Utilize the additional width of the swamp runs to provide natural filters for sediment and
nutrients and diffuse flow from upstream runoff
• Install, augment, and maintain an appropriate riparian buffer with sufficient density and
robustness to support native forest succession.
• Encourage water quality enhancement through riparian forest planting and woody
material installation,and increased floodplain interaction/overbank flooding.
• Restore the existing ditched streams to single and multi-thread headwater systems with
forested riparian buffers.
• Provide ecologically sound construction techniques that will require minimal grading and
disturbance.
3.0 PROJECT SUCCESS CRITERIA
3.1 Stream Restoration Performance Standards
Single Thread Channels(Reaches 1 - 4)and Swamp Run(Reach 5):
Groundwater monitoring wells are installed in and near the thalweg of all five reaches.
The wells are equipped with continuous—reading gauges capable of documenting
sustained flow. Per the approved Mitigation Plan, each reach must exhibit water flow for
at least 30 consecutive days during years with normal rainfall (demonstrating at least
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
1

intermittent stream status). All restored channels shall receive sufficient flow through the
monitoring period to maintain an Ordinary High-Water Mark(OHWM). Field indicators
of flow events include a natural line impressed on the bank; shelving; changes in soil
characteristics; destruction of terrestrial vegetation; presence of litter and debris;
wracking; vegetation matted down, bent, or absent; sediment sorting; leaf litter disturbed
or washed away; scour; deposition; bed and bank formation; water staining; or change in
plant community. In addition, two overbank flows shall be documented for each reach
during the monitoring period using continuously monitored pressure transducers and crest
gauges. All collected data and field indicators of water flow shall be documented in each
monitoring report. Seven flow monitoring stations are located on Reaches 1 —4, three are
located on Reach 5.
3.2 Stream Channel Restoration Stability Performance Standards
Headwater System(Reach 5):
All stream areas shall remain stable with no areas of excessive erosion such as evidence of
bank sloughing or actively eroding banks due to the exceedance in critical bank height and
lack of deep-rooted stream bank vegetation.
Single Thread Channels(Reaches 1 - 4):
1. Bank Height Ratio (BHR) shall not exceed 1.2 within restored reaches of the stream
channel.
2. Entrenchment Ratio (ER) shall be no less than 2.2 within restored reaches of the stream
channel.
3. The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met
through two separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the 7-year post
construction monitoring period.
4. Three bank pin arrays and 11 cross sections are located on Reaches 1 —4.
3.3 Planted Vegetation Performance Standards
1. At least 320 three-year-old planted stems/acre must be present after year three. At year
five, density must be no less than 260 five-year-old planted stems/acre. At year 7, density
must be no less than 210 seven-year-old planted stems/acre.
2. If this performance standard is met by year 5 and stem density is trending toward success
(i.e., no less than 260 five-year-old stems/acre) monitoring of vegetation on the site may
be terminated provided written approval is provided by the USACE in consultation with
the North Carolina Interagency Review Team(NCIRT).
3. Thirteen vegetation plot samples are located within the project area.
4.0 SITE CONDITIONS AND DESCRIPTION
Much of the site has been used for crop production, primarily corn, soybeans, and wheat. As a
result of the lowering of local water tables, and in some cases the complete elimination of ground
and surface water interaction, the degradation of water quality and downstream anadromous fish
spawning/nursery habitat has occurred. Hydric soils are present on site, meaning that the pre-
existing site conditions were appropriate for raising the water table and re-establishing normal
base flow conditions(See Figure 1 -Vicinity Map).
5.0 MITIGATION COMPONENTS
Mitigation components are limited to five reaches: Reach 1: 833 lf; Reach 2: 532 lf; Reach 3: 445
lf; Reach 4: 437 lf; Reach 5: 644 lf,for a total restored stream footage of 2,891 if(Table 1).
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
2

6.0 DESIGN APPROACH
A natural design approach was used to restore channel sinuosity and flow of headwater streams,
which existed prior to channelization. Grading was designed to decrease sediment load and
erosion rate while allowing for floodplain connectivity and storage for overland flow. Banks were
graded down to distribute flow velocity and the banks and riparian buffers were planted to
stabilize the channel and create habitat. A combination of Priority 1 and Priority II restoration
types were used. Where the proposed channels tie into the existing, non-restored channels,
Priority II restoration was used.
7.0 CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING TIMELINE
Construction commenced in December 2014, with the installation of recommended erosion
control practices, and was completed in May 2015. Planting was officially concluded in early
January 2016. (Table 2—Project History Table)
8.0 PLAN DEVIATIONS
There were no significant deviations between construction plans and the As-built conditions.
9.0 PROJECT PERFORMANCE
The Hudson stream restoration project is currently meeting functional goals and objectives.
Annual monitoring took place in October and revealed the presence of bankfull events, floodplain
connectivity, and lateral and vertical stability. In-stream structures were observed to be
functioning as intended with minimal scouring of the bed or banks. Bankfull events were
observed for Years 1 through Year 6. The site is meeting the bankfull standard for success. The
entire length of the project is currently exhibiting fully vegetated banks with both herbaceous and
woody plants. Overall, woody plantings within the riparian buffer are meeting project goals.
Some dieback of planted stems occurred in previous years, but reintroduction of other woody
vegetation has been noted in all monitoring plots. Tree heights range from 4-15 feet, with an
approximate average of 10 feet (2020 data). Stream gauges indicated base flow and bankfull
events at 9 out of 10 locations. Baseflow and bankfull events could not be confirmed at Well 10
because the well cap and logger were disturbed; the base station also malfunctioned during the
monitoring effort, preventing download of the annual data. Base flow and bankfull events are
assumed to have occurred based on conditions seen during monitoring and information from
adjacent wells. During MY 5, bank pins could not be located due to dense vegetative growth;
erosion is therefore assumed to be minimal given the vegetative stability of the reaches.
Aggradation was noted on Reaches 2 and 3 in MY 5, though slightly less than in MY 3; both
reaches remain stable. Stream cross sections are meeting objectives in 11 out of 11 locations.
Previous corrective measures included regrading Reach 5 to raise the stream invert to create a
wider swamp run. This was identified during a field meeting with NC Division of Mitigation
Services and the USACE in June 2017 and completed in October 2017. A field meeting with NC
Division of Mitigation Services and the USACE in April 2018, identified two monitoring wells
that required repair; repair was completed. Year 1 Monitoring identified some areas where woody
survivability was low; these areas were spot planted in December 2017. In Year 3, Vegetation
Plot 6, and other small areas on Reach 1 and 2, appeared to have slightly low woody
survivability. These areas were spot planted in October 2019, though the areas were smaller than
0.1 acres and were not included in the CCPV.No additional corrective measures are necessary.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
3

10.0 METHODS AND REFERENCES
Monitoring methodology did not differ from the approved Mitigation Plan. Cross-section
dimensions were collected using standard survey methods. Vegetation assessment was done
according to the Level 2 protocol specified by the Carolina Vegetation Survey. Hydrology
monitoring wells were installed per ERDC TN-WRAP-00-02 "Installing Monitoring
Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands" dated 2000. Groundwater levels were recorded using the U20-
001-01 water level data loggers manufactured by Onset Computer. The loggers were installed in
the wells per the manufacturer's instructions.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
4

e:
•
•
Drive south on US 17, 4.6 ,, �a
' miles from its intersection ,
with NC 33. Turn left on .'le '' " r
Possum Track Road. -� . J '11
4
Entrance to project is 1.1
miles on left. - 4 •
, f
- liffi 4. ,.. .. .. ..
_. _ ,
..4"ff. NUCISO - 7"11)... k ,
a: - ca wan 19 d ._ / Sr;. • • '' tilt iii°5'‘ dtP!
. -4.1411
To Chocowinity " - .�,~ R
,
5. } i.
•
a 1
. -F -- Access (Yellow) , 1
® ro •
pos 4 - di �4
i ..•_--. f :el.??- -- s41rn-7•rack-Rtl -- _
P• ilir
i /41I.1 . hzT ); 1-A- ff p r Ir-,'. �201fi'GdagIe II
Goo`{I ear t Itom, -- , --- i 1s , ' [[77
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Hudson Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project #95361
Environmental Beaufort County, NC
Qualit
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
5

APPENDIX A: PROJECT BACKGROUND TABLES
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
6

Table 1:Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Hudson Property,Beaufort County
EEP Project Number:95361
Mitigation Credits
Stream Riparian wetland Non-riparian Buffer Nitrogen Phosphorous
wetland Nutrient Nutrient
Offset Offset
Type R RE R RE R RE V
Totals 2,891
Project Components
Project Stationing/Location Existing Approach Restoration Restoration Mitigation
Component Footage/Acreage (PI,PII etc.) or Footage or Ratio
or Reach ID Restoration Acreage
Equivalent
Reach 1 766 LF PI 833 LF 1:1
Reach 2 516 LF PI/PII 532 LF 1:1
Reach 3 611 LF PI/PII 445 LF 1:1
Reach 4 503 LF PI/PII 437 LF 1:1
Reach 5 689 LF PI 644 LF 1:1
Total 3,085 LF 2,891 LF
Component Summation
Restoration Level Stream Riparian Wetland Non-riparian Buffer Upland
(linear feet) (acres) Wetland(acres) (square feet) (acres)
11 Riverine Non-
riverine
Restoration 2,891 LF
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Creation
Preservation
BMP Elements
Element Location Purpose/Function Notes
FB Adjacent to stream Buffer 100 feet on either side of stream centerline
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
7

Table 2:Project Activity and Reporting History
Hudson Property-EEP Project Number 95361
Activity,Deliverable,or Milestone Data Collection Complete Actual Completion or Delivery
Project Institution N/A June 2012
Mitigation Plan July 2014 Oct 2014
Permits Issued March 2013 May 2014
Final Design Construction March 2013 May 2014
Construction N/A May 2015
Containerized,Bare Root,and B&B Planting N/A January 2016
Baseline Monitoring Document(Year 0-Baseline) January 2016 August 2016
Year 1 Monitoring September 2016 Final:January 2017
Year 2 Monitoring November 2017 Final:January 2018
Year 3 Monitoring October 2018 Final:March 2019
Year 4 Monitoring October 2019 Final:January 2020
Year 5 Monitoring October 2020 Final:December 2020
Year 6 Monitoring October 2021 Draft:November 2021
Year 7 Monitoring
Table 3:Project Contacts
Hudson Property-EEP Project Number:95361
Primary Project Design POC Ecotone,Inc.
Scott McGill(410)420-2600
129 Industry Lane,Forest Hill,MD 21050
Construction Contractor POC Riverside Excavation,Inc.
Car Baynor(252)943-8633
Survey Contractor POC True Line Surveying
Curk Lane(919)359-0427
Planting and Seeding Contractor Carolina Silvics,Inc.
POC Mary Margaret McKinney(252)482-8491
908 Indian Trail Road,Edenton,NC 27932
Seed Mix Sources Ernst Conservation Seeds,LLP,Meadville,PA
Nursery Stock Suppliers Carolina Silvics,Inc.
Monitoring Performers Ecotone,Inc.
Stream and Vegetation POC Scott McGill(410)420-2600
129 Industry Lane,Forest Hill,MD 21050
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
8

Table 4:Project information
Hudson Property-EEP Project Number:95361
Project name HUDSON PROPERTY
County BEAUFORT
Project Area(ac) 13.4 AC
Project Coordinates(Lat and Long) 77°06"13.62'W/35°26"53.20'N
4.1 Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic province INNER COASTAL PLAIN
River basin TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASIN
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8- 03020104 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03020104010010
digit
DWQ Sub-basin CHOCOWINITY CREEK—HORSE BRANCH
Project Drainage Area(acres) 190.86
Project Drainage Area Percentage of 1.2%(2.24 acres)
Impervious Area
CGIA Land Use Classification 2.01.01.07 Annual Row Crop Rotation _
4.2 Reach Summary Information
Parameters Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 5 _
Length of reach(linear feet) 766 516 611 503 689 _
Valley classification VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII _
Drainage area(acres) 40.51 74.63 _ 35.21 150.35 190.86 _
NCDWR stream identification score 20.75 20.75 20.75 20.75 28
NCDWR Water Quality Classification C;NSW C;NSW C;NSW C;NSW C;NSW
Morphological Description(stream type) G5-G6 G5-G6 G5-G6 G5-G6 G5-G6
Evolutionary trend _ Early(CEM) Early(CEM) Early(CEM) Early(CEM) Early(CEM)
Underlying mapped soils GoA&CrB CrB&Ly CrB&Ly CrB CrB&Me
Drainage class MW MW&SP MW&SP MW MW&P
Soil Hydric status Non-Hydric Non-Hydric Non-Hydric Non-Hydric Hydric _
Slope(ft/ft) 0.009 0.006 0.008 0.004 0.003
FEMA classification N/A N/A N/A N/A AE/X
Native vegetation community Pasture/Crop Pasture/Crop Pasture/Crop Pasture/Crop Pasture/Crop
Percent composition of exotic invasive N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
vegetation
4.3 Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting
Documents
Waters of the United States—Section 404 YES YES Supporting Documents
Waters of the United States—Section 401 YES YES SAW-2012-01394
Endangered Species Act NO YES NA
Historic Preservation Act NO YES NA
Coastal Zone Management Act(CZMA)/ NO YES NA
Coastal Area Management Act(CAMA)
FEMA Floodplain Compliance NO YES NA
Essential Fisheries Habitat NO YES NA
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
9

APPENDIX B: VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA
Current Condition Plan View
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment(Reach 1-4)
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Site Photos
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
10

W•. "� �' h Asset Restoration
' • c:-ti ;,..,,' + •
�; Footage
��'• • r _. .... ,4 • - , A Reach 1 833 LF
- 41 , Reach 2 532 LF
9�..,fjiti•r .''i.ar '�' ';�.. _ _ -_, .r, , Reach 3 445 LF
:� •
..4 -r.._ -' Reach 4 437 LF
-- r x • .:► ,�, �'I 1“.'h -. Reach 5 644 LF
s,; �rz +.
., �pr{�� : `'`h•,' ;�„`�" + y '. • Total 2,891 LF
:.. '..4 v.. ----, .r I.-his ,<, a `ti
eitit--_. -
,1r - '' i }'_`'-tiAC"x' 1. :' •• -.41`i,,L .T
_3•• max.i':',,.C•;::',__�.' 1 ±.
ti' _ 1 f., ���#;,° •-� - o,. .•,.; -
ter
r .
, _. .....,,...,,, _
.,"7 , .
.1.tlit
.- '' 'itk,, = -, 4:-..\,-..- - . 1 .. Nt.. . . .
.gg
4 f .'. - -., r _ Feet
p .a rr_ '.7aiarc:r�;r-sri.'i:!dlxid CT:::E;•e, ja •s`iar Geno�C �-. �i �c' ., ©% li.,i�5.,':en:Gr I[l.li3(ti.
�n a is' wCilViscr'.:Dr°:."t ai,is •C s�._ :'; s c(;usc•-•
likliiLI
HUDSON STREAM NMI Log Drops - Flow Stations Easement Boundary Criteria Unmet
Albemarle Restorations, LL(' RESTORATION PROJECT Erosion Top Of Bank Woody Riffles
CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
,rrvlRryh,rori•,rr Cross Sections Access Road - Criteria Met
...,X..u.„ti,r,,,, PROJECT#9 5361 �f►Yyy
rrrrri/:,hrrar FEBRUARY 21,2022 0 Bank Pin Array ^-, Stream Centerline
Note: Year 6 Monitoring did not require Vegetation Plot or Cross Section Survey. CCPV is based on 2020 information.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
11

.. r •' 3 lit r Y.- "r
}
-t-.r,r • .i ' '
_ .,t y .aep
te cL.Y a '7
•
i • • �". o .i ,
, cisk.• • ..,„
cX - [i •_-:,:-.-:,..1'-..'.4,...,.. . . ....-• • .•• ,- . ,
` ,. •• ' • . - .fir' � Y.•i•. .. •+i,:d •r:. - •.4 .=.ry
•
..'--T::7 . '';: :.7 7' x,.. 4, ,L. .. .. .__._. . 4., , .
.,. .1" -.,...4 .-, 'rile.....,., 0
Cif 0:0
� 't • ni X, .:•,4 .f.. .K: , Feet-
!' r "a .c.i; ,' ,r-q,'" - . Snurl:e:Esri,A•lnxnr.CesEye,Earthstar Geagraphir.s,ONES.+Airbus OS USDA,USGS;Aerr 7IC). Ii' i
■ ... -
■ "� nc^te GIS User Comr-r,ar•t Esn.HERE.•Garrr•n.{c O erlStreet•Mao contributors.and the i=i;
r, Y 1 P
HUDSON STREAM Log Drops - Flow Stations Easement Boundary Criteria Unmet
Albemarle Restorations, LL( RESTORATION PROJECT Erosion Top Of Bank Woody Riffles
CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
rli•rhm,f Rvrrnn+rinrr Cross Sections Access Road - Criteria Met
.SO rwx Faxrwrulue PROJECT 495361
rrildli,frt iMrar FEBRUARY 21,2022 CO Bank Pin Array Stream Centerline
Note: Year 6 Monitoring did not require Vegetation Plot or Cross Section Survey. CCPV is based on 2020 information.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
12

17 4
. 1 NeiC\' ' ... ''
., '' N 2
_- - .- :4-4C
I I - '411.."1"14/.." :
t Pr
r ,
,. 0 Q ,t"Ij g ,N. \\5.
Ni,,, • • . LI d2k§' •;....._ .
,. n A . •+e. �. , }.jfa
i' ' 7
*
, . : `-r
• r• 01 I 200
r' Feet
f
...- ;I-. ,ii.,:.Fsrr.A4�ix:c '.. ;,.1r:,E�3rihslar Cenoraphirs,C'J-3rl',rlii S i5� ikrfl..... ,.,S neiuC;Rl7 li)`J
:ric-I-;•'.:;I[:.J..:r I ..r'--.ir ty.Esri.HERE.Garrr h.![:1 Op i` r....
Yf BI..[rc+eiPaa:�:'ar`^bii'::'�: ir:;•1.l'u !_IcS.ise.
■ l
HUDSON STREAM Log Drops _Flow Stations Easement Boundary Criteria Unmet
Albemarle ReNtorntion 1. LLt RESTORATION PROJECT Erasion Top Of Bank Woody Riffles
CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
.1.1 Relp.or inn Cross Sections Access Road -Criteria Met
"R.•.•r,ii.u,„" PROJECT#95361
n hlra! FEBRUARY 21,2022 0 Bank Pin Array Stream Centerline
Note: Year 6 Monitoring did not require Vegetation Plot or Cross Section Survey. CCPV is based on 2020 information.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
13

k4ciN f�V
,AI, Pale, +
L• 'fir K'. �.
..41....../.. ..441Li10114....- —‘, :•
f + CO
i � �• r2
.r r r!• -.
Y i , i •~ _
..
t.... ii
i f
lity, ,� ► .i
ri "
.. .:.t\''..\. B. .
'AO ' • ate•". �3 , , a,.
r.°_ rw. - - q _ '16::
wig
•
+!
r
e
0 it 200
1 :- - Feet
i n,rce:Esri-M.ax:ar.Ge:,Eye,Earlhslar Ceoorr:ptscs,CNES:�!irFi.ir:i:S ..1:sEt•..I,5:. .AEnr,i,RIJ,ION
t' ( r:>::r.l:: ,I..r.` u-J the GIS user
1 -nr,:he.G15 User ty.Esri,HERE.Garm n. ]�l,,.r�• _
lt
i t Oyr.nibr73t.1rt=. y: _
+pp
HUDSON STREAM Log Drops -Flow Stations Easement Boundary Criteria Unmet
-3!fheniarfeRestorattons. LLB RESTORATION PROJECT Erosion Top Of Bank Woody Riffles
CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
nor Rr*ri,r,,ri.,n — Cross Sections Access Road Criteria Met
PROJECT#95361 0 Bank Pin Array Stream Centerline
FEBRUARY 21,2022
Note: Year 6 Monitoring did not require Vegetation Plot or Cross Section Survey. CCPV is based on 2020 information.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
14

, A,
.....„ „op...A,....„ , yis. ,, , __ .
,I,Loi,... 4.4f: AL..' •'' : .- • --' -- • .-- .-..1. ..•f' . .' - '.'. •---.--,:-“- S.- .-
�r .4
1! ' ..:•••'.4icSir
Vr4:1'7:.'..414%;°•1. . „ .........c607
it"�' a lli 7 \....\ ._ ._
•Y2 + _ �►,bw
• r
' et 4 ii
NV
W I -• max-- - -:,na^ i rr es.�. • r
Y i y .4 iri �3
. 44-4 cy
}, .
1
: ;.- •
4+• , Feet t
! :61-'T, �C.] JG'•`Je NIt dO 2K.:MCAL CS AeroGRID.ION
• r {Lrf51- ©T ',[ I'I ek' •ndtheOISuser"; '� L •.
w
+z
HUDSON STREAM WM Log Drops Mi Flow Stations Easement Boundary Criteria Unmet
Albemarle Restorations. LLL RESTORATION PROJECT Erosion Top Of Bank Woody Riffles
CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
.unr Rrrnuurirrrr - Cross Sections Access Road Criteria Met
Ire Rea!uwl..h PROJECT#95361 �+r�
r,If drew, FEBRUARY 21,2022 lei Bank Pin Array .^r•, Stream Centerline
Note: Year 6 Monitoring did not require Vegetation Plot or Cross Section Survey. CCPV is based on 2020 information.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
15

TR
. .44040..1/14, 1./. 3.
1 r f..-t
�►
N.
► A
•
• 4 . .
t �.
*Pt"
' •
+' •i I•••...• 1, ,• .04. '• Itp,44"ii," . .0.-....... .
•
Alb 1
Ilk, .. •••..
41.
-4. .).,,..e. ..,.... •
. ...,. ;,,.... . _ .
..
_., ,,, .."; ''....-,'
M R r�
'4
le
fi - - ►► • +
44
r- lip'
y r.
- lair „0 150 f. 300
.e..et. ., ..� eet
•
soiI re,e:Esri. Ir4ar [[?l e Egagikp nt rgi,111EVIN.PA-1,104eroGRID.ICN.
anr..-.he GIS Use, C .fhA nrm b, g >i4 a .,h ris user
cor r ini rrty r
HUDSON STREAM Log Drops -Flow Stations Easement Boundary Criteria Unmet
,41/iernarle Restorations. LLC RESTORATION PROJECT Erosion Top Of Bank Woody Riffles
CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
tti•avid 7ir:m urvnn Cross Sections Access Road _ Criteria Met
.Srrenw lir,roorinun PROJECT#95361
kildt frlfWAfrnr FEBRUARY 21,2022 0 Bank Pin Array Stream Centerline
Note: Year 6 Monitoring did not require Vegetation Plot or Cross Section Survey. CCPV is based on 2020 information.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
16

Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 1
Assessed Length 766
Number Footage Adjusted%
Number with with for
Major Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Channel Channel Performing Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Woody Woody Woody
Category Sub-Category Metric as Intended As-built Segments Footage as Intended Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1. Bed 1.Vertical Stability 1.Aggradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units) deflect flow laterally(not to include point bars)
2. Degradation-Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2.Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate 13 13 100%
3.Meander Pool 1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>1.6) 5 5 100%
Condition
2. Length appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 5 5 100%
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
4.Thalweg Position 1.Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run) NA" NA" NA*
2.Thalweg centering at downstream of meander(Glide) NA` NA* NA*
2. Bank 1.Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simplyfrom poor growth 0 0 100% 1 1 11'.
and/or scour and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
2.Undercut appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 0 100% 1 1 11'.
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
3.Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse 0 0 100% 1 1 1 11'
li Totals 0 0 100% 1 1 10
3. Engineered °
Structures
1.Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 8 8 100%2.Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 8 8 100%
the sill.
2a.Piping Structures lacking anysubstantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100%
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
3.Bank Protection exceed 15%.(See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring 8 8 100%
guidance document)
Pool forming structures maintaining—Max Pool Depth:Mean
4.Habitat Bankfull Depth ratio>1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at 8 8i. 41 100%
base-flow.
`Stream's narrow width,layout,and heavily vegetated banks make this attribute not applicable.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
17

Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 2
Assessed Length 516
Number Footage Adjusted%
Number with with for
Major Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Channel Channel Performing Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Woody Woody Woody
Category Sub-Category Metric as Intended As-built Segments Footage as Intended Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1.Bed 11.Vertical Stability 1. Aggradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units) deflect flow laterally(notto include point bars)
2. Degradation-Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2.Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate 9 9 All 100%
3.Meander Pool
Condition 1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>1.6) 3 3 100%
2. Length appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 3 3 100%
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
4.Thalweg Position 1.Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run) NA* NA* NA`
2.Thalweg centering at downstream of meander(Glide) NA* NA* NA`
2.Bank 1.Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
and/or scour and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
2.Undercut appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
3.Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
Totals 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
3.Engineered 1.Overall Integrity Structures physically dislodgedg
Structures g y P ysicall intact with no boulders or logs. 0 0 NA
2.Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 0 0 NA
the sill.
2a.Piping Structures lacking anysubstantial flow underneath sills or arms. 0 0 NA
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
3.Bank Protection exceed 15%.(See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring 0 0 NA
guidance document)
Pool forming structures maintaining—Max Pool Depth:Mean
4.Habitat Bankfull Depth ratio>1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at 0 0 NA
base-flow.
Stream's narrow width,layout,and heavilyvegetated banks make this attribute not applicable.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
18

Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 3
Assessed Length 611
Number Footage Adjusted
Number with with for
Major Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Channel Channel Performing Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Woody Woody Woody
Category Sub-Category Metric as Intended As-built Segments Footage as Intended Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1.Bed 1.Vertical Stability 1.Aggradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units) deflectflow laterally(notto include point bars)
2. Degradation-Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2.Riffle Condition 1.Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate 7 7 100%
3.Meander Pool
1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>1.6) 3 3 100%
Condition 2. Lenoth appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 3 3 100%
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
4.Thalweg Position 1.Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run) NA' NA* NA*
2.Thalweg centering at downstream of meander(Glide) NA* NA" NA*
2.Bank 1.Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simplyfrom poor growth 0 20 98% 0 0 98%
and/or scour and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
2.Undercut appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
3.Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
0 20 98% 0 0 98%
3.Engineered
Structures 1.Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 0 0 NA
2.Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 0 0 NA
the sill.
2a.Piping Structures lacking anysubstantial flow underneath sills or arms. 0 0 NA
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
3.Bank Protection exceed 15%.(See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring 0 0 NA
guidance document)
Pool forming structures maintaining-Max Pool Depth:Mean
4.Habitat Bankfull Depth ratio>1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at 0 0 NA
base-flow.
*Stream's narrow width,layout,and heavilyvegetated banks make this attribute not applicable.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
19

Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 4
Assessed Length 503
Number Footage Adjusted%
Number with with for
Major Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Channel Channel Performing Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Woody Woody Woody
Category Sub-Category Metric as Intended As-built Segments Footage as Intended Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1.Bed 1.Vertical Stability 1.Pggradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units) deflectflow laterally(not to include point bars)
2. Degradation-Evidenceofdowncutting 0 0 100%
2.Riffle Condition 1.Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate 8 8 NA
3.Meander Pool
Condition 1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>1.6) 3 3 NA
2. Length appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 3 3 NA
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
4 Thalweg Position 1.Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run) NA* NA" NA
2.Thalweg centering at downstream of meander(Glide) NA* NA" NA
2.Bank 1.Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
and/or scour and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
2.Undercut appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
3.Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
Totals 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
3.Engineered t Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 3 3 NA
Structures
2.Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 3 3 NA
the sill.
2a.Piping Structures lacking anysubstantial flow underneath sills or arms. 3 3 NA
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
3.Bank Protection exceed 15%.(See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring 3 3 NA
guidance document)
Pool forming structures maintaining-Max Pool Depth:Mean
4.Habitat Bankfull Depth ratio>1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at 3 3 NA
base-flow.
*Stream's narrow width,layout,and heavily vegetated banks make this attribute not applicable.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
20

Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Planted Acreage 12.42
Mapping CCPV Number of Combined %of Planted
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Depiction Polygons Acreage Acreage
Pattern
1.Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.1 acres and Color 0 0 0.0%
Pattern
2.Low Stem Density Areas* Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY 3,4 or 5 stem count criteria 0.1 acres and Color 0 0 0.0%
Total: 0 0 0.0%
Pattern
3.Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year 0.25 acres and Color 0 0 0.0%
Cumulative Total: 0 0 0.0%
Easement Acreage 13.5
Mapping CCPV Number of Combined %of Planted
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Depiction Polygons Acreage Acreage
Pattern
4.Invasive Areas of Concern Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale 1000 sf and Color 0 0 0.0%
Pattern
5.Easement Encroachment Areas Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale none and Color 0 0 0.0%
No areas of concern are noted.
*Some small areas spot planted in 2019;these areas are smaller than 0.1 acres and not included in CCPV
Hudson Stream Restoration Project Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
21

q° f \i \ ' 'y i r r ` 1
, , i,, , lf,,,,14' /: 4 -`4:g '' 1_''
,A4
kilt
f �.
_ ,..:-.- f.,45......;--1.,', t: . .4--, --,:-'.wk.
F�
•
it
rr a ,{j�
�r xr A lye+ ittt,, ' , 2,y. sp y— l r
'� fA}w � �,�-.-��� �' of e ! i' '�kV Y w 1��i " 'C __
ikO
i `{ ,P•
'?�� � •:� rAI T•i�`�. f:. Y^� tl^ F L �,j Ik fir..,.„-:,
k '�C�
�' -tea , �•�rti Z` i ,1 ' " a 11 11; L
� � 3 }�','. { •_ �,,WAIL
e mas i `j • ,- S , >•P ..•; . 4 , 5
` , ' .- �- 'tt". A a e �' 'it " 4 p"" '� dry
�tk 1 �� f� �� �+'u �. -�r� 'x,(m�tij���� Las K, St�=�l �-.I� �� }- _ � a.s„
it
‘Ilk
Photo 1: Highly vegetated stream area with wetland along Reach 1 View Northwest.
w 4 I r k _x t i a - ` i 95 .,..
0.
Ee y� wl ! - rf v, f
F 2 .T i .. � 3 S4 4 / � Y R r�k T
�_`� ,, �iya CCr``a I *� `� � �,"� �.ewe, ,3ti' �" �
L'4 3 l � S `'k k Y T k J g �9
7
I x
•f��d. 6 ,- f,✓ }L �� � �k L ° i , r �/ � 1,r,�,f I
•
$, y� f w t�,�, ' '
i,.. ..„,,,,„,:iit.,.
� f � .�• Y� �A r F..C' � �L�+F,� � i' �1��"At�a+R�£ eR�
nl'‘.:S.--G:5* 't'ri A"S' '
WAI
'�y.�yyp���-vot�„'ay �`�� ��p-:'-'- '4P21:44 ic,--%411-40M. '' .(f �� '—ay k � �I it L �' 4
iii
Photo 2: Near Cross Section 6 on Reach 2-View Northwest.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year
6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
22

, .._ ..
1 i w
18ti
F
h
�q, L Y . ` E'
`i
aa a :' f� b "k � t � C� +ery ; @e°' 4 , y � 2rF
ffer
PP4
Iti
Photo 3: View of Cross Section 1 on Reach 3 —View Northeast.
d
5.
alf , ., '-• "'.,ltik" '4'7,A:14' ',, ' -;."." ' , t'' 4t: '."-'..g.!,4.,?. 'N.-'71._ %,
� t � r.�.,� m' �sa�'�.. µ 'isty k� �v.04 ���µ I _
`
4 l �
1
g.
1/J4 ..-:.' ,..14,./'-,A1,,,it IF:e- —r ''' '' k ' "'-.1 t-1*-,, '). .'. ,i.7;;,1•2 ----,:
SPwS ,
vii4t,
Photo 5: View near Cross Section 4 on Reach 4—View Southeast
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
23

�. f� � �it * f r` ' IF �'tart��� ' r xS* � $ $ rY.
.41
,,,...,,. .,"
‘,,p;"4-\„',,,,,..-;P,:--...is.
4
4r-
t';„4.1.P.104-.,!•..,s . f ':�si,3.,,,7!..i.' ',',."-A.:-'=-1 .q. r , y1t�1 i r. -a . '�...,_f - `�,,
IA
oaf CA{ Y • It r .R_ ,
/ 4 x7 c ,? gr, r 1
N-'� �.� �� �.� f�_°. � r -sue'' � [
tt
3i, .o4v 1RR �!,7z 'tea •. . ,_� 1' ;g•
_+
. h`,, tt.� . . •"fit d �'r' 45 'S ��"'• �. \�_
,� ' _ A..day ` .�, -'- -c _ .� g F,.. .
Aii .ice`:N
— ..:-, `ti - '.Q?Y;�- .j�'r is a .A `� y� — ..
lije
a r` \ r vrC�a, ll��
Photo 5: View near Cross Section 4 on Reach 4—View Southeast (Piping).
T-fr.A,
x • nr,
�yNO P _ rn
l Z�l 7�ta - 1` ` YSY ,'r
V p
1;,
k L iT .3.h f
sue..` x 7
•
•
gr. • :; ..." - - - -
y 1
\p J r`
�s•
��F. j� r I i}i F j. m"T S \,5 �i °43'-t
I u� w
' i 1.' .:? :.-?'' ` ' : tea' r t t ''.
Ajf� % 11� 4 r r 4 v�,�,�A r.
Photo 6: View downstream of Reach 5 Swamp Run.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
24

t c "sat; ns++f" ,°+try'!,/ i�
. ;ate .-_-�
a gr ° . E s u•
.,..--:.r",ik:''.411lit, .
1 y:?� a:
1Q1Q 4 ►/
ij
� y�1l ik ,': 3 Y
` + r
am. . � : _ , �•
r
j1'41,11 x jrt; rat.,%',,, ''4Ie"i� d' n� � ! a ) !( '
X fll r•r`"�,� .✓ 'S a„� F n ,�z r- 3P +.ic Pg i rrtt"
1 '' F' a �iI .a "y r `�i ,� ,a ,„"r".. n [.. ry� k $ tee die
r 1 i lNV'�r 1:.� ' ': .cT I S :�q ' .41''./f'T 3 }°��,aS'�i°�',. �.�•`�' �F' �� �.:3 F�� . ��„k .:�Y'7�.'�.4.r:w s ? 1 a>
Photo 7: View upstream on Reach 5 Swamp Run.
Hudson Stream2022 Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
Project#95361 February
25

APPENDIX C: MY 5 VEGETATION PLOT DATA (2020)
Table 7: Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
26

Table 7: Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities (MY 5 2020)
EEP Project Code 0004638. Project Name:Hudson
Current Plot Data(MY5 2020)
0004638-01-0001 0004638-01-0002 0004638-01-0003 0004638-01-0004 0004638-01-0005 0004638-01-0006 0004638-01-0007 0004638-01-0008
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Acer rubrum red maple Tree
Baccharis halimifolia eastern baccharis Shrub 2 5 1 2 2
Betula nigra river birch Tree
Juniperus virginiana eastern redcedar Tree
Ligustrum vulgare European privet Exotic
Liquida mbar styraciflua sweetgum Tree 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 1 1
Morella cerifera wax myrtle shrub 1 1 1
Pinus echinata shortleaf pine Tree
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree 14 5 6 10 5 13
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 3 3 6 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 5 5 5
Quercus alba white oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2
Quercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree
Quercus nigra water oak Tree 2 2 2
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 6 6 6 6
Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1
Ulmus americana American elm Tree
Stem count 11 11 32 8 8 17 7 7 16 10 10 27 10 10 17 7 7 22 11 11 17 11 11 15
size(ares) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
size(ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Species count 5 9 4 4 7 2 2 4 3 3 7 5 5 7 3 3 6 3 3 5 2 2 4
Stems per ACRE 445.2 1295 323.7 323.7 688 283.3 283.3 647.5 404.7 404.7 1093 404.7 404.7 688 283.3 283.3 890.3 445.2 445.2 688 445.2 445.2 607
EEP Project Code 0004638. Project Name:Hudson
Annual Means
Species
Scientific Name Common Name Type 0004638-01-0009 0004638-01-0010 0004638-01-0011 0004638-01-0012 0004638-01-0013 MYS(2020) MY3(2018) MY2(2017) MY1(2016) MVO(2016)
PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoL!P-all T PnoLS.P-all T PnoL1 P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Acer rubrum red maple Tree 2 2 i 9
Baccharis halimifolia eastern baccharis Shrub 1 2 3 18 1
Betula nigra river birch Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1
Juniperus virginiana eastern redcedar Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1
Ligustrum vulga re European privet Exotic 1
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Tree 3 15 3 32 10 6
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 4 4 5 14 14 15 15 15 18 12 12 12 31 31 31
Morella cerifera wax myrtle shrub 3 4 2
Pinus echinata shortleaf pine Tree 1 1
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree 12 3 1 83 84 53
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 5 5 5 IIM1 10 10 10 1 1 1 4 4 4 49 49 54 49 49 50 46 46 50 44 44 47 54 54 54
Quercus alba white oak Tree 1 1 1 5 5 5 11 11 11 11 11 15 12 12 16 12 12 12 16 16 16
Quercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 11 11 11 16 16 16 17 17 17 19 19 19 19 19 19
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 6 6 6 8 8 8 11 11 12 8 8 8 13 13 13
Quercus nigra water oak Tree 3 3 3 3 3 3 8 8 8 13 13 13 14 14 15 11 11 11 18 18 18
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 _ _ _ _ 32 32 39 29 29 31 29 29 35_ 24 24 25 33 33 33
Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 2 3 2 2 7 6
Ulmus americana American elm Tree 1 1_ 1 1 1 1
Stem count 10 10 26 7 7 25 16 16 20 8 8 31 10 10 18 126 126 283 140 140 254 144 144 234 130 130 134 184 184 184
size(ares) 1 1 1 1 1 13 13 13 13 13
size(ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32
Stems per ACRE 404.7 404.7 1052 283.3 1012 647 647 809 324 324 1255 405 405 728 392 392 881jj 436 791 448 448 728 405 405 417 573 573 573
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
27

Table 7: Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities (Continued)
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements,but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements,by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
28

APPENDIX D: MY 5 STREAM MEASUREMENT AND
GEOMORPHOLOGY
Cross Sections with Annual Overlays (XS 1-11)
Table 8: Bank Pin Data
Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Reach 1-4)
Table 1 la. Monitoring Data—Dimensional Morphology Summary
Table l lb. Monitoring Data— Stream Reach Data Summary (Reach 1-4)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
29

+9 Pool
44
43
42
41
$ 40
C
0
39
› orialiIIIIIIINI111111111111111111<
a)
w 38 - �.
37IP'
36 ,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
MY0(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) MY2(11/2017) +MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) —Bankfull
Cross Section 1 Reach 3 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
30

2+41 Riffle
41
39 -
4L''''.%.%"6" ,,„,„.......404044448440404441 .411404441:4440trea40000001000000000000. ..
C
0
f6
a�i 37
W
„ A
35
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
— MYO(1/2016) —MY1(9/2016) MY2(11/2017) MY3(10/2018) —F MY5(10/2020) Ban kfu l l
Cross Section 2—Reach 3 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
31

+24 Riffle
38
36 -
c
0
cz
v
w 34 -
32 ,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
—0—MY0(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) MY2 (11/2017) —40—MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) Bankfull
Cross Section 3 Reach 4 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
32

2+69 Pool
39 ,
38
37
36
C
0 35 -
w 34 -
33 -
32
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
MY0(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) t MY2(11/2017) —•—•MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) Ban kfu I I
Cross Section 4—Reach 4 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
33

+68 Pool
40
39
38
37
o
m
a' 36
w 35 ►tf�
lOr
34 r 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
MY0(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) f MY2(11/2017) MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) Ban kfu II
Cross Section 5 —Reach 2 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
34

3+95 Riffle
42 ,
41
40
39
3840
w 37 •41114
401mv.
36
35
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
MVO(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) +MY2(11/2017) MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) BankfuII
Cross Section 6—Reach 2 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
35

6+47 Pool
39 -
38
37
o �a
ro
cu
w 36
35
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
MY0(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) MY2(11/2017) MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) Bankfull
Cross Section 7—Reach 1 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
36

4+43 Riffle
39.0 -
38.5
00 38.0
ai
"' 37.5 �.
37.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
�MVO(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) t MY2(11/2017) +MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) I3ankfull
Cross Section 8—Reach 1 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
37

2+73 Pool
40.5 ,
40.0
39.5 •
iF
O � N..'� 39.0ir.
n
v
W
38.5 '
38.0 r 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
—•—MY0(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) •—•—MY2(11/2017) +MY3(10/2018) t MY5(10/2020) Ba nkfu II
Cross Section 9—Reach 1 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
38

+64 Riffle
41.5 ,
- -
41.0
- 40.5 -
r� y
w
40.0
39.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width(ft)
MVO(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) MY2(11/2017) —0—MY3(10/2018) MY5(10/2020) Bankfull
Cross Section 10—Reach 1 (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
39

8+14 Riffle
38 ,
37
36
35
- 400
w 33
32
31
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Width(ft)
—40—MY()(1/2016) MY1(9/2016) t MY2(11/2017) MY3{10/2018) --MY5{10/2020) Bankfull
Cross Section 11 —Reach 1 &4 Confluence (2020 Data)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
40

Table 8: Monitoring Year 5 - Bank Pin Data
Pins arrays consist of three pins located in the middle of stream banks along meander bends _
Bank Pin Array#1 @ XS 5 -Reach 2—Station 2+69
Pin Exposure
Upstream Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation
Middle Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation
Downstream Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation
Bank Pin Array#2 @ XS 4 -Reach 2—Station 3+95
Pin _ Exposure
Upstream Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation
Middle Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation _
Downstream Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation
Bank Pin Array#1 @ XS 9 -Reach 1 —Station 2+73
Pin Exposure
Upstream Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation _
Middle Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation _
Downstream Pin Could not find- minor aggradation& dense vegetation
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
41

Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
ProJ)ect Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361)-Segment/Reach:Reach 1
Parameter IGauge2 Re Tonal Curve I Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es)Data Design I Monitoring Baseline
t
Dimension and Substrate Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Mean Med Max SDS n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD' n
Bankfull Width(ft) 3.36 3.83 6.02 19.74 21.97 24.2 9.02 11.5 16.2 2
Floodprone Width(ft) 6.47 6.91 10.5 44 64.5 85 18.06 26.74 34.89 57 83.33 2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.45 0.52 0.6 0.7 0.75 0.82 0.42 0.22 0.26 2
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.56 0.87 1.07 0.85 1.02 1.18 0.44 0.53 0.61 0.4 0.51 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 1.99 2 2.68 16.09 16.49 16.89 3.8 2.58 4.26 2
Width/Depth Ratio 5.64 7.37 13.52 24.22 29.27 34.67 21.4 52.27 62.31 2
Entrenchment Ratio 1.74 1.8 1.93 2 2.94 3.87 2 2.94 3.87 4.96 5.14 2
1Bank Hei ht Ratio 1 1 2
Profile I r
Riffle Length(ft) N/A* 12 46.5 81 4.93 19.09 33.25
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A* 0.004 0.011 0.017 0.006 0.016 0.025
Pool Length(ft) N/A* 21 30.5 40 4.72 8.41 14.98
Pool Max depth(ft) N/A* 1.4 1.65 1.9 0.72 0.93 1.15
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A* 40 59 78 16.42 26.95 35.63
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A* 27 49 76 11.08 20.11 31.19
Radius of Curvature(ft) WA* 90 92 95 36.94 37.76 38.99
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A* 4.10 4.19 4.32
Meander Wavelength(ft) WA* 12.43 15.07 18.25 112.1 135.9 164.6
Meander Width Ratio WA* 1.23 2.23 3.46
Transport parameters IIM
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.26 0.18
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 0.56 0.14
Additional Reach Parameters 1
Rosgen Classification G5-G6 C5-C6 C5-C6 C5/6
Bankfull Velocity(fps)
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 5.6
Valley length(ft) 840 264
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 846 264 833 850
Sinuosity(ft) 1.01 1 1.04 1.04
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.007 0.004 0.007
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.006
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric I
Biological or Other
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
42

Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
ProJ)ect Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361)-Segment/Reach:Reach 2
Parameter IGauge2 Regional Curve I Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es)Data Design I Monitoring Baseline
t
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD' n
Bankfull Width(ft) 5.97 6.87 7.2 19.74 21.97 24.2 14.83 11.78 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 10.03 12.03 13.47 44 64.5 85 29.71 43.55 57.39 28.2 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.91 0.92 0.94 0.7 0.75 0.82 0.67 0.45 1
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.38 1.42 1.54 0.85 1.02 1.18 0.7 0.84 0.98 0.86 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 5.59 6.32 6.58 16.09 16.49 16.89 10 5.28 1
Width/Depth Ratio 6.38 7.47 7.88 24.22 29.27 34.67 22 26.18 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.67 1.68 1.96 2 2.94 3.87 2.94 2.39 1
1Bank Hei ht Ratio 1 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) N/A* 12 46.5 81 8.1 31.39 54.68
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A* 0.004 0.011 0.017 0.003 0.008 0.012
Pool Length(ft) N/A* 21 30.5 40 14.18 20.59 27
Pool Max depth(ft) N/A* 1.4 1.65 1.9 1.16 1.48 1.84
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A* 40 59 78 27 44.33 58.61
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A* 27 49 76 18.23 33.08 51.31
Radius of Curvature(ft) WA* 90 92 95 60.76 62.11 64.14
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A* 4.10 4.19 4.32
Meander Wavelength(ft) WA* 12.43 15.07 18.25 184.3 223.5 270.7
Meander Width Ratio WA* 1.23 2.23 3.46
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.42 0.11
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 1.25 0.18
Additional Reach Parameters 1
Rosgen Classification G5-G6 C5-C6 C5-C6 C 5/6
Bankfull Velocity(fps)
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 17.2
Valley length(ft) 486 264
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 516 264 532 541
Sinuosity(ft) 1.06 1 1.05 1.05
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.003 0.004 0.003
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0035
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric I
Biological or Other
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
43

Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
ProJ)ect Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361)-Segment/Reach:Reach 3
Parameter IGauge2 Re Tonal Curve I Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es)Data Design I Monitoring Baseline
MMIN
Dimension and Substrate Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD' n
Bankfull Width(ft) 3.55 4.03 5.05 19.74 21.97 24.2 10 12.5 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 5.97 6.44 9.13 44 64.5 85 20.03 29.36 38.69 32.9 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.55 0.79 0.84 0.7 0.75 0.82 0.5 0.57 1
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.88 1.15 1.44 0.85 1.02 1.18 0.52 0.63 0.72 0.85 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 1.94 3.17 4.26 16.09 16.49 16.89 5 7.07 1
Width/Depth Ratio 5.12 5.99 6.5 24.22 29.27 34.67 20 21.95 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.6 1.68 1.8 2 2.94 3.87 2 2.94 3.87 2.63 1
1Bank Hei ht Ratio 1 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) N/A* 12 46.5 81 5.46 21.17 36.87
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A* 0.004 0.011 0.017 0.005 0.014 0.021
Pool Length(ft) N/A* 21 30.5 40 9.56 13.88 18.21
Pool Max depth(ft) N/A* 1.4 1.65 1.9 0.86 1.1 1.36
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A* 40 59 78 18.21 29.89 39.51
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) WA* 27 49 76 12.29 22.3 24.59
Radius of Curvature(ft) WA* 90 92 95 40.96 41.88 43.24
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A* 4.10 4.19 4.32
Meander Wavelength(ft) WA* 12.43 15.07 18.25 124.3 150.7 182.5
Meander Width Ratio WA* 1.23 2.23 3.46
Transport parameters _
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.37 0.14
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 1.02 0.18
Additional Reach Parameters 1
Rosgen Classification G5-G6 C5-C6 C5-C6 C 5/6
Bankfull Velocity(fps)
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 8
Valley length(ft) 442 264
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 460 264 445 446
Sinuosity(ft) 1.04 1 1.01 1.08
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.007 0.004 0.007
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.005
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric I
Biological or Other
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
44

Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
ProJ)ect Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361)-Segment/Reach:Reach 4
Parameter IGauge2 Re Tonal Curve I Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es)Data Design I Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD' n
Bankfull Width(ft) 7.34 7.48 8.84 19.74 21.97 24.2 21.82 9.9 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 12.21 13.83 16.28 44 64.5 85 43.69 64.05 84.41 31.36 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.97 1 1.05 0.7 0.75 0.82 0.78 0.32 1
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.47 1.51 1.82 0.85 1.02 1.18 0.81 0.98 1.13 0.74 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 7.49 7.69 8.58 16.09 16.49 16.89 17 3.17 1
Width/Depth Ratio 7.01 7.47 9.11 24.22 29.27 34.67 28 30.9 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.63 1.84 1.88 2 2.94 3.87 2 2.94 3.87 3.17 1
1Bank Hei ht Ratio I 1 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) N/A* 12 46.5 81 11.92 46.18 80.44
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A* 0.004 0.011 0.017 0.006 0.016 0.025
Pool Length(ft) N/A* 21 30.5 40 20.85 30.29 39.72
Pool Max depth(ft) WA* 1.4 1.65 1.9 1.34 1.71 2.12
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A* 40 59 78 39.72 65.21 86.21
Pattern '
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A* 27 49 76 26.8 48.66 75.47
Radius of Curvature(ft) N/A* 90 92 95 89.37 91.36 94.34
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A" 4.096 4.188 4.324
Meander Wavelength(ft) N/A* 12.43 15.07 18.25 271.1 328.7 398.2
Meander Width Ratio N/A* 1.23 2.23 3.46
Transport parameters
_ Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.48 0.16
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 1.01 0.22
Additional Reach Parameters r_1._
Rosgen Classification G5-G6 C5-C6 C5-C6 C 5/6
Bankfull Velocity(fps)
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 26.2
Valley length(ft) 434 264
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 503 264 437 447
Sinuosity(ft) 1.16 1 1.01 1.01
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.003 0.004 0.003
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0035
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
4%of Reach with Erodin.Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
45

Table 11a. Monitoring Data-Dimensional Morphology Summary(Dimensional Parameters-Cross Sections)
Project Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361) Segment/Reach:Reach 1-4(2200 feet)
Cross Section 1(Pool-Reach 3) Cross Section 2(Riffle-Reach 3) Cross Section 3(Riffle-Reach 4) Cross Section 4(Pool-Reach 4) Cross Section 5(Pool-Reach 2)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area 36.40 36.36 36.55 36.42 36.43 34.50 34.34 34.60 34.62 34.63
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfullt Area 1.00 1.00 0.77 0.88 0.79 1.00 1.14 0.77 0.65 0.90
Thaloeg Elevation 36.33 37.05 37.54 38.28 38.08 35.55 35.44 35.52 35.51 35.51 33.76 32.88 33.96 34.06 33.85 33.00 32.92 32.90 33.20 33.02 34.56 34.77 34.89 35.19 35.02 _
LTOB'Elevation 37.57 37.53 38.05 38.65 38.49 36.40 36.36 36.31 36.31 36.24 34.50 34.55 34.45 34.42 34.52 33.60 33.64 33.60 33.75 33.73 35.46 35.42 35.44 36.15 35.41
LT0132 Max Depth(ft) 1.24 0.48 0.51 0.37 0.50 0.85 0.92 0.79 0.80 0.70 0.74 1.67 0.49 0.36 0.70 0.60 0.72 0.70 0.55 0.60 0.90 0.65 0.55 0.96 0.60 _
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft') 3.90 1.50 1.40 1.80 1.80 7.07 7.07 2.90 5.60 4.60 3.17 4.40 2.00 1.70 2.30 3.19 2.30 1.80 2.50 2.50 3.70 4.90 2.00 3.40 3.40
Cross Section 6(Riffle-Reach 2) Cross Section 7(Pool-Reach 1) Cross Section 8(Riffle-Reach 1) Cross Section 9(Pool-Reach 1) Cross Section 10(Riffle-Reach 1)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area 36.53 37.13 37.75 37.84 37.49 37.91 37.90 37.97 37.93 37.91 40.26 40.22 40.27 40.28 40.29
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfull'Area 1.00 0.63 0.47 0.74 1.60 1.00 1.30 1.09 0.88 0.80 1.00 1.13 1.04 1.00 0.90 _
Thalweg Elevation 35.67 36.57 36.97 37.01 37.02 35.91 35.87 35.70 35.96 35.93 37.40 37.41 37.33 37.44 37.36 38.41 38.32 38.05 38.43 38.52 39.86 39.77 39.82 39.87 39.90
LTOB'Elevation 36.53 36.92 37.34 37.62 37.78 36.56 36.66 36.25 36.70 36.58 37.91 38.05 38.03 37.87 37.81 39.00 39.03 39.21 39.05 39.09 40.26 40.28 40.29 40.28 40.25
LTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 0.86 0.35 0.37 0.61 0.80 0.65 0.79 0.55 0.74 0.70 0.51 0.64 0.70 0.43 0.50 0.59 0.71 1.16 0.62 0.60 0.40 0.51 0.47 0.41 0.40 _
LTOB'Cross Sectional Area(ft) 5.25 2.82 1.60 2.66 13.89 2.30 3.10 2.30 3.20 3.20 4.28 7.20 5.01 3.80 2.77 2.20 12.40 5.20 2.40 2.40 2.40 3.30 2.90 2.40 2.00
Cross Section 11(Confluence-Reach 1) The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The
outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward.They are the bank height ratio using a
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank.These are calcdated as follows:
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area 33.42 33.44 33.49 33.52 33.53 1-Bank Height Ratio(BHR)takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2,then the MY1
bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey=10 ft2.The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfull'Area 1.00 0.84 0.73 0.71 0.79 of bank(LTOB)elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the
Thaloeeg Elevation 32.51 31.91 32.56 32.58 32.60 denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year.
LTOB'Elevation 33.42 33.19 33.24 33.25 33.33 2-LTOB Area and Max depth-These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey(The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation).Area below the LTOB elevation will
LTOB2 Max Depth(S) 0.91 1.28 0.68 0.67 0.50 be used and tracked for each year as above.The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation(same as in the BHR calculation)will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB
LTOB'Cross Sectional Area(ft)22.54 14.68 14.13 13.85 16.54
Note:The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements am to their limit of reliable detection,therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement(as a percentage)is by default magnified as channel size decereases.Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional
sediments observed.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
46

Exhibit Table 11b. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
Project Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361) Segment/Reach:Reach 1
'Parameter Baseline MY-1 MY-2 MY-3 MY-5 MY-7
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle only Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n _
Bankfull Width(ft) 11.50 16.20 2 11.46 20.00 2 11.19 16.10 2 11.24 17.33 2 11.20 14.90 2 _
Floodprone Width(ft)57.00 83.30 2 58.28 86.26 2 53.80 97.70 2 57.38 74.01 2 54.00 >100 2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.22 0.26 2 0.24 0.28 2 0.23 0.26 2 0.25 0.26 2 0.20 0.60 2 _
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.40 0.51 2 0.49 0.50 2 0.42 0.57 2 0.40 0.45 2 0.40 0.60 2
_ Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 2.58 4.26 2 3.25 4.77 2 2.58 4.26 2 2.58 4.26 2 2.58 4.26 2 _
Width/Depth Ratio 52.27 62.31 2 40.49 83.95 2 48.60 60.83 2 38.10 38.50 2 52.20 52.80 2
Entrenchment Ratio 4.96 5.14 2 4.31 5.08 2 5.21 5.36 2 4.27 5.10 2 4.80 --- 2
'Bank Height Ratio 1.00 1.00 2 1.00 1.00 2 1.12 0.88 2 0.91 1.10 2 0.80 0.90 2
Profile ' T Taim
ir
Riffle Length(ft)
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) . . . . _ _ _
Pool Length(ft)
Pool Max depth(ft)
Pool Spacing(ft) . _ _ _
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft)
Radius of Curvature(ft)
Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual data,dimensional data or profile data indicate
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) . significant shifts from baseline _ _
Meander Wavelength(ft)
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification C 5/6 C 5/6 C 5/6 C 5/6 C 5/7
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 850 850 850 850 850
Sinuosity(ft) 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft)
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006
2-Bankfull for XS 6 recalculated
'RI%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
'SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% - - .
sd16/d35/d50/d84/d95/
2%of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these vnll typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3=Riffle,Run,Pool,Glide,Step;Silt/Clay,Sand,Gravel,Cobble,Boulder,Bedrock;dip=max pave,disp=max subpave
4.=Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
47

Exhibit Table 11b. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
Project Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361) Segment/Reach:Reach 2
Parameter Baseline MY-1 MY-2 MY-3 MY-5 MY-7
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle only Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean'Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n
Bankfull Width(ft) 11.78 1 12.51 1 12.51 1 26.22 1 24.4 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 28.2 1 25 1 42.3 1 48.32 1 36.3 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.45 1 0.11 1 0.42 1 0.22 1 0.2 1
'Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.86 1 0.21 1 0.54 1 _ 0.64 1 0.5 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 5.28 1 1.39 1 5.28 1 5.28 1 5.28 1
Width/Depth Ratio 26.2 1 112.3 1 29.64 1 40.9 1 112.7 1
Entrenchment Ratio 2.39 1 2 1 2 1 1.8 _ 1 1.5 1
'Bank Height Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Profile 1 C
Riffle Length(ft)
Riffle Slope(ft/ft)
Pool Length(ft)
Pool Max depth(ft)
Pool Spacing(ft)
Pattern 71 -
Channel Beltwidth(ft)
Radius of Curvature(ft)
Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual data,dimensional data or profile data
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) indicate significant shifts from baseline
Meander Wavelength(ft)
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification C 5/5 C 5/5 C 5/5 C 5/5 C 5/6
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 541 541 541 541 541
Sinuosity(ft) 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft)
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035
2=Bankfull for XS 6 recalculated
'Ri%/Ru%IP%/G%I S%
'SC%/Sa%/G%I C%l B%I Be%
'd16/d35 Id50/d84 Id9511
s%of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual sunny from visual assessment table
3=Rffle,Run,Pool,Glide,Step; Silt/Clay,Sand,Gravel,Cobble,Boulder,Bedrock; dip=max pave,disp=max subpave
4.=Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
48

Exhibit Table 11b. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
Protect Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361) Segment/Reach:Reach 3
Parameter Baseline MY-1 MY-2 MY-3 MY-5 MY-7
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle only Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n
Bankfull Width(ft) 12.50 1 14.44 1 16.33 1 14.80 1 13.00 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 32.90 1 36.68 1 42.80 1 36.01 1 38.20 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.57 1 0.48 1 _ 0.43 1 0.47 1 0.50 1 _ _ _ _
'Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.85 1 0.96 1 1.04 1 0.88 1 0.90 1 _
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 7.07 1 16.24 1 _ 7.07 1 7.07 1 7.05 1 _ _ _ _
Width/Depth Ratio 21.95_ 1 69.34 1 37.73 1 16.80 1 24.00 1
Entrenchment Ratio 2.63 1 2.53 1 2.25 1 2.42 1 2.90 1
'Bank Height Ratio 1.00 1 1.00 1 1.00 1 0.45 1 1.00 1 _
Profile r
Riffle Length(ft)I
Riffle Slope(ft/ft)
Pool Length(ft)
Pool Max depth(ft)
Pool Spacing(ft)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft)
Radius of Curvature(ft)
Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual data,dimensional data or profile data indicate
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) significant shifts from baseline
Meander Wavelength(ft)
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters _
Rosgen Classification C 5/6 C 5/6 C 5/6 C 5/6 C 5/7
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 446 446 446 446 446
Sinuosity(ft) 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft)
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005
2=Bankfull for xS 6 recalculated
3Ri%/Ra%IP%IG%IS% _
3SC%/Sa%fG%fC%fB%I Be% _ _ _ _ _
3d16/d351 d50 l d84/d95 I
2%of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profle.
2=Proportion of reach eibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3=Riffle,Run,Pool,Glide,Step; Silt/Clay,Sand,Gravel,Cobble,Boulder,Bedrock; dip=max pave,disp=max subpave
4.=Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
49

Exhibit Table 11b. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
Project Name/Number(Hudson/DMS:95361) Segment/Reach:Reach 4
Parameter Baseline MY-1 MY-2 MY-3 MY-5 MY-7
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle only Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Mod Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max SD° n Min Mean Med Max I SD° n
Bankfull Width(ft) 9.90 1 8.27 1 10.59 1 10.00 1 8.00 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 31.36 1 57.96 1 29.01 1 25.46 1 34.20 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.32 1 0.52 1 0.30 1 0.30 1 0.40 1
t Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.74 1 1.62 1 0.62 1 0.52 1 0.80 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 3.17 1 4.31 1 3.17 1 3.17 _ 1 3.17 1
Width/Depth Ratio 30.90 1 15.86 1 35.39 1 19.23 1_ 20.20 1
Entrenchment Ratio 3.17 1 7.01 1 5.47 1 2.55 1 4.30 1
'Bank Height Ratio 1.00 1 1.00 1 1.00 1 0.70 1 1.00 1 Profile II _
Riffle Length(ft)
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) _
Pool Length(ft)
Pool Max depth(ft)
Pool Spacing(ft)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft)
Radius of Curvature(ft)
Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual data,dimensional data or profile data -
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) indicate significant shifts from baseline _
Meander Wavelength(ft)
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters _
Rosgen Classification C 5/6 C 5/6 C 5/6
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 447 447 447
Sinuosity(ft) 1.01 1.01 1.01
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft)
BF slope(ft/ft) 0 0035 0.0035 0.0035
2=Bankfull for XS 6 recalculated
3RI%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
3SC%/Sa%/G%I C%/B%/Be% U
3d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/ __ _ _ _
2%of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3=Rifle,Run,Pool,Glide,Step; Silt/Clay,Sand,Gravel,Cobble,Boulder,Bedrock;dip=max pave,disp=max subpave
4.=Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
50

APPENDIX E: YEAR 6 HYDROLOGIC DATA
Table 9: Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 12: Verification of Baseflow
Figure 2: Monthly Rainfall Data with Percentiles
Figures 3-12: Stream Surface Water Hydrology (Well 1-10)
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
51

Table 9:Verification of Bankfull Events
Date of Greater
Observation Dates of Occurrence Method than Qbkf
Stage?
Reach 1(Well 5,6)
10/27-10/28/20, 11/1-11/8/20, 11/12-11/30/20, 12/1-12/6/20, 12/8/20-1/13/21,
10/28/2021 1/17-1/21/21, 1/23-1/31/21,2/4-3/3/21, 3/5-4/5/21,4/10/21, 6/4/21, 6/7&8/21, Data logger Y
6/10& 11/21,6/22-6/29/21
10/28/2020 Various, including: 11/11-12/22/19, 1/4-4/26/20,5/20-6/24, 9/15-9/21 Data logger Y
10/23/19 Various, including: 11/11/18-4/6/19,6/7-6/15/19 Data logger Y
10/5/18 Various, including: 12/8-4/6/18,5/05-5/10,5/30-6/6, 6/14, 7/24-8/8,8/22-8/26, Data logger
9/13-9/20
11/17/17 Various, including:9/29/2016-10/17/2016, 10/21-10/24,7/16-7/17, 8/11,8/13 Data logger Y
8/14,9/6-9/8/2017
9/29/16 2/7-2/13/16, 3/7-3/9/16 Data logger Y
Reach 2(Well 7)
10/28/2021 10/27/20-5/9/21, 5/12-5/15/21, 5/29-7/17/21,7/19-7/23/21,7/27-8/30/21, Data logger Y
9/3/21, 10/23-10/25/21
10/28/20 Various, including: 11/24/19-6/23/20,9/18-10/28 Data logger Y
10/23/19 Various, including: 10/5/18-5/5/19,6/7-7/2,7/12-7/25,8/16-8/24, 9/6-9/14, Data logger Y
10/22
10/5/18 1/7-1/16/18, 1/25-2/23, 2/27, 3/24-3/27,3/21,4/9-4/15, 8/2-8/5,9/13-9/20 Data logger Y
9/29/2016-10/16/2016, 10/25, 12/18-12/28, 12/30-1/3, 1/5-1/19, 1/30-1/31, 2/1-
11/17/17 2/6, 2/20-2/21, 3/3-3/6, 3/19-3/27,3/29-3/30,4/1-4/3,4/13,4/18-4/20,4/28- Data logger Y
4/30, 5/30/2017
9/29/16 1/29-2/1/16, 2/2-2/8/16 Data logger Y
Reach 3(Well 1,2)
Various, including: 10/27-12/6/20, 12/8/20-1/14/21, 1/17-1/31/21, 2/3-4/10/21,
10/25/21 4/13-4/14/21,4/19-4/24/21,4/26-4/28/21, 5/1/21,5/12-5/13/21, 5/29-6/11/21, Data logger Y
6/18/21,6/20/21, 6/22-7/1/21, 7/5-7/16/21,7/19/21, 7/22-7/23/21,7/27/-
7/29/21,8/2-8/19/21,8/24-8/29/21
10/28/20 Various, including between 12/14/19-3/10/20 Data logger Y
10/23/19 Various, including: 11/4/18, 11/11-11/15, 12/24-12/28, 12/30-12/31, 1/7/19, Data logger Y
1/15-1/23, 1/31-2/02. 3/13,3/19-21, 3/27-3/28
10/5/18 12/27/2017, 1/1/18, 1/6, 1/16, 1/25-2/5,3/27,9/13-9/18 Data logger Y
11/17/17 9/29/2016-11/3/2017 Data logger Y
9/29/16 2/5-6/16, 2/18/16, 5/29/16, 6/7/16 Data logger Y
Reach 4(Well 3)
10/31-11/2/2020, 11/4-11/9/2020, 11/12-11/15/2020, 11/18-11/21/2020, 11/24-
11/26/2020, 12/3/2021, 12/13-12/16/2020, 12/18-12/20/2020, 12/22-
12/24/2020, 12/27/2020-1/3/2021, 1/10-1/12/2021, 1/24/2021, 1/26/2021,
10/25/21 1/28/2021, 1/28-1/31/2021, 2/8-2/22/2021, 2/25-2/28/2021,3/2/2021, 3/7- Data logger Y
3/12/2021,3/16&17/2021,3/19-3/22/2021,3/30-4/4/2021,4/10/2021,
5/29/2021,6/2-6/4/2021,6/7/021, 6/10/2021, 6/25-6/27/2021,6/29/2021,
08/1/2021,8/3,4, 6&7/2021,8/15& 18/2021
10/28/20 Various, including between 12/7-12/22/19, 1/8-1/22/20,2/6-2/24 Data logger Y
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
52

10/23/19 Various, including: 10/17-10/26/18, 11/4, 11/9, 11/11-11/23, 12/5-12/16, 12/25 Data logger Y
1/2/19, 1/21-2/4,2/8-2/11, 2-16-3/14, 3-19-3/21, 3/25-3/31,4/1-4/7,9/6/18
10/5/18 11/9, 11/17-11/22/17,3/24-4/24/18, 5/22-6/10,9/11-9/19 Data logger Y
9/29/2016-10/2, 10/6-10/12, 10/14-10/16, 10/25-10/29, 11/1-11/2, 11/5-11/8,
11/17/17 11/12, 12/4-12/5, 12/9-12/28, 12/30-1/3, 1/6-1/17, 2/2-2/6,2/10-2/11, 2/21, 3/2- Data logger Y
3/31,4/2-4/3,4/9-4/20,4/24-4/26,4/29-4/30,5/5,5/25, 5/30,6/21,6/24-6/25,
7/5,7/18,8/13-8/14,9/9-9/11/2017
9/29/16 2/4/16, 2/18/16, 5/3/16,6/7/16 Data logger Y
Reach 1&4 Confluence(Well 4)
10/31-11/9/20, 11/12-11/29/20, 12/2-12/4/20, 12/10-12/20/20, 12/22/20-1/4/21,
1/6-1/7/21, 1/9-1/13-21, 1/18-1/20/21, 1/23-1/31/21, 2/4/21, 2/6-2/28/21,3/2-
10/25/21 3/3-21,3/6-3/23/21, 3/25/2021, 3/29-4/4/21,4/10/21, 6/3-6/4/21,6/7- Data logger Y
6/10/2021, 6/12/21,6/25-6/29/21,7/11/21,8/3-8/4/2021,8/7-8/8/21,8/15/21,
8/18/21
10/28/20 Various, including between 12/19-12/22/19, 1/8-1/23/20, 2/14-2/24, 3/7-3/23 Data logger Y
10/23/19 Various, including: 10/18/18, 11/3, 11/8, 11/11-11/18, 11/21-11/23, 12/5-12/15, Data logger Y
12/24-12/31, 1/31/19-2/2, 2/18-2/27, 3/6-3/14,4/1-4/5,6/10, 7/12,9/5
10/5/18 11/13, 11/17, 12/12, 12/26, 12/31/17, 1/10/18,2/13-2/15, 3/24-3/26,4/22,5/31, Data logger Y
6/1, 7/24, 7/29,8/8,9/12,9/16
11/17/17 10/7-10/9/16, 12/19-12/20/16, 1/2/16, 1/7-1/10/17, 1/13-1/14/17,3/5/17, 3/23 Data logger Y
3/24/17,4/24-4/25/17, 5/5/17, 5/23/17, 5/25/17, 6/24/17,9/6/17
9/29/16 2/4/16, 2/18/16, 5/3/16,6/7/16 Data logger Y
Table 12:Verification of Baseflow
30 Consecutive Days
Minimum Flow
Well(Reach) Dates of Occurrence Requirement Met? Notes
1(Reach 3) Various Y On-site data logger
2(Reach 3) Various Y On-site data logger
3(Reach 4) Various Y On-site data logger
4(Confluence R1&4) Various Y On-site data logger
5(Reach 1) Various Y On-site data logger
6(Reach 1) Various Y On-site data logger
7(Reach 2) Various Y On-site data logger
8(Reach 5) Various Y On-site data logger
9(Reach 5) Various Y On-site data logger
Logger/Well Cap
10(Reach 5) N/A N/A Dislodged/Base Station
Malfunction
Hudson Stream Restoration Project-Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
53

Figure 2: Monthly Rainfall Data
14
12
10
c
8
(13
0
4 1111
2
0
Nov 20' Dec 20' Jan 21' Feb 21' Mar 21' Apr 21' May 21' Jun 21' Jul 21' Aug 21' Sept 21' Oct 21'
Date
Rainfall(in) 30 percentile —70 percentile
Rainfall Data collected from Pitt-Greenville Airport in Beaufort County,NC. Data obtained from USDA-NRCS Agricultural Applied Climate
Information System. Percentiles calculated from 1997-2021 data.
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
54

Figure 3
Monitoring Well 1 —Reach 3
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
Monitoring Well 1 - Reach 3
40.0
39.0 ,/y/� I/1/� .,V4 /�A J"` Nnr;IilII .. 'W`"""� Y � Ittft4 IN ' `tiabe, ' ""h�" i'I �+' •�,
c 38.0 u, Yr ,• V Y 1J1/. VV - �V 9'r'I�
as 37.0
35.0
O O O O O O O O O O c-1 N1 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci c1 .1 c1 ,1 c1 c1 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci c1 .1 c1 c1 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci c1 ,1 O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N M 0011 LOO M T lD Cr) Cr) lO N 00 V1 N CO ci N d" Cr) 0011 lO [M O011 V1 N CO Lf1 N 00 11 N 00 d' •-1 N N c-I N M O to M O L/1 N T Lf1 N Cr) 11 N d"
N c1 N N ci c1 N c1 N N \ ci c1 N c1 N N ci c1 N c1 N (NI ci c1 N ci N N ci c1 N CC) \ -1 c1 N c1 N N
1-4 N N i\-1 r\-I c\-I N N N N en /+'1 M MI Cr) CY V if L\ L.11 LDD LOO l\D ^ ^ N N N 0000 00 0000 0000 0cr) \1 0\1 Ci -1 O O O
T-1
Date
—Water Elevation Bankfull Datum —Thalweg Elevation
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
55

Figure 4
Monitoring Well 2 —Reach 3
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
Monitoring Well 2 - Reach 3
37.0
0 wIltkivALAN
)11144.64 41411111.44,1:1141114\41
W tiNY
34.0
N N N N N N N N N N N rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J r'J r'J r'J
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
n N M Lin rn r�l N.n c Lfl N cc M 6�7 u�'] r_I M M 6�7 M r_-I n cDD N M O N N M O N C• u�'] r_I cDD N CO L_f] N M Q_7 uf'] N M C• Lfl r_I N.n Q_7 u�'] r_I N. O
rn r-1
M-tea ���� N aa� cD ���N.Nr-1 rn rn - - - co W- - - - c - - O O - -
O r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N r-I r-I r-I N N N rn rn rn rn Lf'1 u'] u'3 Lf'] CD CD CD n n N. cc co co co cn cn cn O O
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I
Date
Water Elevation Bankfull Datum —Thalweg Elevation
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
56

Figure 5
Monitoring Well 3 —Reach 4
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
Monitoring Well 3 - Reach 4
36.5
0 35.5
34.5Iiie'lliNNAI/1.4kArLAAPAiliAtAl/AVde4ft\m/Vd A_ ALL
tip.....ln 11
'+1irhil
co
m 33.5 141 %.004/0 m11.
W
32.5
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N C Lfl r�l N M c CAD N M M C Lfl N M M M n r_-I 0_D M N M,t O cDD N M,t 00 cID M c Lfl r_-I M N C Lfl N M c C_D r�-1 N M c Lfl N M c Lfl r_I M'
N N N N - - - M N CO CO - - - 67 67 - - - 0 O �-„
O r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N r-I rl r-I N N N MMMM u'] u'] u'] Lin Co CD CD N N N cc cc cc cn cn c rl r-I O O
rl r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1
Date
-Water Elevation -Bankfull Datum Thalvveg Elevation
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
57

Figure 6
Monitoring Well 4—Confluence Reaches 1 & 4
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
Monitoring Well 4 - Confluence Reaches 1&4
35.0
33.0 ,t+cW1111146411"\VIII\VVVIII
T '
133.0
Y ,■
31.0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
M c_7 Lfl N 00 O CD N C O [�D N M"O CD N CO LID M c_7 u�'] r_I N O_'7 ] r- rn c [�D n m c• Lin N CO O [�D r c O CD r'O CD N 00
N N rf1 N N cD N. N. cc cc c7
O r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N N r-I r-1 r-I r-I NNNN rn M M M Lf] u'] u'] CD CD CD n n N. CO CO CO Cr) Cr) c7 r-I r-1 O 0
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I
Date
Water Elevation Bankfull Datum —Thalweg Elevation
Figure 7
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
58

Monitoring Well 5—Reach 1
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
39.00 Monitoring Well 5 - Reach 1
8.00 �i l411\11111N1101\ i ' N OM. rhi
VI 111
37.00
m
d
W36.00
35.00
N N N N N N N N N N N r r r N N r r N N r r r N r r r N N r r r N r r r N r r r r N r r r N r r r r r r r
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
n M O n r_ 0_0 u�'] N c r_ 0_0 _f'] m]N W Lfl N 00 r_00 Lfl N 6�7 uDD M O uD M c �D m O n r_n r_00 O n r_00 Lfl N
N r-I rl N r-I N N r-I rl N r-I N r-I N N r-I - N r-I N M r-I rl N r-I rl rn rl N N r-I rl N r-I N
co
O r-I r�l r�-I r�l r-I rl N N N r_-I N N N N N N m m rn rn m N N ]]] [moo [moo LID n n n n cc cc cc cn cn c O O
rl r-I rl r-I rl r-I rl r-I rl
Date
-Water Elevation -Bankfull Datum Thalvveg Elevation
Figure 8
Monitoring Well 6—Reach 1
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
59

Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
Monitoring Well 6 - Reach 1
42.0
41.0 1�
c E
W
37.0
O O O O O O O O O O O r-1 rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J r'J r'J r'J r'J
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
OPP O O O O POO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
r-N c_7 Lfl r�l n rn_ c_7 [�D N cc m cc Lfl N 0_0 m cc Lfl r_-I 0_0 up N 0_0 O up N 0_0 O up rn_ c_7 Lfl r_I up N c_7 Lfl r�-I N rn_ c_7 C_D r�-I N rn_ c_7 Lfl r�-I N rn_ c_7 Lfl r_I 0_0 O
rn rn rn
r-1 r-1 N N N N m ��-„ 00 OD c7 c7 �-„ O O �-„
O r-I rl r-I rl r-I rl r-1 N N N r-1 r-1 r-1 NNN rn rn rn rn u'] u'] u'] u'] CD CD CD N N N cc cc cc c7 c7 a) rl r-I O O
rl r-I r-I r-I r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-I
Date
—Water Elevation —Bankfull Datum Thalweg Elevation
Figure 9
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
60

Monitoring Well 7—Reach 2
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
Monitoring Well 7 - Reach 2
E
0
04141)1/11t1
c 0 rrfll
36.01111111\\
I `
m
w 35.0
34.0
p p p p p p p p p p p
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O p p p p p p p p p p O O p p p O O p p p O p p p p O p p p p O p p p p O p p p O O p p p O O p p p O O p p p p p p p
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
n N cn L_O r�l N m c CAD N Co m cc L_O N Co_m cn L_O r_I CO_ up N o O up N co_ O up r c LO r_I up N c_7 L_O r_-I N [Y c_7 uDD r�-I -m c Lfl r�-I - [Y c_7 L_O r_I CO_ O
m ���-„ ��-„ N up [- cc co -„ c7 c7 -„ p p �-„
O r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N r-I r-I r-I N N N rn rn rn rn Ln u'] u'] un CD CD CD N N N CO CO CO c7 c7 cn p p
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I
Date
—Water Elevation Bankfull Datum —Thalweg Elevation
Figure 10
Monitoring Well 8—Reach 5
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
61

Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 6
Monitoring Well 8 - Reach 5
34.0
--�— 33.0 ejetANdefrompat44/14047.0 „
32.0 vl 1V \it
y 31.0 Water occasionally drops below streambed for part of the day;but there
uI are 60+consecutive days of flow between 2/3 and 4/5/21.
30.0
O O O O O O O O O O O r.J r' r' r' r' rJ r' r' r' r' r'J r' r' r' r' rJ r' r' r' rJ rJ r' r' r' rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r'J r'J r'J rJ rJ r' r' r' rJ rJ r'J r'J r' r' r' r'J r'
N N NNNN NNN NNN NNN 4-JINN NNNN NNN 4-JINN NNN NNN NNNN NNN NNN NNN NNNN NNN NNN N N
OP O O O O POO c O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O POO O O O POO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
cc rn cn CD N 00 O [�D m cn d• O CD N cn CDD N cc N r_n c Lfl r_I rY C Lfl r�-I N r_n O [�D r�-I N r_n C [�D N co d• O [�D N co O [�D r�-I co d• O [�D N cc u_7rn
r�-I
N N m N N cc 00
O r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N N r-I r-I r-I r-I NNNN rn rn rn rn Ln Ln Ln co co co N N N cc cc cc cn a) C r-I r-I O O
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I
Date
Water Elevation Streambed Surface Elevation
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
62

Figure 11
Monitoring Well 9— Reach 5
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 5
Monitoring Well 9 - Reach 5
33.0
32.0
C 31.0
co 30.0 \1\41144\irikt14111111\1\-\\:11t
m 29.0
W
28.0
N N N N N N N N N N N J N J J N N N J J J r-I N N J J N J J J J N N J J N N N r-I N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
000000
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N OJ N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O M O_7 [�D N O O [�D f_n O'f d- O uDD N O_) O [wD N CO N M O_'7 u�'] r_-I n O_7 Lfl r�-I N n O LDD r�-I N n O_7 LDD N W d- O LDD N W d- O uDD r�-I m d- O LDD N M L_f] r�-1
N r-I N N r-I r-I N N r-I r-I N N r-I r-I N N r-I r-I N m rl r-I N rl N N rl r-I N r-I N N r-I N N r-I N N r-I N
CDr-I r-I r�l r�-I r�l r-I NNNN r_-I r_-I r_I r_-I N NNNN m M M r n r n N N _f] L_f] Lfl uDD uDD uDD r- r- n n n cc co coc c c OD OD
r-I r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1
Date
Water Elevation Streambed Surface Elevation
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
63

Figure 12
Monitoring Well 10—Reach 5
Logger Malfunction; unable to download MY 6 data.
Stream Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring - MY 5
Monitoring Well 10 - Reach 5
32.0
y3 .0
30.0
0 29.0
m 28.0
y 27.0
— a) a) Q5 a) a) a) a) Q5 Q7 a) c 0 c c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 c c 0
rl 00 rl rl rl rl 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0 COO
0 O 0 0000000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
rn O Lfl N O O n m c [�D n O [moo N m't r_-1 n r_I n m O N r_-I c O n m c t�D N.n O [moo m 6 7 u�'] N a m O [�D N.
c O n m Q_7 co N.N O O
� �� N �� N, N N N, M u5 CO CID N. n n -„ c -„ �„, O ��„,
O O r-I rl r-I rl r-I rl N N N r-I rl rl N N N rn rn M M u'] u'] u'] CD CD CD n n n CO CO CO CO cn cn cn cn O O O
rl r-I rl r-I rl r-I rl rl r-I rl r-I rl
Date
Water Elevation Streambed Surface Elevation
Hudson Stream Restoration Project—Year 6 Monitoring Report
February 2022 DMS Project#95361
64