The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20081317 Ver 1_Monitoring Report_20140514FOURTH ANNUAL (2013) REPORT FOR THE HELL SWAMP /SCOTT CREEK WATERSHED MITIGATION SITE PANTEGO TOWNSHIP BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 2 Preparedgor:T PCSThosphateZompany,anc.2 Preparedly:2 CZR2ncorporated2 MayZZ0142 FOURTH ANNUAL (2013) REPORT FOR THE HELL SWAMP /SCOTT CREEK WATERSHED MITIGATION SITE PANTEGO TOWNSHIP BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PreparedJor:2 PCS2'hosphate2✓ompany,2nc.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Preparedly:2 CZR2ncorporated2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 May2?0142 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 2 1.02 PROJECT27VERVIEW2 ................................................ ............................... 1.1 History. 2 ............................................................. ............................... 1.2 Location. 2 .......................................................... ............................... 1.3 Goals2and2) erformance2✓ riteria. 2 ..................... ............................... 2.0 REQUIREMENTS2 ...................................... ............................... 2.1 Normal2Rainfall2ind2; rowingLeason .2 ......................... 2.2 Hydrology. 2 ...................................... ............................... 2.3 Vegetation. 2 ..................................... ............................... 2.4 HydrogeomorphicNonitoring2 )f.Ztreams2ind2,/alleys.2 2.5 Photograph ic2)ocumentation2 ........ ............................... 3.0 S U M MARY2)ATA2 .............................................................. ............................... 3.1 Rainfall. 2 .................................................................. ............................... 3.2 Hydrology2 ............................................................... ............................... 3.2.1 QA/ QC2) f2NellPerformance2 ............................... ............................... 3.2.2 Geomorphic2vlonitoring,2= Iowa= vents2 )nd24nnualLtreamzurveys.2. 3.2.3 Hydroperiods2 ....................................................... ............................... 3.2.3.1 Riparian2-leadwater23 ystems/ Bottom land s. 2 .............................. 3.2.3.2 Non- riparian2lardwood2= lat .......................... ............................... 3.2.4 Hydroperiod23omparison2oZontrolTorests. 2 ..... ............................... 3.2.4.1 Plum' slit. 2 ................................................... ............................... 3.2.4.2 Windley. 2 ....................................................... ............................... 3.2.4.3 Winfield2 ........................................................ ............................... 3.3 Vegetation. 2 ............................................................. ............................... 3.3.1 Riparian23uffer2 .................................................... ............................... 3.3.2 Riparian2kreas/ Bottomlands2 ............................... ............................... 3.3.3 Non- riparian2-iardwood2= tat. 2 ............................... ............................... 3.5 Photograph ic2Documentation. 2 ............................... ............................... 4.0 SUMMARY2. LITERATURE2;ITED2. 2 2 ..a .212 ..2 .2Z .2? .23 .23 .252 ...........2 ..........2i .......... ..........2� ..........2f ..........2i ..........� ..........� ..........23 ..........2; ..........2; ..........� ..........2i ..........D ..........D ..........23 ..........232 82 .202 Cover2'hoto:2 Aerial2photos2142November22013.22Top2photo-view2to2the2east.2Bottom2photo- view2o2he&est.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 HeIlLwamp /ScottZreekNitigationLite72 ii2 PCS2)hosphate2✓ompany,2nc.2 Fourth2%nnualReport2 2 May720142 LIST OF TABLES Table212 2 Performance2; riteria, 2nethods2;ummary,2ind2;urrent2; tatus. 2 ....... ...........................2--12 TableMa22 Wetland2hydroperiods2in220132of2922riparian2monitoring2wells2at2Hell2Swamp2 restoration2;ite2Juring2iormal2 and2all) 2ainfall2l ;onditions.2 ............ ...........................2--42 Table2ZbZ! Wetland2hydroperiods2in220132of21112non- riparian2hardwood2flat2monitoring2 wells2at2- Ie112Swampaestoration2; ite2and21421 earby2�ontrolavells2Juring2iormal2 (and2 ll) 2tainfa112onditions. 2 ....................................................... ..............................2- -132 TableBa2 Summary2af2nonthly2 tisual2b bservations2b fZlow2n222013Zrom2lapper23cott2 ✓reek2 and2ts2ieadwater2;ystemsaUT1 2- 21T7) 2)nd232ributary2o2Smith2 :reekaUT8)23t2 He I Mwa m p2 ............................................................................... ..............................2- -232 Table2b2 Summary2of2visual2observations2of2flow29n220132From2Bay2City ,2Scarp,2Porter2 Creek, 2ind2D uckX;reek2 ............................................................. ..............................2- -242 Table922 Fourth2annuala 2013) 2; urvival2) f2rees2ind2; hrubs2planted2nZ2320 .22- acre2plots2 (riparian,'bnd2)on- riparian) lt2 - ellBwamp.. 2 .............................. ..............................2- -252 TableZ22 Survival2bf2trees2bnd2 5hrubs2planted2n21920. 017- acre2plots2n2 potential2Yiparian2 buffer2breas2it2HellLwamp2rom2)aselineRsummer2?010) 2o2a11220132 ..................2--262 Table2622 Survival2of2trees2and2shrubs2planted2in2122riparian20 .22- acre2plots2at2Hell2 Swamp2rom2mseline2 summer2010)2o2fa112?0132 ................... ..............................2- -282 Table2122 Survival2bf2trees23nd2shrubs2p lanted2n21112ion- riparian2).22- acre2plots23t2Hel12 Swamp2from1aseline2 summerZ! 010) 2o2 fall2013.. 2 ................. ..............................2- -292 LIST OF FIGURES Figure2122 He112Swamp2/icinity2Vlap2 Figure7122 He112SwampNonitoring2- ocations2 FigureB22 He1125wamp2MitigationLite2Monitoring2ocations2)n25oilLurvey2 FiguregA2 HellLwamp2Restoration2Nrea2Nell2 ocations2bn2\s26uilt2iDAR2 Figure24B2 He1125wamp�Control2Forest2 Nell2- ocations2)n2OO42-iDAR2 Figure2522 20132iell2; 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.12 History.22The21, 297- acre2- Ie112Swamp/ Scott,�Creek2Natershed2nitigation2;ite2s2a2 sign ificant2component2DfZhe2compensatory2mitigation2for2un avoid able2impacts2to2wetlands2and2 waters2as2authorized2by2Section24042Permit2Action2l D22001100962and2the2Section24012Water2 Quality2:;ertification2DWQ2' 2008 - 0868, 2v ersion2 2. 0. MZR2ncorporatedaCZR )2)f2ViImington,2VC2 monitors2hydrology2and2vegetation2of2the2Hel12Swamp2site, 2as2weI12as2three2other2iearby2sites2 (Wind Iey, 2' lum' s2P it, 2and2Ninfield) 2used2 as2hydro log icaI2controls .22Hydrogeomorphic2fnonitoring2 of2the2stream2v aIIeys2s2conducted2by2Baker2E ngi nee ring. 22Resto ration 2activities2at2HeIMwamp2 were2authorized2ay2the2VC2Di vision 2Df2CoastaI21Man age ment2bnd2CoastaI Area 2Vlan age ment2Act2 ( CAMA) 2najor2l eve Iopment�Dermit233- 092as2tveII2bs2he2\ IC21Division2Df2- andResources2= rosion2 and 2Sediment2Control2' erm its, 2tvhich2tvere2ssuedJor2112Separate2p hases2bnd2further2J escribed2 in2the2As23uiUReport2( CZR22010) 2bnd2theJ3aseIine2bndTirst2AnnuaIJReport2 (CZR22011).22Nork2 occurred2rom212Ju1y220092Unti12222June7201023nd2b egan2n2areas2iotIubject2oJ✓AMA2r Bection2 404�urisdiction. 22Planting2Dccurred Zrom2February2o2May22 010, 2after2each2phase2Df2 restoration2 earthworkkaslompleted; :�olanted2, pecies2 and21ensities 2arealescribed2nl;ZR22010.2 1.22 Location. 22The2Hel 12Swamp2site2is2located2within2the2Pamlico2Hydrologic2Unit2 030201042of2the2Tar- Pamlico2river2basin2within2the2Pungo2Creek2subbasin2and2encompasses2 almost2the2entire2Scott2Creek2watershed2and2a2portion2of2the2watersheds2of2Smith2Creek2and2 Broad2Creek. 22Located2on2the2southwest2side2of2Seed2Tick2Neck2Road2 (SR21714)2Sn2Beaufort2 County, 2the2site: Js2approximately222miles2east- southeast2( straight- line2distance)2of2the2town2of2 Yeatesville, 2Pantego2rownship ,2JorthZarolina4Figure2l ).212 1.32 Goa ls2and2Performance2C rite ria. 22T he2primary2g oaI2:)f2the2project2l s2to2 ,estore232 self- sustainingZunctional2watershed2and2wetland/ stream2complex2to2allow2 surfacealow2to2move2 through2vegetated2wetlands2before2reaching2any2stream. 22Mitigation2yields2are2estimated2and2 performance2; riteria2ire2Jescribed2or2he,-project2n2Jetail2n2he2Compensatoryl4itigation2 °lan2or2 Restoration2)f2 fell ,Bwamp /ScottZreek2WatershedRCZR2 2009). 2Performancelriteria2)ndlurrent2 status2ire25ummarized2n2FableZ .2Dver2ime2he2- e112Swamp2 ;ite2s2)xpected2oauccessfully:2 reestablish2ipproximately:212 •2 19, 7832inearJeetaLF) 2f2:ero2and2irst- order25tream,2ncluding2he2 restoration2)f25 ix2iparian2ieadwater2 5ystems2and2hree2ow2)nergy2 streams;22 •2 212icres2)f2rar- Pamlico2iparian2) uffer, 2vith2idditional:�ootential2 auffer2 opportunity2f2s uitable25 tream25egments2orm2n2he2iparian2ieadwater2 systems;22 92 582 acres2) f2iparianJorestedIardwood &etlandaheadwater2o rest, 2 bottom I and Iardwood2orest2and2iverine2 2wampJorest), Nth 2;ome2 add itional1nhancement:�)otential ;2ind72 •2 8082icres2)f2ton- riverine2iardwood2lat;23nd2z 2 preserve2)r2ehabilitate2ipproximately :22 2 92 402 acres2)f2ion- riverine2iardwoodJlat2ncluding2i234- acre2state2)r2 regionally25ignificant" 2nature2iardwoodJlat;2 •2 282a cres2)f2iverine25 wamp2orest /bottomI and 21ardwood2o rest; 22 •2 182)cres2)f2ion- riverine2iardwood2lat;2ind22 92 2002)cres2) f2ireas2napped2is2Aplands2 m2helounty2;oil2;urvey.2 Hell23wamp /ScottZreekNitigationTDite22 12 PCSThosphateZompany,2nc.2 Fourth2knnualReport2 2 May720142 An2a dditiona121032 3cres2i nderlain2Dy2hydric1oiIs2ire2l ncluded2is2 `potentia121on- wetl and "2 areas21ue2to2Jrai nag e2Dffects2from2peri mete r2l itch es2that2nust2 ,emain2Dpen.Z?Approxi mate ly2342 acres2at2he2iead2f2he2vatershed2s2nature2ion- riverine2tvet2iardwood2orest2nderlain2yZape2 Fear2; oiIathe2VindIey2ract) 2ind2i viI12:)e�) reserved 2to2heIp2nitigateJor�)ermitted2 -nine2l mpacts2to2 the2Bonnerton2non- riverine2wet2hardwood2area .22The2Plum's2Pit2 ract2(Arapahoe23oi1,2iardwood2 forested2Netland) 2ind2he2Ninfield2ractaAugusta ,2romotley,2)nd2Roanoke2;oils) are2ther2iearby2 hardwood2orested2✓ vetlands2at23imilar2) levations2o�)ortions2) f2�e112Swamp2ind2inderlain2 )y2;oil2 series2�napped2Dn2Hell2Swamp2as25hown2Dn2the2Beaufort2County25oil25urvey2 (Kirby21995).22AI12 three2racts2tviII2) e2nonitored? as2iydrologic2;ontrols2or2he2estored2iydrology2)f 2applicable2areas2 at2he2- IelMwampaitea Fig ure2l ).2 2 2.0 REQUIREMENTS 2.12 Normal2Rainfall2and2Growing2Season. 22An2onsite2continuous2electronic2rain2 gauge2s21ownloaded2Dnce2a2- nonth2and2ts2iata2are2ised2n2�onjunction2Nith21ataJrom2bearby2 automated 2Neather2;tationsai. e., 2JOAA' s2% uroraaite2ecause2he23eI haven aite2Nas2ot23ctive2n2 2013) 2to2determine2normal2rainfall2during2the2monitoring2period .22He112Swamp2data2were2 compared2to2the2W ETS2range2of2normal2precipitation2to2determine2if2Hell2Swamp2rainfall2was2 with in2the2iormal2ange. 22The2ange2Df2iormal�Drecipitation2for2this2eport2efers2o2the230t "2and2 70th Dercentile2thresholds2Df2the�Drobability2Df2iaving2Dnsite2rainfall2amounts2ess2than2Dr2ligher2 than2those2thresholds. 22The2ange2Df2iormal2and2the230- day2olling2total21ata2ines2Degin2Dn2the2 last2Jay2Df2--ach2nonth2and2the22 0132NETS- Auroral, no nth Iy2p recipitation2totaI2s2plotted2Dn2the2 last2JayIfIach2nonth.222 Under2he2Z 0102egional:2juidance2rom2he2✓ orps2) fEngineers2or2Netland2iydroperiods ,2 the2normal2growing2season2for2Beaufort2County2is2282February2to262December2or22822days2 ( WETS2table2for2Beaufort2County2first/ last2freeze2date228° 2F2502percent2probability )2(US2Army2 Corps2of2Engineers22010). 22At2the2suggestion2of2the2Corps' 2Washington2regulatory2field2office ,2 data2collected2between212February2and2282February2provide2important2information2related2to2 analyses2:)f2site2hydrology2iuring2he2E)arly2tgrowing23eason, 2Dut2are2not2part2Df2the2hydroperiod2 calculation2or23uccess.222 2.22 Hydrology. 2Figure2221epicts2the2ocations2Df2hydrology2 -nonitoring2�quipment.22A112 well2 ocations2 are2also2iepicted2:)n2the2 Beaufort2County2Soil2Survey2sheet292 (Figure23)2and2Dn2 LiDAR2( Figures24A2and24B). 22To2document2surface2storage, 2hydrologyan2the2 Festored2iparian2 headwater2system, 2and2hydroperiods2of2all2wetland2types2on2the2site ,21112semi- continuous2 electron icEcotone2/v ater2evel2nonitoring2Nells2( manufactured2by2Remote2lData2Systems ,2nc.2:)r2 RDS) 2a re2Jeployed2at2a21ensity2 )f23pproximately212v vell/ 102acres2n2the2ion- riparian2metland2flat2 areas. 2d 4n2additional2122Nells2Nithin2he2�xpected2iparian2one2and2902Nells2n--402arrays 23cross2 the2stream2valleys2neasure2the2iydrology2f2the2- iparian2stream2systems2and2bottomlands2 (922 riparian2wells). 22Forty2( 40) 2gauges2( beta2nodels) 2to2record21ow2flow2events2were2alsoanstalled2 either2Nithin2)r2ear2?ach2) f2hese2tream2arrays2n2�arly22011 .2�The21ow2gauges2Nere2emoved2 in2201321ue2to2a21ecrease2n2eliability .)ZEach2stream2./alley2 array2 ;onsisted2Df2a2Nell2Dn2either2 side2of2the2perceived2valley2and2a2flow2gauge2in2the2valley2where2flow2had2been2evident2or2 seemed2likely2based2on2the2topography2of2the2valley2and2surrounding2area .22The2arrays2are2 approxi mate ly2i002eet2apartaa long 2he2ong2ixis) 2n2�ach2 ialIeyaat2east2323 rrays2per21 ,000 -foot2 reach; 2upstream, 2center, 2downstream). 22Observations2at2the2site2of2the2flow2gauge2during2vvel12 down loads2and2semi- annual2stream2surveys, 2rainfal1, 2and2geomorphic2position2are2used2to2 documentIvidenceIf21ow.2 At2the2ongest2, nonitored2control2site2( Windley2tract), 2three2electronic2wells ,2each2paired2 with2a2manual2vvell, 2have2been2monitored2since2March22007. 22Four2electronic2wells2have2been2 monitored2n2PIum' s2Pit2since2October220102and2seven2alectronic2rells2iave2 )een2-nonitored2n2 the2N infield2ract25 ince2July220114Figures232ind--4).2I2 Hell23wamp /ScottZreekNitigationTDite2z 22 PCS2'hosphateZompany,2nc.2 Fourth2knnualPeport2 2 May210142 Electron ic2NeIIs2are2lr lownIoaded2ance2a2month2bnd2he2data2 (readings2every21.52iours)2 eva I u ated 2on 2a n 2a n n u a I 2bas i s2to2d ocu me nt2wetl and 2h yd rope ri od s. 22Wetl and 2hyd rope riods2a re2 caIcuIated2byZountingZonsecutive2= iays2mith2vateraeveI2 ataeast2122nches2aeIow2he2 ;oi12;urface2 d u ri n g 2th e2g rowing 2sea son2u nd e r2n orm a l2or2be I ow2n orm a I 2ra i nfa I 12co n d iti on s. 22Data2from 2th e2 Wind ley, 2Plum's2P it, 2and2 VinfieId23 ites2 are2ised2o2Dompare2o2aydroIogy2at2appIicable23 reas2bt2 HeIIZMamp. 2Because2af2_ lifferences2n2naturity2and2: listurbanceZharacteristics2 bf2the2-nitigation2 site, 2these2data2wiIl2aot2be2used2for2strict2success2or2performance2para meters, 2only2to2confirm2 local /region al2ydroIogicaI2esponse2o4) recipitati on. M/ isual2) bservations2)f21owZonditions23t2he2 vaIIey2arrays2a re2- ecord ed. 27d VoZontro123ite2for2the2flow2parameter2has2aeen2dentified ,23Ithough2 observationaI2data2from2another2nearby2PCS2mitigation2site2( Bay2City)2and2from2other2sites2 monito red 2or2b ther2PCS2projects2are2ncluded2Nith2his2eport2o23how2iow2)ther1itesZunctioned2 during2he2year.2 2 232 Vegetati on. 22The2fourth2annuaI2survey2of2the212320 .22- acre2pI anted 2tree2and2 shrub2monitoring2plots2occurred2in2October2and2November220132and2 -epresents2a2two2percent2 sample2)f2he2estoration2breaa Fig ure22 ).Mmallera0. 017 - acre) 2planted2ree.-�ond2;hrub2nonitoring2 plots2: were2also2surveyed2at2192stream2arrays2to2provide2an2estimate2of2stem2density2in2the2 potential2, iparian2buffer2areas .22Annual2-nonitoringZor2three2 iuisance25pecies2 [red2rnaple2(Acer rubrum),Iweet2jumaLiquidambar styracif /ua),23nd2oblolly2pineaPinus taeda)]2)egan2n2201123nd2 hasZontinued23ince.22 2 2.42 Hydrogeomorphic2Monitoring2of2Streams2and2Valleys .22Scott2Creek,2the2main2 channel2thatZlows2through2the2site, 2begins2ts2headwaters�bnsite ,2and2flows2to2the2downstream2 extent2of2the2p rope rty2at2NC2Route299, 2where2the2creek2flows2through2a2 road 2culvert2and2 eventual ly2 _lischarges2to2l:lungo2Creek,2a2 ributary2o2he2l:lungo2River .ZFor2this2•eport,2the2nain2 channel2s2d ivided2nto2Upper2Scott2Creek2( USC), 2NhichZontains2the2constructed25ingle2thread2 channel2bnd2the2zero2arder2V alley2apstream, 2bnd2L ower2Scott2Creek2 (LSC).22Several2headwater2 tributariesaUT12-2UT8)2 vere2dentified, 2Using2L i DAR, 2historical23erials ,2bnd2<nowledge2bf2he2;ite2 (Fig uresMind23).2 2rwoZross2;ections2n2the2ScottZ-'reek23ingle2hread2 vhannel2;tream25egment2 are2r neasured23nnually2tiuring2the2 Pnonitoring2period;2the2bther2 ributaries2vere2tneasured2n2the2 thirda20l 2) 2ljear2ind2tviII2b e2neasured2n2he2fiftha2014 )2nonitoring2ljear.22 2 2.52 Photographic2Documentation. 22Twenty2( 20) 2permanent2photo2point2locations2 were2✓ stablished2at2, andom2tvell2ocations2andZive2Nere,3astablished2along2he2perimeter2af2he2 restoration2b reaa Fig ure22). 2Bhotographs2✓ vere2aken2n2he2fourZardina121irections2cis &ell2asIn2 add itional2d irection2to2�apture2as2nuch2af2the2vegetation2plot2as2possible2anless2t2Nas2already2 captured2§ n2the2other2four2photos. 22Photographs2at2the2fixed- point2stations2were2taken23n2July2 20102 (baseline)2 and2 each2 subsequent2fal12 during2 the2 monitoring2 period.2 2 Fourth2 annual2 photographs &ere2aken2n2November7Z013.2 22 3.0 SUMMARY DATA 3.12 Rai nfall. 22Total2rainfal12recorded2at2the2Hel12Swamp2rain2gauge2for220132was2 40. 412nchesaa2; onsiderable2lecrease2fromaast2jear' s2i0. 752nches )2bnd2otal2ainfa112ecorded2bt2 the2nearby2PCS2Duck2Creek2monitoring2site2was236. 162inches2 (also2a2considerable2decrease2 from 2ast2year' s252. 792nches). 22TheMETS230- year2Pange2bf2horma12 :1ata25hown2bn2Eigure252s2 derived2rom2he2atest23vailable2; 1ata2; et23nd2; omprises2he2years21971- 2000.29he230- day2olling2 total2of2Hell2Swamp220132rainfall2was2considered2withinMETS2normal2 Fange2or2below2normal2 (Figure25).222 2 The2JS2Drought2\Aonitor2( http:// droughtmonitor. un1. edu) 2provides2a2synthesis2Df2nuItiple2 indices2and2mpacts2and2- eflects2the2consensus2of2federa129nd2academic2scientists2an2 'egiona12 ccnditions2b n2b2NeekIy2basisaupd ate d2l✓ ach2Thursday). 22- Jsing2an2area -we ighted2;average,2North2 Carol ina' s2Beaufort2County2experienced2102weeks2in2the220132growing2season2with2drought2 status,2ess2hanaast2( rear. M112102Neeks& ereIonside red 2a bnormaIIy2dry2bnd2nost 2,Neeks&ere2n2 the2l ate2; pringaeight2onsecutive2N eeks2beginning2n2nid- April) .22rhe2l ast2wo2meeks2bccurred2n2 HeIlBwamp /ScottZreekVitigationBiteT 32 PCS2PhosphateZompany,2nc.2 F o u rt h 2%n n u a I 2R e p o rt2 2 May220142 the2early2fal1. 220nly2one2more2Neek2i n220132Nas2i n2drought2conditions2 (considered2abnormally2 dry), 2) ut2t2D ccurred2n2aarly2= ebruary, 2before2he2;tart3if2he2 growing2;eason.2 1- he2�arly2rlrought2 wee ks2likeIy2ca used 2waterA eve Is2at2severaI2( but2not2nost) 2NeIIs2to2 -Irop2below2- 122nches2and2 th erefore2n ay2i ave2; h orte n ed 2h e i r2vetla n d 2iyd ro period. 2 3.22 Hydrology.Z The2irst2uI12jear2bf2post- restoration2iydrology2lata2for2the2 antire2aite2 was220112Decause2construction23ctivities2prevented2all2vells2rom2being2nstalled2at2he25tart2Df2 the22010Zjrowing2; eason. ZHowever, 2/ vells2vere2nstalled23s2; oon2as2onstruction2n23n2irea2vas2 complete, lo2lata2/ verelollected2luring2a2arge:�portion2)f2heZ1 010Zjrowing2eason2bver2nost2)f2 the2ite. 22Tables2lepicting2201321aily2Ne112- eadings2and2ainfa1123re2ncluded2bn2a2om pan ion2 :,D2 to2his2eport.2 2 3.2.1 QA /QC of Well Performance. 221n22011, 2approxi mate ly2one2third2of2the2 Hell,'Bwamp2n rells2Nere2ested2or:�Derformance2according2o2nonitoring2equirements2 ;pecified2n2 ERDC2TN- WRAP- 05- 2aUS2Army2Corps2)f2E ngineers22005) 2222The2esting2vas21escri bed An2he2 second2annual2( 2011) 2nonitoring2eport2( CZR22012). 22ln22013, 2an2additional2242:)f2the2intested2 wells& ere2ested2ind2a1l2dnet2he:�)erformance2riteria .2 2 3.2.2 Geomorphic Monitoring, Flow Events and Annual Stream Surveys. Two2 cross2ections2( 723nd2B) 2n2the23ingle2thread2r hannel2) f2upper2Scottxreek2Nere2 rstablished23t2 baseline2and2are2measured2annually. 22The2fourth2annual2measurement2of2those2two2cross2 sections2occurred2in2December220132and2no2areas2of2concern2were2identified .22Appendix2A2 contains2the2omplete23aker2 geomorphica eport, 2/ vhich2ncludes2i2figure23howing2the2ocation2:)f2 all2�ross2-,ections2r ind2the2profiles2:)f2E)ach2�ross23ection2neasured2n22013 .22= ach2�ross2;ection2 exhibited2ninor2lifferences2 from2as- built2�onditions, 2Dut2those2lifferences2 =ire2�xpected2n2hewly2 constructed2restoration2sites. 22The2channel2and2floodplain2changes2observed2along2the2cross2 sections2are2attributed2o2lood2ieposition ,2oil2; ettling, 2naturing2egetation ,2and2;light2ilifferences2 inIurvey2od4)oint2ocations.22 Monthly2)bservations2at21ow2nonitoring2tations2locumented2ictive21ow2lt2east2 once23t2332) f2he'-402) bservation:�pointsaTable23), 2i vhich2a1so2neans,'�8ctive21ow2vas2llocumented2 somewhere2in2every2stream2valley2in220132except2for2UT22and2UT42 (Appendix2B2and2on2the2 companion2:, D2o2ihis2eport). 2�Active21ow2was2locumented2n2JT42 1uring2the2tream2urveys.)ZL Slightly2more2flow2events2were2documented2at2most2observation2points2at2the2other2monitored2 sitesaTable23). 2Photographs2and2v ideo2) f21ow2aken2Juring2nonthly2;ite2 visits23re23Iso2ncluded2 on2he2om pan ion23D2o2his2eport .22 2 TheZirst2stream23urvey2:)ccurred2272January220l l 2nrhen2E)ach2ieadwater2valley2 was2valked2o2letermine2he2ocations2for2nstallation2b f2he2ow2low2jauges .ZAuring2hat2;urvey,2 flow2f2arying2amounts2and2lepths& as2hoted2n2a1most2all2he2alleys2and2at2iImost2)very2jauge2 location. 22A2second2stream2su rvey2was2cond ucted2at2the2end2of2the2year2(302November2-212 December22011). 22Active21ow2vas2) ccurring2Juring2he2econd2tream2 ;urvey2it2JT82and2 -ower2 Scott2Creek, 2but2was2not2discernible2in2other2valleys, 2although2water2was2present .22However,2 evidence2f4)ast2low2avents2Nas2iioted2luring2he2; econd2tream2 ;urvey2n2JT3,2JT6,2JT7,2JT8,2 and2JpperLcottZreekasorting, 2deposition, ahallow2hannel2eatures ,2lebris /wrack,23nd2braids2r2 meanders).Z Refer2io2Appendix232f2the2econd2annual2eport2(CZR22012 )2or2a2ummary2)f2ihe2 two2; urveys, aelected:�ohotos, 2and2nap2)falocumented2 Stream2eatures.2 2 For2each2subsequent2survey, 2all2the2headwater2valleys2at2Hell2Swamp2were2 walked2from2the2downstream2end2to2the2upper2reaches2to2document2active2flow2with2video2 (if2 possible), 2)r2B vidence2b f2past21ow2Avith4) hotographs2a ndZGPS21ata .22fhe2hird2bnd2ourthIurveys2 in2 1012athird2innual23nonitoring2year) 2bccurred272June23nd211 ,bnd2132jecember210122ind2he2 find ings2Av ere2Jescribed2nAppendix232Df2he2hird2annual2teportaCZR22013 ).2AIso,2ideo2f21ow2 from2he2Decemberaurvey2at2 / arious2ocations2i vas2ncluded2b n2helompanion2✓D2o2hat2eport.ZL Active2ow2low2n2 tarious2vater2lepths& as2b bserved2n2l- ower2S cottZreek2and:4)ortions2bf2Jpper2 Scott2:, reekasingle2hread2and23bove) 2n2Doth2he2June2and2Jecemberlurveys .Z During2the2June2 Hell23wamp /ScottZreekavlitigationLiteZ2 42 PCS2PhosphateZompany,2nc.2 Fourth2 knnualPeport2 2 MayZ20142 survey, 2io23ctive2low2)r2 rvater2/vas3)bserved2n2 ny3if2he2annamed2ributaries 2and2io2iideo2/vas2 taken2)f2- ower2)r2J pper2Scott23 reek, 2) s21ow2Nas2)f2ow2telocity23nd2NOU ld2iot2e2�asilyaeen2n2 a2i ideo. 27he2,vinter2; urvey2)ccurred2)ver2wo2iays2n2) ecember2N ith2iearly21 .52nches2)f2'ainfa112 occurring2between2the2two2days. 22The2112December220122survey2Jay2was2nuch 2like2the2June2 su rvey2Nith2he2E)xception2DfZlow2videoa -ecorded2 n2Lower2Scott2Creek2iear2he2 -nouth2Df2UT6.22 There2N ere2io2Dther2Dbservations2)f23ctiveJlow2Dr2Nater2n23 ny2Df2he2)ther2annamed2ributaries2 on 2hat21ay2�xcept2JT6 .22After2he2l 22December2ain2�vent, 2he23tream2�rossing2between2 -ower2 Scott2Creek23nd2Jpper2Scott2Creek2was2- evisited2Dn2132December220122and2active2Flow2 video2 wasa- ecorded. 22S eve ra12videos2Df2activeZIow2were2alsoa- ecordedZor2UT8 .22ln2addition2to2active2 flow, 2physical2Features2noted2du ring 2stream2surveysan220122included2bed2and2bank ,2sediment2 transport2 and /or2 scour,2 sediment2 sorting,2 debris2 wrack,2 and2 matted2 vegetation2 parallel2 to2 down stream2low.222 The2Fifth2and2sixth2surveys2occurred29- 102July2and210- 112December22013,2he2 fourth 2year2Dfanonitoring. 222Every2VaIIeya; ontained2vater, 2--ven2f2Dnly2 Donfined2to2ts2lower2.-nd.22 Active2Flow2i n2varied2water2depths2was2visible2and2documented2with2video2i n2aI12the2unnamed2 tri butaries2with2the2exception2of2UT2 .22Active2flow2was2docu me nted 2fo r2th e2fi rst2ti me2i n2the2 project' s2historya- iear2the2- nouth2of2UT52during2he2December23urvey .221 n2addition2o2he210 -112 December23urvey2vi sit, 2b ioIogists2eturned2o2he2ialIeys2Df2JT52and2JT62heJoIlowing2Neek2n2 December2182in2an2attempt2to2re- acquire2flow2video2lost2due2to2corrupted2fil es. 22FIow2was2 documented2where2conditions2similar2to2those2during2the210- 112December2survey2existed .221n2 add ition2 o2active2flow, 2physical2 teatures2noted2, Juring23tream23urveys2n2 20132ncluded2bed2and2 ban k, 2sediment2transport2and/ or2scour, 2sediment2sorting, 2debris2wrack ,2and2matted2vegetation2 paral lel2o2lownstream2low.ZZ2 2 Until2the2planted2trees2and2shrubs2reach2enough2height2to2shade2the2valleys ,2 development2of2dense2herbaceous2vegetation2will2continue2to2occur2in2many2areas .22This2 herbaceous2ayer2an2attenuate2low2) vents2ind2educe2/elocity2)elow2he�ooint2)f2cour2nnd2an2 also2) bscure2ecognition2) r:�)revent2ormation2) f2) ther2ncipient2 ,hannel2ormation2eatures.2l2 2 3.2.3 Hydroperiods. 22The2najority2f2all2wells2exhibited2wetland2hydroperiods2 regard less2)f2- ainfall2onditions2n22 013aTables22 A,'�bnd2ZB, 2Figure23)2and2a2few2-nore2Nells2iad2 wetland2iydroperiods2than2n 2201123nd22 012. 22AIso, 2- nany2N ells2Nere2n2a2Netter2:one2han2ast2 year. 2Nost2Nells2iad2; everal2Netland2iydroperiods2hroughout2he2year2and /or2ariousbther2lays2 scattered2throughout2the2growing2season2where2water2levels2were2- 122inches2or2shallower.22 Rehydration2of2the2site2will2likely2continue2as2the2site2equilibrates2to2its2new2hydrology .22The2 reported2hydroperiods2btaenaocations2 Nere2possibly23horter2than2Nhat2actually2Dccurred2lueao2 we112nalfunctions. 22fhese2gaps23re2hown2) n2he2nonthly2ables2hat2Jepict220132Jaily2ioon2Nell2 read ings2ind2ainfaI12ncluded2n2he2om pan ionZD2o2his2eport .2l2 2 3.2.3.1 Riparian Headwater Systems / Bottom lands.22n22013,2nost2)f2he2 riparian2wells2( 762out2of292) 2exhibited2a2wetland2hydroperiod2greater2than212 .52percent2of2the2 growing23eason2 (Table22A,2FigureTD), 2132- nore2Nells2 han2ast2year .22TheZour2Nells2hat2Jidaiot2 exhibit2a2wetland2lydroperiod2greater2han262percent2may2be21ue2toanicrotopography2or2o2the2 well2being2located2slightly2upslope2of2the2riparian2v alley2edge ,2r2o2drawdown2by2the2adjacent2 stream2iydrology. 7d41 12ut2wo2)f2he2iparian2Nells23Iso2neasured2 Nater2ables2;hallower2han2 -122 inches2ontinuously2etween21 2=ebruary23nd7 172 ebruaryaTable71A).2 2 3.2.3.2 Non - riparian Hardwood Flat. Only2hree2 )f2he21112rvells21id2iot2 exhibit2a2Netland2- iydroperiod2and2nost2Nells2exhibited2b2Netland2iydroperiod20reater2than212 .52 percent2Df2heagrowing2season2( 892Nells) 2( Table22B, 2Figure2B). 22Six2Df2the2892Nellsa ,ecorded2a2 wetland2hydroperiod2for2longer2than2752percent2of2the2entire2growing2season .22The2lack2of2a2 wetland2iydroperiod2it2he2hree2Nells2- nighta) e2Jue2toanicrotopography .22A112)ut2our2Nells2also2 measured2water2tables2shallower2than2- 122inches2continuously2from212February2through2272 February.222 Hell23wamp /ScottZreekNitigation2jite7l 52 PCS2'hosphateZompany,2nc.2 Fourth2knnual2Report2 2 May/10142 2 1n2he2Netland2anhancement23rea, 2/ vhere�)re- construction2:lata2�xists2or2 two2NeI Is, 2hose2ivelIs2iave2ecorded2onger2iyd rope riods2post- construction.272 3.2.4 Hydroperiod Comparison to Control Forests. 3.2.4.1 Plum's Pit. AI12four2wells2were2drier2n220132han2n22012 ,23ut2 still2ecorded2/vetland2iydroperiods. 2? 12Two2ivells2recorded2heir2ongest2iydroperiods2n2he2?62o2 12. 52percent2, ange2and2two2wellsaecorded2their2 ongest2hydroperiods2n2he2?252to2752percent2 rangeaTable22B, 2FigureTD). 22AI12) f2he2Nells2n220132, ecorded2ess2 ;umulative2Aays2/vhere2/vater2 tables2nrere25hallower2han2- 122nches2han2n22012, 2but2hey2a112 -ecorded2wetland2Nater2ables2 many2- nore2lays2Dther2han2he2consecutive2days2:)f2heir2iydroperiods2 (Table22B).2ZFhree2Nells2 also2neasured2vater2ables2 ;hallower2han2l20nchesJrom21 Tebruary2hrough227Tebruary23nd2 the2ourth2mell2recorded2hose2evels2or2 2021ays2n2hat2period2( Table 22B).2Zfhese23Avells2recorded2 similar2iydrologic2 batterns2is2) ther2niells2n25 imilar2opographic2positions�t2lellzwamp .22 2 3.2.4.2 Wind /ey.22nZ2 013, 2ill2hree2Atells2iad2onger2iydroperiods2han2n2 2012x27, 22 8, 2and2312percent). Mnly2b ne2Nell2iad2nore2�umulative2days2han2t onsecutive2days2 and2t2U nly2iad2hree2) xtra2l: lays4Table2Z B, 2= igurel).2 N112bf2he2tvells2also2Measured2 roater2ables2 shallower2than2- 122inches2from212February2through2272February2 (Table22B).22These2wells2 recordedaimilar2iydrologic:�oatterns2as2) ther& ells2n2; imilar2opographic:�positions2at2 -Iell2swamp.22 2 3.2.4.3 Winfield. 22 ln220132bnly2Dne2of2he2seven2Nells2did2iot2axhibit2a2 wetland2hydroperiod2(Table22B, 2Figure26). 22Four2af2theaemaining25ix2wells2exhibited2a2vvetland2 hydroperiod2orZ> 62p ercent2o212. 52percent2) f2he2growing2; easonaone2 Pnore2hanaast2year)2nnd2 the2other2wo2forZ252o2752percent2( Table22B, 2Figure26) 2( one2nore2han2last2year ).22AI12wells2 except2he2)ne2/ vith2he2ongest2; ontinuous2iydroperiod, 2recorded2Nater2ables2hallower2han2122 inches2at2bther2imes2han2he2ongest2hydroperiod2 ind2$ ix2vells2tecorded2hose2evels2or2Most2 br2 all2of2February2( Table22B). 22These2vvells2- ecorded2similar2hydrologic2patterns2as2other2wells2n2 similar2opographic2positions2it2Hell2Swamp .Z2 2 3.32 Vegetation.2 2 By2 use2 of2 only2 the2 number2 of2 planted2 stems2 that2 were2 unquestionably2alive2in2the2monitoring2plots, 2the2most2conservative2estimate2of2survival2is2 presented.2 2 Many2 stems2 appeared2 dead2 or2 questionable,2 but2 based2 on2 prior2 monitoring2 experience, 2 i1tem2heeds2o2appear2dead2( or2hot2) e2ound) 2or2wo2 ;ampling2Dvents2)efore2t1an2 be2Confidently2bounted23s2iead. 22Tables24- 72iocument2�urrent2; urvival2Df28112 iegetation:plots2)y2 size2bategory2and2/ vetland2rnitigation2C one2ompared2o2) aseline2and23re21escribed2n2nore2iletail2 in25ections3)elow. 22n23ummary, 2he2density2bf2all2rees2n22013 ,2based2Dn2he21232riparian2and2 non- riparian2plots, 2tr vas23542tinquestionably2a1ive2 >;tems2per2acre;2he2density2bf2 all2tinquestionably2 alive2S hrubs2Nas2122$ tems2per2icre; 2and2he2lensity2bf2ill2rees, 2;hrubs,2)nd2inknown2;tems2hat2 were20nquestionably2ilive &as23662Stems2,)er2acre2( Table). 2Appendix2 ;2rontains2he2iumber2bf2 stems2hat& ere2alive2nlach:�olot2or2he2) aseline2s amplinglvent2.and2or2he2a117 20132;urvey.2T2 2 Add itional2reatment2olontrol2he2nvasivelommon2eed2 (Phragmites australis)2)ccurred2 1- 22D ctober220132Lising2b2�ombination2)f2:3lyphosate2bnd2mazapyr .7lrreatments2Nere2bpplied2n2 the2lower, 2. inplanted2§wampy2area2bf25cott2--reek, 2he2ower2bnd2 bf2he2JT62and2JT72ial ley, 2he2 Iower2and2D f2JT5, 2and2along2he2filled2 l;hannel2bf2he2'ormer2Scott2; reek2Dhannel.22rhis2/vas2he2 fourth2year2iif2reatment2and2t2appeared2hat2he2Jensity2 :)f2he2reed2 Nas2ess2han2 )ther2years.22 The2reed2appears2diminished2and2occurs2in2only2spotty2patches2in2he2areas2that2have2been2 treated. 7dv1ore2applications2 ire2 inticipated2or2 it2east2)ne2nore2jear2f2iecessary.22 2 The2Corps2determined2hat2hree2ree2species2have2he2possibility2o2butcompete2 .young2 planted2rees2 it2a2Mitigation2Site2Jue2o2heir2quick2growth2 ind2heed2o2be2Monitored2as2hu isance2 species2o2ensure2hey2do2not2ake2over2a2mitigation2site. 22The2hree2species2are2oblolly2pine2 (Pinus taeda),2red2napleaAcer rubrum ),23nd2;weetgumaLiquidambar styraciflua).ZResults2bf2he2 firstZuisance2monitoring2survey, 2which2occurred2in2the2second2year2 (2011)2of2site2monitoring,2 indicated2that2Nhen2a ll2hree25pecies2Were2aombined, 2hey2- epresented247 .82percent2af2he21802 Hell23wamp /ScottZreekNitigationZ;ite72 62 PCS2PhosphateZompany,2nc.2 Fourthalnnual2Report2 2 May720142 stem slountedan2he21232iuisance:�Olots. 22fhe2) mount2)faobloIly4'bine2tvas2dentified2 )s2a4-)otentia12 pro blem2n2hree2pIots. ZFor2h aore2nformation2See2he2S econd2a nnua12 (2011)2eport2(CZR22012).2 Results2a f2he2; econd21uisance2nonitoring2urvey ,2 vhich2accurred2n2he2hird2yeara2012 )Baf25ite2 monitoring, 2ndicated2hat2A then2a112hree23pecies2uvere2: ombined ,2hey2epresented240�Dercent2af2 the23702stems2counted2in2the21232nuisance2plots. 22The220122monitoring2sh owed 2that2other2 species2iot2; onsidered2iuisance2rees2ivere2)stablishing2hemselves ,2educing2he2percentage2bf2 the2iuisance2rees .ZFurthermore,2nm2 012, 23ix:2plots2; ontained27 8�)ercent2 af2he2iuisance2;tems.22 Results2a f2he2hird2uisance2nonitoring2urvey, Bonducted2n22013 ,2vereaimilar2o2hose2nZ1012.ZZ Nuisance2stems2comprised238. 52percent2of2all2stemsan2the2nuisance2plotsan220132 (Figure28).22 Again, 2he2najority2of2auisance23tems2 (70.1 percent) 2ivere2n23ix2plots ,2bIthough2ane2of2he2p1ots2 from2ast2year2s2ot2isted2n2he2op25 ix2his2jear2and2a ne:�)1ot2hat2 /vas2ot2isted2ast2year,2s2ow2 listed2n2he2op2Dercent. 2Five2bf2he2ix2plots2n220132ontained,�E7 .2�Dercent2bf2he2pine2-,tems,2 one2p 1ot2Contained292. 32percent2af2he2naple25tems, 2bnd2bne2olot2 t;ontainedTD6.02percent2bf2he2 sweet2gum2;tems. 2�Only�bne2a f2he25 ix2J ontained2nore2han2a ne2iuisance2;pecies .)Z1fhe2est2af2 the2nuisance2stems2are2scattered2across2the2plots. 22The2six2plots2are2all2on2the2edges2bf2Hell2 Swam p2adj ace nt2o2a xi sting 4) ineatands2a r2nixed2orest, 2/ vhere2nvasions2 af2iuisance2;pecies2are2 more2likely2to2occur2( Figure28). 22A2plan2to2reduce2loblolly2pine2in2the2worst2areas2will2be2 implemented2n72014.72 3.3.1 Riparian Buffer. Overall2urvival2) f2rees2hat2vere2bnquestionably231ive2 in2heZ 92iparian2a uffer�)lots2rom2 aaselineamid- summerZZ 010) 2o2all220132vas2 762percent,2vith2 a2; orresponding2lensity2a f23502rees:�per2acreaTable23), 23Iightly2ess2 ;tems2han2ast2jear.72frees2 with2ncertain2urvival25 tatusastem2appeared2lead2a utlould2iot2 aelonfirmed)2tvere2iot2ncluded2 inlalculations .ZlSweet2aayaMagno /ia virginiana),2ed2aayaPersea palustris),2vater2upeloaNyssa aquatica ),2and23weet2pepperbush2(C /ethra alnifo/ ia) 2aad2he2owest23urvivals2 (38,20,240,2and2382 percent, 2espectively) 2Nhen2he2i ncertain23tems2are�bxcluded2( Table25).22Ten2(up2From2aight2i n2 2012,2but2 own2 from2122n22011) 2bf2he2192ree2 5pecies2iad2302percent2ar: greater25urvival,2with2 five2a f2he2aightltO004)ercent2urvivalawater2iickorygCarya aqua tica],2/hite2aakgQuercus alba],2 water2aakgQ. nigra],2ivillow2aakgQ. phe/1 os ]2and2,ommon:i)ersimmongDiospyros virginiana]).212 Only2three2shrub2species2represented2by2only2a2few2stems2were2found2in2the2 riparian2a uffer2plots; 2ikely2lue2o2he2a verallZow2Jensity2af25hrubs23cross2he2Site23nd2he25ma112 size2a f2he2a uffer4)lot. Mvera112; urvival2a f25 hrubs2rom2) aselineamid- summer22010)2neasurement2 to2all22 0132,vas237,I)ercent2or25 tems2hat2vere2nquestionably2alive2tvith2a1orresponding2lensity2 of2252shrubs2per2acre2( Table25), 2both2sIightly2higher2than21ast2year .22Survival2in creased 2to2752 percent2 and2 282 stems2 if2 questionable2 stems2 are2 included.2 2 Buttonbush2 (Cephalanthus occidentalis, 212stem) 2had2the2lowest2survival2( 02percent) 2and2swamp2doghobble2(Leucothoe [genus2changed2to Eubotrys] racemosa, 212stem) 2had2the2highest2survival2 (1002percent).22The2 survival�bf2he2hird25pecies ,2/irginia2/villowa /tea virginica), 2n creased 2rom2ast2year .ZButton bus h2 survivalas2nuch2higheran2the2other2two2wetland2area2types2and2swamp2doghobble2survivalas2 much2ower.2 Densityan2he2potential2- iparian2buffer2areas2for2all2rees2and2shrubs2combined2 after2he2a1122 01323urvey2vasTo752tems:2per23cre2or2a112pecies2Unquestionably231ive ,aess2han2 Iast2year. 22The2; urrent2lensity2s2nuch2iigher2han2he232023tems2equired2or23uccess ,lo2rven2 though2densities2and2survivals2are2 1ower2than21ast2year, 2it2is2anticipated2thatZhe2densities2wil l2 remain2above2he2tninimum2equired2amount .22Theaiparian,',buffer2plots2t ontain2en2ree2Species2 with2survival2of2802percent2or2greater, 2which2results2in2a2diverse2habitat ,2especially2when2 considering2here2areaeven2a ther2ree2 5pecies2epresented2n2he2cone.Z? 3.3.2 Riparian Areas /Bottomlands.2 2 Within2 the2 122 plots2 located2 in2 riparian/ bottomland2ireas, 2) verall23Urvival2)f2rees2rom2 aaselineamid- summer22010)2o2all2Z0132 was2752percent2for2stems2unquestionably2dive, 2with2a2�orresponding2lensity2Df23102Stems2per2 acre2( Table26), 2vhich2s21ightly2iigher2than2ast2year. 2-�Out2bf2he2honfidently 2dentified23pecies,2 red 2aay2and2weet2bayaaad2heaowest23urviva12nZ1 0132( 62and23 �aercent ,2espectively).22Survival2 of2vater2upelo2vas2iot2hat2t nuch2higher2at2182percent.Z ZSurvival2af2�)ight2 )f2he2182planted2ree2 Hell23wamp /ScottBreekNitigationBiteZZ 72 PCS2'hosphateZompany,2nc.2 Fourth2knnualReport2 2 MayZ10142 species2was2902percent2or2greater2( more2than21ast2year) 2and2three2of2these2eight2were21002 percentamore2han2ast2jear). MveraIIIurviva12 bf2,hrubs2rom lase Iine2 (mid- summer22010)2o2a112 2013Zvas2 32p ercentJor25 tems2hat2Nere2Unquestionably2b1ive, Zvith2i2 ;orres pond ing2Jensity2)f232 shrubs2 ber2 bcre, 2ess2han2ast2jear2 (Table23).M /irginia2tvillow2( /tea virginica)2s2he2nain2;hrub.222 2 Density2n2he2iparian/ bottomlands23reasJor2i112rees2ind2 ;hrubs2;ombined2ifter2 the2fa11220132survey2was23162stems2per2acre2for2all2species2unquestionably2alive .22Eight2tree2 species2iave2d2jreater2han2902p ercent2§ urvival, 2Atith2hree2inore2hot2far2 behind,&hich2esults2n2d2 diverse2iabitat, lspecially& hen2t; onsidering2here2) re2ive2norelpecies2epresented2n2he2 !one.2 2 3.3.3 Non- riparian Hardwood Flat. Overall2survival2of2trees2unquestionably2 alive2in2the21112plots2representing2the2non-riparian2hardwood2flat2area2from2baseline2(mid- summer22010) 2toZa11220132Nas2862percent, 2✓ vith2a2corresponding2density2bf23592trees2per2acre2 ( Table27), Z; Iightly2ess2han2ast2year. 22Trees2mith2Uncertain25 urvival2 ;tatus2(stem2bppeared2lead2 but23ould2iot2)e2; onfirmed) 2nrere2iot2ncludedan2; alculations. 2Dut2 bf2he224lonfidently2dentified2 tree23pecies ,25ourwood2(Oxydendron arboreum) 2and2- ed2bay2had2he 2owest23urvival2(02and2112 percent, 2espectively) 2uuhen2he2i ncertainitems2a re2bxcluded2bnd21123pecies2iad290�Dercent2Dr2 greater2survival, 2two2of2which2were21002percent- common2persimmon2and2possumhaw2 (Ilex decidua)2RTabl ell ).M OveraII23Urviva12bf25hrubsJrom2t )aseline2( mid- summer2 2010)2o2fa11220132vas2802 percent2for23tems2hat2li vere2Unquestionably2a1ive, 2/ vith2a23orresponding2density2 bf21323hrubs2per2 acre2( Table27), 23imilar2o3ast2year .22,Swamp2rose2(Rosa palustris )2iad2he2owest25urvival2Nhen2 excluding2he2Uncertain25 tems2( 02percent) 2but2Was2epresented2b y2)nly2l 25tem2bnd2was2followed2 bylpicebush2(Lindera benzoin, 226�)ercent) 2( Table27) .22Possumhaw2ViburnurnaViburnum nudum)2 had2helighestlurvival2( 1002percent) khen2) xcluding2incertain2; tems2and2ive2)ther2;pecies2iad2 greater2han2802percent2 ;urvival.2M 2 Density2n2he2hon- riparian2iardwood2flat2hreas2for2a112rees2hnd2 ;hrubs2Combined2 after2the2201323urvey2was23722stems2per2acreZor2a1123pecies2i nquestionably2alive2(832percent2 survival) aTable2l). Mven2hough2densities2are2; lightly2ower2han2ast2jear ,2both2density2bstimates2 are2ligher2han2he2equired22602; tems2and2helite2s2diverse2NithZ 72reelpeciesInd2ive1hrub2 species2Nith2h2g reater2han2802percent25urvival. 22 42otal2b f233�)1anted2ree2and2 ;hrub25pecies2ire2 unquestionably23live2n2he2ion- riparian23reas.2 2 3.52 Photographic2Documentation. 22A2few2photos2' epresentative2of220132conditions2 are2paired2with2b aseline2photos2at2he23ame2ocation2for2comparison2 (Appendix2D).22More2are2 available2apon2equest.222 4.0 SUMMARY Accord ing2to2VVETS2rainfall2estimates, 230- day2ro11ing2tota12rainfaI12amounts2were2within2norma12 range2for2 nost2b f2he2jear, 2m ith2b nly2b2ew2periods2b f2) elow2hormal2ainfalla Fig ure25 ).2According2 to2the2US2Drought2Monitor, 2102weeks2during2the2growing2season2were2tn2 drought2and2all2were2 classified2as2) bnormally2dry. 2Eight2> f2hose2veeks2tvere2 )arly2n2he2jrowing2;eason.2 Post- restoration2vetland2iydrology2ind21ow2nonitoring2or2; uccess2bfficially2 )egan2January2Z011.22 Most2vells2bn2the2bntire2He112Swamp25ite, 2ncluding2those2n2the2hine2headwater2valley23ystems ,2 recorded2i vetland2hydroperiods2during2periods2b f2iormal2D r2) elow2iormal2ainfa11 .MNells23t.?lum's2 Pit2bnd2/ Vindleylontrol2forests2ecorded2tvetland2iydroperiods2; imilar2o2iydroperiods2 bf25imilarly2 Iocated2Hell2Swamp2wells2and2the2Winfield2control2forest2wells2recorded2a2range2of2wetland2 hydroperiods2similar2to2that2of2similarly2located2Hell2Swamp2wells .22Evidence2of2flow2(braided2 patterns, 2channel2formation, 2flowing2vvater, 2sediment2sorting) 2has2been2seen2in2some2areas2of2 most2)f2he2;tream2talley2; ystems ,2ncluding2he2;ingle- thread2: hannel 2for2he2hird2jear2n2a2ow.22 Hell23wamp /Scott2Creek2Mitigation25ite22 82 PCS2?hosphate2Company,2nc.2 Fourth2 knnual2Report2 2 May220142 OveraI125urvival2of2trees2anquestionably2aIive2n2the21921parian2buffer2plotsZrom2baseline2(m id- sum mer22010) 2to2fa11 220132was2762percent, 2with2a23orresponding2lensity2f26502trees2per bcre.2Z Overa1125 urvival2cf25 hrubs2n2he2p otentialaiparian2) uffer28reas2from2Daselineamid- summer22010)2 to2fa1 1220132was2672percent2for2stems2that2were2unquestionably2alive ,2with2a2corresponding2 density2)f22 52shrubs�Der2bcre. ZSurvival2lensity2n2he2ootentialaiparian2uffer23reas2for2a112trees2 and2 shrubs2 combined2 after2 the2 20132 survey2 was2 6752 stems2 per2 acre2 fort a112 species2 unquestionably2i1ive.22 Overall2survival2ofZrees2unquestionably2alive2n2the2other2122riparian2plots2from2baseline2(mid- summer22010) 2to2fa11220132Nas2752percent, 2d vith2a2corresponding2lensity2f23102trees2per2acre .22 Overa1125urvival2Df2a hrubs2n2he2iparian2 plotsgrom2)aseline2( mid- summer22010)2toga11220132vas2 434)ercent2or23tems21hat2vere2 inquestionably2ilive, 2vith2alorresponding2 iensity2bf252;hrubs,'Per2 acre. 22Survival21ensity2n2the212aiparian2plots2for2b112trees2and2shrubs2 iombined23fter2the220132 survey2vas23162;tems:�per2icre2 for2iIlTpecies2Unquestionably23live .212 Overall2survival2:)f2 rees2n2 he21112ion- riparian2iardwoodZIat2plotsZrom2baseline2 (mid - summer2 2010) 2survey2to2fa11220132was2862percent, 2with2a2corresponding2density2cf23592trees2per2acre .2Z Overa112 surviva12 oft shrubs2 in2 the2 hardwood2 flat2 areas2 from2 baseline2 (mid - summer2 2010)2 measurement2to2fa11220132was2802percent2for2stems2that2were2unquestionably2alive ,2with2a2 correspond ing2lensity2f21323hrubs2per23cre. 22Survival2lensity2n2he2hon- riparian2iardwoodzlat2 areas2for2all2 rees2and2shrubs2combined2after2the220132survey2was23722stems2per2acre2for2all2 species2inquestionably2ilive .272 2 Overallaurvival2b f2iIl2;tems2. inquestionably2ilive2it21e112Swampas2314)ercent2vith2366atems:2per2 acre. 22AI 12p I a nted2areas2are2cu rrently2a bove2density2success2req u i rements2for2each2type2of2 mitigation23nd2; urvival2) f2; everal2; pecies2) f2rees2s2iigh, 2, quating2o2i21iverse2iabitat2ocross2he2 site.2 HellLwamp /ScottZreek2vlitigation2LSite22 92 PCS2lhosphateZompany,2nc.2 Fourth2knnualReport2 2 May220142 LITERATURE CITED CZR21ncorporated. 222009. 22Compensatory2Mitigation2Plan2for2Restoration2of2Hell2Swamp /Scott2 Creek2Natershed.2 CZR2ncorporated. 72010. 2As- Built2Report2or2hea- lellZ;wamp/ Scott2✓reek2Restoration2Site.71 2 CZR21ncorporated22011. 22Baseline2and2First2Annual2Report2for2the2Hel12Swamp /Scott2Creek2 Restoration25ite.2 CZR2 I ncorporated2 2012.2 2 Second2 Ann ua 12 (2011)2 Report2 for2 the2 He112 Swam p /Scott2 Creek2 Restoration25ite.2 CZRancorporated22013. 12fhird Ann uaIa2012) 2Report2or2he21e112Swamp /ScottZreek2Restoration2 Site.2 Kirby,ORobertZA. 221995. 22The23oil23urvey2) fBeaufort2--ounty, 2` lorth2:;arolina .ZNatural2Resources2 Conservation2Service,2JSDA.2 U.S.2Army2Corps2of2Engineers. 222002. 22Regulatory2gjuidance2 etter2(RGL)202- 02.22Guidance2Dn2 Compensatory2 mitigation2 projects2 for2 aquatic2 resource2 impacts2 under2 the2 Corps2 regulatory4)rogram4)ursuant2o2 5ection24042)f2heZlean2 Nater2Nct2ind25ectionO O2)f2he2 Rivers2and2-larbors2Nct.2 U. S. 2Army2Corps2of2Engineers ,2EPA,2NC2 Nildlife2Resources2Commission ,2and2NC2Division2of2 Water2)uality. 712003. 72StreamaNitigationBuidelines .72Nilmington,2AC.2 2 U.S.28,rmyBorps2)fa=ngineers. 72005. 2Fechnica125tandard2or2Nater- Table2Nonitoring2)fBotential2 Wetland2Sites. 2WRAP2Technical2Notes2Collection2 (ERDC2TN- WRAP- 05- 2.)2U.S.2Army2 Engineer2Research2ind2DevelopmentBenter ,2Vicksburg,aNS2 2 U. S. 2Army2Corps2of2Engineers2and2NC2Division2of2Water2Quality .222007.22Draft2nformation2on2 stream2- estoration2Nith2emphasis2Dn2the2; oastal2plain .2242Apri12upplement2o2JSACOE,2 et2i1.22003.2 2 U.S.2Army2Corps2of2Engineers. 222008. 22Regulatory2Guidance2Letter2 (RGL)208- 03.22Minimum2 monitoring2requirements2for2compensatory2mitigation2projects2involving2the2restoration ,2 establishment,a nd/ ora; nhancement2)f2iquatic2esources.2 2 U.S.2Army2Corps2)f2=-ngineers.Z2 010. ZRegional23upplement2o2he2Corps2Df2Engineers2Netland2 del ineation2nanual: 2Atlantic.2bnd2SuU�oastalR)lainaegion .MJersion2L.0.2ZPJ.S.2Nakeley,2 R. W. a- ichvar, aandB. V. Aoble, a' ds. 7ERCD /EL2FR- 08- 30,2/icksburg,WS.2 Hell23wamp /ScottBreekaNitigationBite72 102 PCS2DhosphateBompany,2nc.2 Fo u rth 2%n n u a I Re port2 2 May720142 m 0 c c v m Table21. 7Performancelriteria, 2nethodsaummary ,Indlurrentatatus. Type of Mitigation Performance Criteria Documentation Methods Dimension & Controls Current Status 282 ebruary2-2i20ecember; 834)ercent2)f2tells2iad2i2 NOAA2NETS21ata2or2 hydroperiod2--12.5202152 922;emi- continuous2 normal2ainfall;2/alley2 percent2)f2he2jrowing2 >_12.5207252ind2>12.52o275 monitoring2vells�arrays);2 dimensions2�s2ndicated2�y2 season, 212�ercent2iadI2 percent2iydroperiod2vithin2 onsite2ain2gauge;2is- built2 LiDAR,�rossaections,2 marginal2�ydroperiod� >6- the2opographic2'alley2 crossIections comparison2o251ontro12 12.5�ercent�f2he2growing sites, 23nd2agency2 season),2bnd2t4bercent21id2 Riparian2vetland2estoration notlxhibitIketland2 (headwater2orest2mc12 concurrence hydroperiod. bottomland2iardwood) Survival2)f2260:?)1anted2 Vegetation:�)lotsIn22 SurvivalJor23112rees�anc12 trees4)er2icre4using2 percent2)f2he2;ite;2122 shrub2;pecies)2)fter2he2 e�lantentedkoody riparian�lots4HS42,2 -IS53, Annual2nonitoring 2013aampling2)vent�vas2 5-2je 5- �ear�ld�lanted2voody2 HS67,2-IS70,21S75,2-iS79, 31623tems4)er2icreR69 %2 HS82,2-IS91,21S92,2-IS93, survival)2or2023pecies2 stems HS94,2-IS123) unquestionably231ive.2 Flow2rom2a pperZcottZreek is2)ow21elivered2J irectly2nto the2vooded2iparian&etland instead2)f2nto2helxcavated diversion1hanne1231ong2he northldge2)f2he2voods.22 Riparian2vetland2 Increase2n2tetland2 Semi - continuous2 28Tebruary2- 120ecember; The2;hannel&as2illed2is2 enhancement hydroperiod2rom�re- monitoringkells;2)nsite2 Belhaven2�10AA2NETS2iata' part2)f2he2estorationIQ restorationlonditions rain2jauge for2iormal2ainfall ScottZreek&atershed.72 Additional ly,2)verland21ow2 from2he&atershed2iorthV the2vooded2iparianketland can2iowInter2his&etland2 without2)eing2liverted2)ffsite by2heIldlhannel. m = o (D c — � v E 3 v C/) o (D 0 v CD N 0 3 v v o A � N Table21.2continued). Type of Mitigation Performance Criteria Documentation Methods Dimension & Controls Current Status 90 %2f&ells2iad2i2 hyd roperiod2-6 %2)f2he2 11125emi- continuous2 282= ebruary2- 12December; growing2;eason,2vith2302 ?64)ercent22hydroperiod2or, monitoring2nrells4l2nrell /10 NOAA2NETS21ata2or2 percentV21vells1aving12 hydric2nineral2;oils acres);2)nsite2ain2,lauge normal2ainfall,2;omparison2 hydroperiod2�12.54bercentIf W2 lontro12;ites the2growingaeason,23nd232 percent21id2iot2�xhibit232 Non- riparianketland2 wetland2iydroperiod. resto ratio nahardwood2lats) Survival2)fZ?604)lanted2 Survival2lensity2orIll2rees trees:�)er2icre4using2 Vegetation4)lots2)nZ12 (and2;hrub2;pecies)23fter2he acreage�lanted2n2rees)2)f percent2)f2he1ite;21112 Annual2nonitoring 2013�ampOer1ce 5- �ear�ld�lanted2ivoody2 plots 483%2 372atems�er�cre�83 %2 stems survival)2or23llapecies2 unquestionably2 live. The2iydroperiods2at2he2wo Semi - continuous2 282:ebruary2-2�20ecember; wells2tvith:�)re- restoration2 Non- riparian&etland2 Increase2n2vetland2 monitoring&ells2-IS2,2 NOAA2NETS21ata2or2 data2n creased 2rom4)re- enhancement4hardwood2 hydroperiod2rom4re- HS17,2S18;nsite2ain2 � � normal2ainfall,�omparison2 restorationlnd2�S2ano� re- flats) restoration1onditions gauge to2lontrolaites data)�xhibited2i2 hydroperiodVZl8:�Oercent2n 2013. Photographs2)f2low2 omeIraided�)atterns2ind2 codepons channel2ormation2iave2 Linear2eet�f�redit�ased2 deposits,2lebris2lows,2 deposits, ,Zsedi s,2 Corps2ind2)WQApril22007 beenaeen2n2;ome?areas2)f Zero2o2irst2)rderatream2 on2nost2apstream2ocation2 wrack2ines,ainuosity,2 lnformation; Information;�alendar�ear;2 most2�tream�alleys.�lowing s.,Tlo restorationkithin2iparian2 of21ow2locumented2it2east braided2eatures,lhannel2 lhave AA2NETS21ar; a water2�asmeen2� n2n2h het headwateraystem twice�eryear2n2 2jears2)ut features);aemi- continuous f all; rmal2ainfall;210 for2i rmal2 singleias2) d2;han 2 of�i2 monitoring2,vell�rrays;2 c e ormal2 other- hannels.2Videonf2 rainfall2 some2lowlvents2s2ncluded GPS;�pen�hannel21ow2 onIom pan ionZD2o2his2 � monitoringlquipment. o m � v 3 c W U) n 0 a v m O 3 N � < ly � o � n N TableA .2concluded). Type of Mitigation Performance Criteria Documentation Methods Dimension & Controls Current Status Flowing&ater2ias2)een2 seen2n2he2;ingle- thread2 channelBnIumerous2tisits TwoBankfull2wents2n2 Photos2rvinter2and2; ummer ;2StreamWitigation23uidelines2 and2ecorded2)y2jauges.2 separate2jears2luringZ2 channela tability2�nalysis Apri1 22003 Evidence2)f2)ut2)f2)ank2 years2)f2nonitoring events2flso2ias2)een2ioted. Vid eo2)f2;ome21ow2)vents2s on2i1ompanionZWo2his2 report. Survival2lensity2n2he2192 First2)r2;econd2)rder2;tream2 restoration potential2iparian2)uffer2 80:?)ercent2;urvival2)f2 areas2or2ill23tems2ifter2he planted2reelpecies2mithin2 20131ampling2tvasX752 502eet2A2;tream2m2)ach2 Established2tegetation2 StreamWitigation23uidelines stems er crea70 /02 side2;fter252jearsaoO202 plots; 3)lant2;u rviva12 Apri172003 survival)2or2illapecies2 trees ) er2icre- :�Oer2)uffer2 analysis unquestionably23live.22 criteria) Density2n2he2meIuffer:�)lot with in2heaingle2hread2 segment2s21172;tems:�Oer2 acre2or23112ilive. 15A2�1 CAC1213.02602f a r- Pamlico2RiverBasin2 MitigationBrogram2or2 Survival2lensity2n2he2192 502eet2me2)r2)oth2;ides2)f2 RiparianBuffers;BWQ2252 potential2iparian2)uffer2 stream2eature2hownIn2 Mon itoring2orj)lanted2ree � Jan uary7008Llarification2 areas2or2fll23tems2ifter2h e Ri p arian2)uffer2estoration USGS2)rBountyaoil2urvey survival2/vithin2,stablished2 #2008- 017;2or2ero2)rder2 20132;ampling2nras2752 or�eroBrder�tream2 � plots2it�ears21,B,2indBi. streams, 2lexibleBufer2 stems2per23cre2or2112 segment&ithB202rees:�Oer mitigation2f2ipproved2)y2 species2anquestionably2 acre23t2naturitya52jears) EMC2is2;tated2n24012 alive.72 certification2lated2152 January72009aDW Q #2008- 0868 1 aNith2)levations2anging2romMeet2aboveNSL2o2ess2han2 Boot, 2he2ion- riparian2nineralglats2at2- IellBwamp2vill2iave232ange2)f2hydroperiods2ncreasing2iownslope2nto2he2i parian2 wetlands.22 ZZ)ocu mentati on 2nay2)e2or2ictive2xa)ast2l ow2:ond iti on s; 2nay2ncl ude2)ther2ag en cy -23 pproved2;tructu ra 12)1 ements2x2ise2)f2ech n ical2)q u i pment2i ot2m list. 0 m c — D v c v co o o n m 77 v 0 S CO cn 0 cn m m C-) 0 � 3 v v N �< O - � 0 Table 2A. Hydroperiods in 2013 of 92 riparian wells (includes 80 stream array wells) at Hell Swamp restoration site during all rainfall conditions. Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 percent of Well where water Dec where Dec where Dates ' growing <6 2:6 -12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is season or above 1- (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above 16 4/29 -5/14 42 27 139 6.4 X 18 11/7-11/24 81 2/28 -5/19 53 27 162 28.7 X 50 6/17 -8/6 72 2/28 -5/10 67 27 142 25.5 X 22 11/2-11/23 70 2/28 -5/8 70 27 150 24.8 X 22 11/2-11/23 75 27 110 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 X 79 26 63 <17 NA <6 X 23 2/28 -3/22 19 3/24 -4/12 82 27 172 36 7/21 -8/26 12.8 X 17 10/9 -10/25 35 11/2-12/6 91 27 85 20 2/28 -3/19 7.1 X 78 2/28 -5/16 21 6/29 -7/19 92 27 203 27.6 X 19 8/11 -8/30 60 10/8 -12/6 45 2/28 -4/13 93 27 139 17 10/9 -10/25 15.9 X 23 11/2-11/24 Cn D v 3 v Cl) o o (7 m v o' v 0 v m 0 0 v� � v N `< Table 2A. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb percent of days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 Well where water Dec where Dec where i Dates growing <6 2:6 -12.5% >12.5 -25 % >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is season or above 1- (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above 94 26 84 <17 22 NA <6 X 123 27 81 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X UT1 -1A 27 78 20 2/28 -3/19 7.1 X 22 2/28 -3/21 UT1 -1C 27 120 19 3/25 -4/13 7.8 X 22 4/16 -5/8 76 2/28 -5/14 26.9 UT1 -2A 27 136 X 19 7/1 -7/19 81 2/28 -5/19 28.7 UT1 -2C 27 173 X 24 6/30 -7/23 76 2/28 -5/14 UT 1 -3A 27 120 26.9 X 20 6/30 -7/19 75 2/28 -5/13 UT1 -3C 27 114 26.6 X 20 6/30 -7/19 74 2/28 -5/12 19 8/11 -8/29 UT2 -1A 27 179 26.2 X 18 10/9 -10/27 35 11/2-12/6 77 2/28 -5/15 20 8/11 -8/30 UT2 -1 C 27 189 27.3 X 19 10/9 -10/28 36 11/1-12/6 3 Cp D v C � 3 � C v � o o C7 m v 0 T 0 v m n 0 v v N o � n Table 2A. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 percent of Well where water Dec where Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25 % >25 -75 % >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is'- season or above (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above 86 2/28 -5/24 21 6/29 -7/20 UT2 -2A 27 191 30.5 X 20 8/11 -8/30 23 11/2-11/24 86 2/28 -5/24 22 6/29 -7/21 UT2 -2C 27 192 20 8/11 -8/30 30.5 X 17 10/9 -10/25 23 11/2-11/24 74 2/28 -5/12 19 8/11 -8/29 UT3 -1 A2 27 167 26.2 X 18 10/9 -10/26 35 11/2-12/6 76 2/28 -5/14 20 7/1 -7/20 UT3 -1 C 27 179 26.9 X 20 8/11 -8/31 57 10/10 -12/6 UT3 -2A 27 144 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 X 45 2/28 -4/13 15.9 UT3-3A 27 79 X 19 4/20 -5/9 50 2/28 -4/18 UT3 -3C 27 97 17.7 X 20 4/20 -5/10 s Dv 3 c L Cn CD o C7 � m K cfl v o' 0 w v co 0 0 W v Table 2A. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb percent of days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 Well where water Dec where Dec where Dates ' growing <6 2!6- 12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is season or above 1- (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above UT3-4A 27 81 45 72 2/28 -4/13 15.9 25.5 X X UT34C 27 110 2/28 -5/10 UT3 -5A 27 192 160 2/28 -8/6 56.7 X UT3 -5C2 27 99 72 2/28 -5/10 15.9 X 23 2/28 -3/22 UT3 -6A 27 87 8.2 X 22 3/24 -4/14 45 2/28 -4/13 UT3 -7A 27 79 15.9 X 18 4/20 -5/8 45 2/28 -4/13 UT3 -7C 27 92 15.9 X 20 4/20 -5/10 UT3 -8A 27 97 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 X UT3 -8C 27 101 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 X 79 2/28 -5/17 28.0 UT3 -9A 27 118 X 21 6/29 -7/20 UT3 -9C 27 173 161 2/28 -8/7 57.1 X 71 2/28 -5/9 UT4 -1A 27 164 17 10/9 -10/26 25.2 X 35 11/2-12/6 89 2/28 -5/27 UT4 -1 C2 27 185 20 8/11 -8/30 31.6 X 59 10/9 -12/6 — C/) v D ED 3 � c -!� v Cn o o n (D 77 0 v o� T 3 O U) v m n O �3 v v N � o — Table 2A. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Dec where Dec where growing Dates ' <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25 % >25 -75 % >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is'- season or above (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above 45 2/28 -4/13 UT4 -2A 27 90 15.9 X 18 4/20 -5/8 118 2/28 -6/25 26 6/29 -7/25 UT5 -1A 27 236 41.8 X 29 8/11 -9/9 58 10/9 -12/6 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 UT5 -1 C 27 184 22 10/8 -10/29 X 36 11/1-12/6 UT5 -2A 27 160 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X UT6 -4A 27 138 71 2/28 -5/9 25.2 X 45 2/28 -4/13 UT6 -4C 27 149 15.9 X 33 4/16 -5/19 UT6 -5A 27 130 71 2/28 -5/9 25.2 X 45 2/28 -4/13 UT6 -5C 27 85 15.9 X 18 4/20 -5/8 UT6 -6A 27 101 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 X UT6 -6C 27 97 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 45 2/28 -4/13 UT7 -1A 27 132 15.9 X 23 4/16 -5/9 46 2/28 -4/14 UT7 -1 C 27 129 16.3 X 23 4/16 -5/9 CI) 3 D v 3 c v C/) o o (� v 0 Z5 T 0 v m 0 0 v v Table 2A. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb percent of days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 Well where water Dec where Dec where Dates ' growing <6 >_6- 12.5% >12.5 -25 % >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is season or above 1- (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above 78 2/28 -5/16 UT7 -2A 27 151 20 6/30 -7/19 27.7 X 19 8/11 -8/29 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 UT7 -2C 27 146 X 17 11/7-11/23 UT7 -3A 27 131 76 2/28 -5/14 26.9 X UT7 -3C 27 212 180 2/28 -8/26 63.8 2/28 -3/21 X 22 UT8 -1 A 27 131 7.8 X 17 10/8 -10/24 75 2/28 -5/13 UT8 -1 C 27 163 26.6 X 17 10/8 -10/24 75 2/28 -5/13 UT8 -2A 27 148 20 7/1 -7/20 26.6 X 21 11/2-11/22 UT8 -2C 27 101 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 49 2/28 -4/17 UT8 -3A 27 88 17.4 X 19 4/19 -5/8 UT8 -3C 27 85 71 2/28 -5/9 25.1 X UT84A 27 115 76 2/28 -5/14 26.9 X 81 2/28 -5/19 UT8 -4C 27 136 28.7 X 24 6/30 -7/23 UT8 -5A 23 30 <17 NA <6 X — C/) v D 3 c L C/) � o 0 C7 (D X_ Ef v o� v 0 0 v m n 0 3 v � � v N � C5 -P, Z) Table 2A. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 percent of Well where water Dec where Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25 % >25 -75 % >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is'- season or above (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above UT8 -5C 27 30 20 2/28 -3/19 7.1 X UT8 -6A 27 97 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 K UT8 -6C 27 107 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 88 2/28 -5/26 28 6/29 -7/26 USC -1A 27 221 31.2 X 29 8/11 -9/9 58 10/9 -12/6 81 2/28 -5/19 21 6/30 -7/20 USC -1C 27 200 28.7 X 28 8/11 -9/8 58 10/9 -12/6 USC -2A 27 89 <17 NA <6 X USG -2C 27 81 19 2/28 -3/18 6.7 X 45 2/28 -4/13 USC -3C 27 108 15.9 X 18 4/20 -5/8 USC -4A 27 84 21 2/28 -3/20 7.4 X 22 2/28 -3/21 USC -4C 27 115 7.8 X 17 4/20 -5/7 160 2/28 -8/6 USC -5A 27 231 56.7 X 23 11/1-11/24 77 2/28 -5/15 USC -5C2 27 119 27.3 X 22 6/30 -7/21 D v 3 c v cl) o m o n � m v o� v Z7 0 U) 3 v cn 0 0 v v O — � n Table 2A. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 percent of Well where water Dec where Dec where Dates ' growing a6 o L 6- 12.5/0 0 >12.5 -25 /o 0 >25 -75 /o >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is1- season or above (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above 160 2/28 -8/6 USC -6A 27 172 31 8/11 -9/11 56.7 X 59 10/8 -12/6 160 2/28 -8/6 USC -6C 27 278 26.7 X 118 8/11 -12/6 87 2/28 -5/25 28 6/29 -7/26 USC -7A 27 216 30.8 X 30 8/11 -9/10 58 10/9 -12/6 88 2/28 -5/26 30 6/29 -7/28 USC -7C 27 222 31.2 X 32 8/11 -9/12 58 10/9 -12/6 88 2/28 -5/26 25 6/29 -7/23 USC -8A2 27 213 30 8/11 -9/11 31.2 X 18 10/9 -10/27 35 11/2-12/6 87 2/28 -5/25 24 6/30 -7/23 USC -8C 27 208 29 8/11 -9/10 30.8 X 17 10/9 -10/25 35 11/2-12/6 m = o (D c c) 3 > v 3 c v C/) o (� m m R v 0 m N VS I v 0 En v m n 0 �3 m v N O — A 0 Table 2A. (concluded). 'Only 17 days or more (6 %) are included in this column. `Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length and so reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than what occurred. Hydrologic Zone Cumulative Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb percent of days 28 Feb -6 days 28 Feb -6 Well where water Dec where Dec where Dates growing <6 o z6-12.5% 0 >12.5 -25 /o 0 >25 -75 /o >75 -100 table is -12" water table is - water table is season or above 1- (282 days) 12" or above 12" or above USC -9A 27 149 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X USC -9C 27 137 76 2/28 -5/14 26.9 X USC -10A 27 138 86 2/28 -5/24 30.5 X 160 2/28 -8/6 USC -11A 27 216 26.7 X 17 8/11 -8/27 94 2/28 -6/1 USC -11 C 27 121 37 6/29 -8/4 33.3 X 28 8/11 -9/9 USC -12A 27 126 78 2/28 -5/16 27.6 X 110 2/28 -6/17 USC -12C 27 191 39 6/29 -8/6 39.0 X 27 8/11 -9/8 91 2/28 -5/29 USC -13A 27 171 29 6/29 -7/27 32.2 X 27 121 17 8/11 -8/27 USC -13C 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 'Only 17 days or more (6 %) are included in this column. `Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length and so reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than what occurred. m= o (D c — 3 C/) Dv B c m Cn coo o C7 m v o' m 71 w zT 0 0 3 v co 0 0 v v <� N - O — .p n Table 2B. Hydroperiods in 2013 of 111 non - riparian hardwood flat monitoring wells at Hell Swamp restoration site and 14 nearby control wells during all rainfall conditions. Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where ' growing Dates <6 o ' > -6 -12.5 /o 0 >12.5-25% >25 -75 /o >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 1 27 282 138 282 78 2/28 -12/6 100.0 X 22 27 2/28 -5/16 27.7 X 77 2/28 -5/15 3 27 177 27.3 X 35 11/2-12/6 4 27 106 70 2/28 -5/8 24.8 X 71 2/28 -5/9 5 27 127 25.2 X 35 11/2-12/6 72 2/28 -5/10 6 27 155 25.5 X 35 11/2-12/6 30 2/28 -3/29 7 27 163 19 4/20 -5/9 10.6 X 17 8/11 -8/27 8 27 105 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 218 2/28 -10/3 9 27 278 77.3 X 60 10/8 -12/6 10 27 137 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 11 23 37 <17 NA <6.0 X 90 2/28 -528 40 6/29 -8/7 12 27 143 31.9 X 37 8/11 -9/18 42 10/26 -12/6 221 2/28 -10/6 13 27 281 78.4 X 60 10/8 -12/6 -n a: o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � c�D o C7 m v o' m n Cn 3 0 0 3 v CD 0 0 v m N O - �0 Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z 6 -12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 14 27 133 90 20 2/28 -3/19 7.1 X 15 27 91 2/28 -5/29 32.3 X 16 27 92 76 2/28 -5/14 27.0 X 49 2/28 -4/17 17 27 107 17.4 X 19 4/20 -5/9 91 2/28 -5/29 18 27 164 29 6/29 -7/27 32.3 X 20 8/11 -8/30 23 2/28 -3/22 19 27 159 8.2 X 19 4/20 -5/9 20 27 108 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 86 2/28 -5/24 28 6/30 -7/27 21 27 196 30.5 X 22 10/9 -10/30 35 11/2-12/6 22 27 143 71 2/28 -5/9 25.2 X 30 2/28 -3/29 23 27 129 13.8 X 39 4/1 -5/9 24 27 129 79 2/28 -5/17 28.0 X 46 2/28 -4/13 25 27 86 16.3 X 17 4/20 -5/7 26 27 282 282 2/28 -12/6 100.0 X 27 27 142 86 2/28 -5/24 50.4 X -n a: o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � c�D o C7 m v o' (D 71 E, T zT 0 0 S N (D C7 0 v v N � o — �0 Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z 6 -12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 90 2/28 -5/28 28 27 165 28 6/29 -7/26 31.9 X 18 8/11 -8/28 2/28 -5/14 76 29 27 181 20 8/11 -8/30 27.0 X 35 11/2-12/6 23 2/28 -3/22 30 27 90 17.0 X 48 3/24 -5/8 46 2/28 -4/13 31 27 127 16.3 X 19 4/19 -5/8 30 2/28 -3/29 323 27 73 10.6 X 17 4/20 -5/7 33 27 88 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X 343 27 124 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 35 27 97 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 36 27 147 78 2/28 -5/16 27.7 X 89 2/28 -5/27 30 6/29 -7/28 37 27 220 31 8/11 -9/10 31.6 X 21 10/9 -10/29 35 11/2-12/6 46 2/28 -4/13 38 27 149 16.3 X 20 4/20 -5/10 -n a: o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � coo o C7 m v o' m 71 8 n Cn 3 0 0 3 v m 0 0 v m N � O - �0 Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 71 2/28 -5/9 39 27 176 25.2 X 18 8/11 -8/28 40 27 282 282 2/28 -12/6 100.0 X 41 27 101 18 2/28 -3/17 6.4 X 43 27 70 18 2/28 -3/17 6.4 X 44 27 97 70 2/28 -5/8 24.8 X 45 27 131 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 46 27 129 76 2/28 -5/14 27.0 X 86 2/28 -5/24 24 6/29 -7/22 47 27 188 30.5 X 19 8/11 -8/29 17 11/7-11/23 86 2/28 -5/24 48 27 137 30.5 X 22 6/29 -7/20 49 27 108 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 23 2/28 -3/22 50 27 115 8.2 X 18 4/20 -5/8 51 27 98 18 2/28 -3/17 6.4 X 46 2/28 -4/13 52 27 146 16.3 X 19 4/20 -5/9 77 2/28 -5/15 54 27 184 26 6/29 -7/24 27.3 X 22 11/2-11/23 m= o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � coo o C7 m v o' m T zT 0 0 3 v (o n 0 v v N - O — � n Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 78 2/28 -5/16 55 27 156 27.7 X 23 6/30 -7/21 56 27 141 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 57 27 123 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 58 27 138 71 2/28 -5/9 25.2 X 59 27 120 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 X 60 27 113 78 2/28 -5/16 27.7 X well malfunction 61 prevented data 127 76 2/28 -5/14 27.0 X collection in February 2/28 -4/13 45 62 27 137 16.0 X 29 4/20 -5/9 2/28 -5/15 77 21 6/30 -7/20 63 27 164 27.3 X 22 10/9 -10/26 20 11/2-11/21 64 27 102 76 2/28 -5/14 27.0 X 45 2/28 -4/13 65 27 91 16.0 X 28 4/20 -5/8 66 27 66 20 2/28 -3/19 7.1 X -n a: o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � c�D o C7 m v o' m 71 E8 zT 0 0 3 v CD 0 0 v v N � O — .p n Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 92 2/28 -5/30 38 6/29 -8/5 68 27 145 32.6 X 25 8/11 -9/14 59 10/9 -12/6 76 2/28 -5/14 69 27 167 27.0 X 17 8/11 -8/27 71 2/28 -5/9 71 27 139 25.2 X 29 7/9 -8/7 72 27 135 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 77 2/28 -5/15 73 27 109 27.3 X 19 7/1 -7/19 46 2/28 -4/14 74 27 103 16.3 X 20 4/20 -5/10 49 2/28 -4/17 76 27 90 17.4 X 19 4/20 -5/9 79 2/28 -5/17 77 27 186 23 6/29 -7/21 28.0 X 18 8/11 -8/28 45 2/28 -4/13 78 27 117 16.0 X 19 4/20 -5/9 80 27 114 71 2/28 -5/9 25.2 X 75 2/28 -5/13 17 8/11 -8/27 81 27 175 26.6 X 18 10/9 -10/26 35 11/2-12/6 -n a: o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � c�D o C7 m v o' (D 71 8 C7 Cn T zT 0 0 3 N (D n 0 v� N `G O Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 83 27 107 20 2/28 -3/9 7.0 X 16 2/28 -3/15 84 27 170 20 6/29 -7/18 7.0 X 17 8/11 -8/27 2/28 -5/19 81 85 27 180 22 6/29 -7/20 28.7 X 18 11/2-11/19 22 2/28 -3/21 86 27 103 7.8 X 19 4/19 -5/8 87 27 126 72 2/28 -5/10 25.5 X 88 27 109 76 2/28 -5/14 27.0 X 81 2/28 -5/19 39 6/29 -8/6 89 27 115 28 8/19 -9/16 28.7 X 17 10/8 -10/24 35 11/2-12/6 90 27 80 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X 23 2/28 -3/22 30 4/20 -5/10 95 27 192 21 6/29 -7/19 21.3 X 22 8/9 -8/31 60 10/8 -12/6 963 27 132 76 2/28 -5/14 27.0 X -n a: o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � �J o m o C7 m v o' m 71 N 0 I 0 3 v co 0 0 v v N � o — �0 Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 u >_6 -12.5 /o o 0 >12.5 -25 /o >25 -75 /o >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) 12" or above' 77 2/28 -5/15 23 6/29 -7/21 97 27 178 27.3 X 19 8/11 -8/30 17 10/8 -10/24 45 2/28 -4/13 98 27 165 16.0 X 29 4/20 -5/9 49 2/28 -4/17 99 27 104 17.4 X 33 4/20 -5/13 2/28 -5/27 89 1003 27 162 31.6 X 17 7/9 -7/26 101 27 109 86 2/28 -5/24 30.5 X 102 27 71 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X 49 2/28 -4/17 103 27 113 20 4/20 -5/10 17.4 X 17 7/9 -7/24 104 27 113 71 2/28 -5/9 25.2 X 105 26 36 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X 106 27 64 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X 1073 27 107 46 2/28 -4/14 16.3 X 108 27 282 282 2/28 -12/6 100.0 X 109 27 95 72 2/28 -5/10 25.6 X 110 27 139 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 111 27 93 72 2/28 -5/10 25.6 X 78 2/28 -5/16 112 27 136 27.7 X 21 6/29 -7/19 -n a: o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � coo o C7 m v o' m A 0 0 3 N co 0 0 v v N - O - �0 Table 2B. (continued). Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where Dates ' growing <6 z6- 12.5% >12.5 -25% >25 -75% >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) y ) 12" or above' 1133 27 78 44 2/28 -4/12 15.6 X 114 27 107 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 115 27 177 161 2/28 -8/7 57.1 X 116 27 114 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X 1173 27 119 75 2/28 -5/13 26.6 X 118 27 66 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X 119 27 77 23 2/28 -3/22 8.2 X 120 26 50 <17 NA <6 X 87 2/28 -5/25 121 27 157 30.9 X 29 6128 -7/26 122 25 26 <17 NA <6 X 124 27 62 18 2/28 -3/17 6.4 X Control wells Ref 1 27 76 76 2/28 -5/14 27.0 X Ref2 27 79 79 2/28 -5/17 28.0 X Ref3 27 90 87 2/28 -5/25 30.9 X PP1 20 60 19 2/28 -3/18 2/28 -5/10 6.7 X 72 PP2 27 144 25.5 X 21 6/29 -7/19 93 2/28 -5/31 28 6/29 -7/26 PP3 27 228 32.9 X 29 8/11 -9/9 59 10/9 -12/6 PP4 27 108 29 2/28 -3/28 10.3 X WFA 27 83 83 2/28 -5/21 29.4 X m= o (D c — �C/) Dv B c m � �J o m o C7 m v o' m 71 N N S O O S v CD 0 O N � N � O — �P n Table 2B. (concluded). 'Only 17 days or more (6 %) are included in this column. 2Located in an existing jurisdictional wetland and not in a control wetland forest. 3Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length and so reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than what occurred. Hydrologic Zone Consecutive Days 1 -27 Feb Cumulative days 28 days 28 Feb -6 Percent of Well where water Feb -6 Dec where water Dec where � Dates growing <6 u >_6 -12.5 /o o 0 >12.5 -25 /o >25 -75 /o >75 -100 table is -12" or table is -12" or above water table is - season (282 above days) 12" or above' WF -2 27 62 24 2/28 -3/23 8.5 X WF -3 21 34 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X WF -4 25 39 22 2/28 -3/21 7.8 X WF -5 4 3 <17 NA <6 X WF -6 27 93 77 2/28 -5/15 27.3 X WF -7 20 51 29 2/28 -3/28 10.3 X 'Only 17 days or more (6 %) are included in this column. 2Located in an existing jurisdictional wetland and not in a control wetland forest. 3Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length and so reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than what occurred. Table 3a. Summary of monthly 2013 visual observations (see Table B -1) from upper Scott Creek and its headwater systems (UT1 -UT7) and a tributary to Smith Creek (UT8). (Numbering of flow stations starts with the most downstream station at each tributary.) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report T -23 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. May 2014 Number of months Number of months Flow station with visual observation of Flow station with visual observation of flow flow USC -1 B 2 UT3 (continued) USC -21B 3 UT3 -6B 2 USC -313 4 UT3 -7B 3 USC -413 7 UT3 -8B 1 USC -51B 3 UT3 -913 0 USC -6B 3 UT4 -1 B 0 USC -7B 2 USC -81B 1 UT4 -2B 0 USC -9B 5 USC -10B 6 UT6 -3B 1 USC -11 B 1 UT6 -4B 2 UT6 -5B 2 UT6 -6B 1 UT1 -1 B 5 UT1 -2B 1 UT1 -3B 2 UT7 -1 B 2 UT1 -4B 2 UT7 -2B UT7 -3B 1 0 UT2 -1 B 0 UT8 -1 B UT8 -2B 6 5 UT3 -1 B 2 UT3 -2B 4 UT8 -3B 5 UT3 -3B 3 UT8 -4B 0 UT3 -4B 1 UT8 -5B 3 UT3 -5B 0 UT8 -6B 4 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report T -23 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. May 2014 m= o (D c �U) > v B c � v Cn o o C7 m cQ� v 0 M LO m T, N 0 Cn ZY M m 0 0 v v < 0 O - -PI 0 Table 3b. Summary of visual observations of flow in 2013 from Bay Ciy, Scarp, Porter Creek and Duck Creek Number of months Number of months Flow station (# of site visits) with visual Flow station (# of site visits) with visual observation of flow observation of flow LC/ Porter Creek BCF1 (12) most upstream 6 PCF1 (14) 5 BCF2 (12) BCF3 (12) 7 BCF4 (12) most downstream 8 *PCF2 (7) 5 HF1 (12) 2 Scarp Duck Creek UD1 -F1 (12) 1 DKCW1F (14) upstream 3 UD1WF1 (12) upstream 0 UD1WF2 (12) downstream 0 DKCW2F (14) downstream 4 UD8F1 (12) downstream 8 DKCW3F (14) upstream 3 UD8F2 (12) upstream 11 DKCW4F (14) downstream 6 *Removed in June 2013 due to logging activities Table 4. Fourth annual (fall 2013) survival of trees and shrubs planted in 123 0.22 -acre plots (12 riparian and 111 non - riparian) at Hell Swamp. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site T -25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 Tagged at Fall 2013 stems Alive Unsure Total Alive baseline' RIPARIAN PLOTS NON - RIPARIAN PLOTS Trees Trees Stems 1,098 819 27 846 Density 416 310 10 320 370 Shrubs Stems 399 319 5 Stems 35 15 4 19 Density 13 6 2 7 Unknown 5 6 TOTAL NON - RIPARIAN Stems 78 0 0 0 TOTAL RIPARIAN 287 9,363 Density stems +24.4ac 450 Total stems 1,211 834 31 865 Density stems +2.64ac 459 316 12 328 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site T -25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 Tagged at Fall 2013 stems baseline' Alive Unsure Tota13 NON - RIPARIAN PLOTS Trees Stems 10,169 8,756 277 9,033 Density 417 359 11 370 Shrubs Stems 399 319 5 324 Density 16 13 0 13 Unknown Stems 414 1 5 6 TOTAL NON - RIPARIAN Total stems 10,982 9,076 287 9,363 Density stems +24.4ac 450 372 12 384 Tagged at Fall 2012 stems baseline' Alive Unsure Tota13 ALL PLOTS Trees Stems 11,267 9,575 304 9,879 Density 416 354 11 365 Shrubs Stems 434 334 9 343 Density 16 12 0 13 Unknown Stems 492 1 5 6 TOTAL ALL PLOTS Total stems 12,193 9,910 318 10,228 Density stems +27.06ac 451 366 12 378 'The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species in the fall sampling event and extra planted stems found in subsequent monitoring years. The baseline survival columns were not adjusted for this. 2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event and dead if at both the current and last sampling events the stem was not unquestionably alive. 3Total includes alive + unsure. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site T -25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 0 m c — C) D v c v � � o m 0 C) 7L m CD cQ' v 0 S LO m N rn v n 0 m v CD C) 0 B v v � c N O � A C7 Table 5. Survival of trees and shrubs planted in 19 0.017 -acre plots in potential riparian buffer areas at Hell Swamp from baseline (summer 2010) to fall 2013. Scientific name Common name Tagged at baseline' Alive Baseline stems Unsure Total3 Alive Fall 2013 stems Unsure Total3 Percent Survival4 Alive Total3 Large trees Carya aquatica water hickory 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 100 100 Fagus grandifolia American beech 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 35 33 0 33 32 1 33 91 94 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 5 5 0 5 2 0 2 40 40 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 39 32 1 33 25 2 27 64 69 Prunus serotina black cherry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Quercus alba white oak 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 100 100 Q. falcata southern red oak 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 100 100 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 14 17 0 17 13 0 13 93 93 Q. lyrata overcup oak 38 30 0 30 31 2 33 82 87 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 30 30 0 30 24 1 25 80 83 Q. nigra water oak 11 8 0 8 11 0 11 100 100 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 -- -- Q. phellos willow oak 4 3 0 3 4 0 4 100 100 Q. spp. oak 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 -- -- Taxodium distichum bald cypress 36 33 2 35 28 1 29 78 81 Ulmus americans American elm 14 13 0 13 12 1 13 86 93 Small trees Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 8 9 0 9 3 0 3 38 38 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 5 5 0 5 3 0 3 60 60 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 7 5 0 5 7 0 7 100 100 Ilex decidua possumhaw 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- 1. opaca American holly 4 4 0 4 2 0 2 50 50 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 13 9 2 11 5 0 5 38 38 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Persea palustris red bay 6 8 0 8 0 1 1 0 17 Total tree stems 275 251 5 256 208 9 217 76 79 Density 859 784 16 800 650 28 678 o m c — Dv c � c c v U) � o m o 0 7L m CD v 0 S LP 9 N V n U) 0 Cn s W CD 0 0 �3 v v � c O_ _ ? n Table 5. (concluded). baseline survival columns were not adjusted for this. 2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event and dead if at both the current and last sampling events the stem was not unquestionably alive. 3Total includes alive + unsure. 4Percent survival was calculated as: (Fall /Baseline tagged) X 100. Tagged at Baseline stems Fall 2013 stems Percent Survival4 Scientific name Common name baseline' Alive Unsure Total3 Alive Unsure2 Total3 Alive Total3 Shrubs Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Corpus amomum silky dogwood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Ilex glabra ink berry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Ilex verticillata winterberry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Itea virginica Virginia willow 10 7 0 7 7 1 8 70 80 Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 100 100 Lindera benzoin spicebush 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Rosa palustris swamp rose 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Viburnum nudum possum haw viburnum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Total shrub stems 12 9 0 9 8 1 9 67 75 Density 38 28 0 28 25 3 28 Unknown sp. 20 10 14 24 0 0 0 0 0 Total Total stems 307 270 19 289 216 10 226 70 74 Total density 959 844 59 903 675 31 706 'The number taaaed at baseline has been adiusted to reflect the orooer identification of species and findina more planted stems in the fall samolina event. The baseline survival columns were not adjusted for this. 2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event and dead if at both the current and last sampling events the stem was not unquestionably alive. 3Total includes alive + unsure. 4Percent survival was calculated as: (Fall /Baseline tagged) X 100. o m c = U) 3 D m 3 v U) CD o o C7 CD v 0 m N CO n Cn v 0 v CD 0 0 v� N `< CD = � 0 Table 6. Survival of trees and shrubs planted in 12 riparian 0.22 -acre plots (2.64 acres sampled) at Hell Swamp from baseline (summer 2010) to fall 2013. 'The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species and finding more planted stems in the fall sampling event. The baseline survival columns were not adjusted for this. 2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event and dead if at both the current and last sampling events the stem was not unquestionably alive. 3Total includes alive + unsure. 4Percent survival was calculated as: (Fall /Baseline tagged) X 100. Tagged at Baseline stems Fall 2013 stems Percent surviva14 Scientific name Common name baseline' Alive Unsure Tota13 Alive Unsure Tota13 Alive Tota13 Large trees Carya aquatica water hickory 3 2 0 2 3 0 3 100 100 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 180 173 0 173 165 5 170 92 94 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 149 149 7 156 27 4 31 18 21 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 28 24 0 24 22 0 22 79 79 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 25 21 0 21 23 0 23 92 92 Q. lyrata overcup oak 210 196 1 197 198 2 200 94 95 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 63 50 0 50 56 0 56 89 89 Q. nigra water oak 3 4 0 4 3 0 3 100 100 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 6 2 0 2 6 0 6 100 100 Q. phellos willow oak 139 124 1 125 129 3 132 93 95 Q. spp. oak 5 7 5 12 0 0 0 0 0 Taxodium distichum bald cypress 202 182 15 197 153 11 164 76 81 Ulmus americana American elm 16 16 0 16 15 0 15 94 94 Small trees Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 18 17 0 17 8 0 8 44 44 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 9 7 0 7 6 0 6 67 67 I. opaca American holly 10 10 0 10 4 1 5 40 50 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 15 16 0 16 0 1 1 0 7 Persea palustris red bay 17 14 3 17 1 0 1 6 6 Total tree stems 1,098 1,014 32 1,046 819 27 846 75 77 Density (stems- 2.64ac) 416 384 12 396 310 10 320 Shrubs Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 4 4 0 4 2 2 4 50 100 Itea virginica Virginia willow 19 20 0 20 12 1 13 63 68 Leucothoe racemosa swamp doghobble 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 50 Lindera benzoin spicebush 5 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 1 0 1 Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum 4 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 Total shrub stems 35 36 0 36 15 4 19 43 54 Density (stems- 2.64ac) 13 14 0 14 6 2 7 Unknown sa. 78 26 77 103 0 0 0 0 0 Total Total stems 1,211 1,076 109 1,185 834 31 865 69 71 Total Density (stems- 2.64ac) 459 408 41 449 316 12 328 'The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species and finding more planted stems in the fall sampling event. The baseline survival columns were not adjusted for this. 2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event and dead if at both the current and last sampling events the stem was not unquestionably alive. 3Total includes alive + unsure. 4Percent survival was calculated as: (Fall /Baseline tagged) X 100. Table 7. Survival of trees and shrubs planted in 111 non - riparian 0.22 -acre plots (24.4 ac sampled) at Hell Swamp from baseline (summer 2010) to fall 2013. The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species in the fall sampling event and extra planted stems found in subsequent monitoring years. The ZSurvival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event and dead if at both the current and last sampling events the stem was 3Total includes alive + unsure. 4Percent survival was calculated as: (Fall /Baseline tagged) X 100. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report T -29 Tagged at Baseline stems Fall 2013 stems Percent survival Scientific name Common name baseline' Alive Unsure` Total" Alive Unsure` Total" Alive Total" Large trees Carya aquatica water hickory 170 161 1 162 162 2 164 95 96 Fagus grandifolia American beech 90 98 0 98 83 2 85 92 94 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 1178 1,180 2 1,182 1112 22 1134 94 96 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 500 502 5 507 260 31 291 52 58 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 703 694 3 697 579 10 589 82 84 Prunus serotina black cherry 30 32 0 32 16 5 21 53 70 Quercus alba white oak 262 232 2 234 255 3 258 97 98 Q. falcata southern red oak 172 157 0 157 165 2 167 96 97 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 715 636 34 670 629 15 644 88 90 Q. lyrata overcup oak 795 786 2 788 776 5 781 98 98 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 1634 1,533 18 1,551 1438 64 1502 88 92 Q. nigra water oak 884 786 14 800 812 22 834 92 94 Q.pagoda cherrybark oak 646 603 12 615 550 27 577 85 89 Q. phellos willow oak 639 584 4 588 609 7 616 95 96 Q.spp. oak 62 121 57 178 1 5 6 2 10 Taxodium distichum bald cypress 694 679 14 693 601 13 614 87 88 Ulmus americana American elm 507 503 0 503 455 19 474 90 93 Small trees Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 123 121 3 124 75 11 86 61 70 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 16 14 0 14 13 1 14 81 88 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 38 35 0 35 38 0 38 100 100 Ilex decidua possumhaw 5 6 0 6 5 0 5 100 100 /. opaca American holly 32 31 1 32 22 0 22 69 69 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 190 188 2 190 91 11 102 48 54 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Persea palustris red bay 82 69 12 81 9 0 9 11 11 Total tree stems 10,169 9,753 186 9,939 8,756 277 9,033 86 89 Density (stems= 24.4ac) 417 400 8 407 359 11 370 Shrubs Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 34 32 0 32 29 1 30 85 88 Cornus amomum silky dogwood 38 23 0 23 36 0 36 95 95 Ilex glabra ink berry 18 19 0 19 14 0 14 78 78 Ilex verticillata winterberry 24 21 0 21 21 0 21 88 88 Itea virginica Virginia willow 197 179 5 184 166 3 169 84 86 Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble 9 1 0 1 3 1 4 33 44 Lindera benzoin spicebush 27 31 2 33 7 0 7 26 26 Rosa palustris swamp rose 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 49 47 0 47 41 0 41 84 84 Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 100 100 Total shrub stems 399 356 7 363 319 5 324 80 81 Density (stems= 24.4ac) 16 15 0 15 13 0 13 Unknown sp. 414 170 5 Total Total stems 10,982 10,279 653 10,932 9,076 287 9,363 83 85 Total Density (stems= 24.4ac) 450 421 27 448 372 12 384 The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species in the fall sampling event and extra planted stems found in subsequent monitoring years. The ZSurvival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event and dead if at both the current and last sampling events the stem was 3Total includes alive + unsure. 4Percent survival was calculated as: (Fall /Baseline tagged) X 100. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report T -29 s lt l } t Stole bC fY BROAD Fl ePines' 1 �• /jj RT. 264 - ; SEED TICK NE PLUM'S PIT y �. C,• 'i, _ - `��' / . I \ CONTROL _ �r•.N .':'' { _ _. . FOREST - , � �; � �,.a� � •� �`�'\ WINDLEY / � LONGINDf• 78' st' 07.0038 RT. -99. q /LATfNDE 35 51' 31.4188' Y+iraKNe°. j _ -^ A FOREST L J, I/ .. �;. .. HELL SWA PUNGO \� '9 SCOITI'.CREMIF CREEK ROAD li WINFIELD CONTROL i tt FOREST t � I V. u r. Pt, Mdln ce.. C .� 0 5,000 10,000 NORTH CAROLINA SCALE IN FEET SITE LOCATION HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE HELL SWAMP -SCOTT CREEK V I r I N I TY k/I O P PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. LEGEND — — — — HELL SWAMP PROJECT BOUNDARY SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: BFG /TL, CONTROLFOREST DATE: 05/09/14 FILE: HELLSMP_VIC_2013 SOURCE: A CP# 174559.66 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP R 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE SUITE 2 IMAGES, NC STATEPLANE, NAD83, FEET, 1:24000 - SCALE, USGSTOPOTILEO83.SID, AND USGSTOPOTILE113.SID, USGS QUADRANGLES RANSOMVILLE AND PANTED , _ INCORPORATED K WILMINGTON, NORTELC9ROLINA 28403 FIGURE 1 WEB SITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG ENWRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FAX 910/392 -9139 LEGEND PP4 - -- PROJECT BOUNDARY (1,296.87 ACRES) A A CONTROL FOREST PP1 A - ACCESS ROAD 'i PP2 PP3 EXISTING ROAD •- ACCESS ROAD PLUM'S PIT CONTROL FOREST GATE o WELL LOCATIONS HS -5 HS -3 ® • ACCESS ROAD HS -1 WELL NUMBER HS -2 O• S -4� . CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS ®HS -10 �:: HS -15 o TREE /SHRUB PLOT MONITORING LOCATION 00 0 FJS -8 HS -9 HS -11 D — VALLEY WELL ARRAY /FLOW OBSERVATION POINT HS -1 •OHS -20 VALLEY WELL ARRAY /FLOW OBSERVATION POINT :S -16 0 Do HS -:5 WITH TREE /SHRUB MONITORING PLOT HSR1 HS- HS -24 O PHOTO STATION HSR2 n HSR3\ HS -27 HS -29 HS -33 ;// HS -3 PLANTING ZONES (1,263.02 ACRES) O �y HS -26 O• HS 28 O0 � 0 HS -34 D UPLAND (117.29 ACRES) � HS -39 HS -36 HS -37 HS -45 HS -46 � HS -38 � i 0 � VALLEY 1 (35.08 ACRES) •O ` �• O • • •� HS- o VALLEY 2 (34.55 ACRES) WINDLEY L CONTROL FOREST HS -48 OHS -51 0 — ZONE 1 (308.61 ACRES) HS -49 HS -50 ZONE 2 (190.32 ACRES) HS -60 HS -61 0 00 D0 HS -6 00 • ZONE 3 -1 (116.67 ACRES) ® ZONE 3 -2 (154.49 ACRES) HS -7 • O HS -73 HS -83 ZONE 4 -1 (140.33 ACRES) ACCESS ROAD HS -84 HS -85 HS -86 ZONE 4 -2 (165.68 ACRES) 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET NOTE: 1. ACTUAL PLANTING ZONE BOUNDARIES DIFFER SLIGHTLY IN SOME AREAS FROM THIS FIGURE. 2. VALLEY WELL ARRAY /FLOW OBSERVATION POINT CONSIST OF TWO SHALLOW MONITORING WELLS ON THE OUTER EDGES OF THE VALLEY WITH FLOW OBSERVATION POINTS NEAR THE MIDDLE OF THE VALLEY, BETWEEN THE WELLS. V f To - PP4 Sb .4 t PP1 PP2 A / Ds PP3 � 1 �\` PLUM'S PIT Ap CONTROL FOREST /1�) HS -50 • HS 70 Ap / • S -2 HS -30 HS -4 HS -6 Sb LEGEND � / C f ` HS- — — — HELL SWAMP BOUNDARY / • 9 • S- OHS-14\ HS -10• • • To CONTROL FOREST S -8 H 11 �7 {fit `/ 1 • WELL LOCATIONS HS -19 .,,i i•�;� c -16 HS -20 HS -21 HS -22 HS 3 HS -1 WELL NUMBER o HSR1 HS -24 HS -25 Pt A CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS HSR2 USC / A — VALLEY WELL ARRAY /FLOW OBSERVATION POINT HSR3\ HS -2 � o HS 9 HS -3 HS -33 • HS -35 VALLEY WELL ARRAY /FLOW OBSERVATION POINT /yi► • • HS -26 S -28 • • S -30 • HS -32 • • HS -34 • l WITH TREE /SHRUB MONITORING PLOT {�} HS -37 T / HS -38 HS -40 HS -45 HS -46 PHOTO STATION • • O • O • • • • • g� SOILS HS -36 HS -3 HS -41 HS -4 HS -43 HS -44 HS -47 SYMBOL SOIL NAME / WINDLEY CONTROL UT6 E UT7 To At AUGUSTA FOREST HS -48 UT1 HS -54 HS -58 HS -5 At "t Cf CAPE FEAR FINE SANDY LOAM t T J �• • O • O 6 OHS -57 O O / DS DRAGSTON HS -49 HS -50 HS -5 S -52 HS- 55A�NS -5Me MUCKALEE —4 • Pt PORTSMOUTH ti y�j I HS -53 HS -67 UT2 HS -691 Ro ROANOKE Sb S -61 y$ 62 -64 HS -65 HS -66 1 HS A�1 To TOMOTLEY LOAMY SAND • 1 0 O • ♦ •HS -70 • To Ds' , % _. HS -60 H -63 HS -68 I WATER FEATURES HS 80 UT5 • AaA � PERENNIAL n.`i )� DS Sb Me ~ INTERMITTENT - I HS -72 � -74 - I • HS -78 HS -79 C' H - S -77 C1*l, S -81 HS -82 ' I HS -83 - I HS -84 HS -8 H' -86 S -88 A S? UT3 0 1 HS -94 AaA To S • • • • • • HS -95 AP HS -89 HS -90 HS -91 �H C14 AaA l HS -97 Pt ` HS -102 UT4 ' Ap DS Ap A ` HS 96 • HS- 8 HS-99 \ HS- • S -101 ® OHS- 103 \�^ \ \ HS -10 / L' rj B 'I HS -104 \ \ \\ AaA At HS -106 HS , ,1 9 � S HS -113 • 7� : HS -10: 5 -108 - � • • -1 • ` HS -110 S 11 , �, 0%.. TaB AaA pt, 0 1,200 2,400 At � 6 ` HS -112 � �, _� SOURCE: I' WF5 HS -114 HS -115 ` /f"I 117 SOIL SURVEY OF BEA GRIC TUREN, NORTH CAROLINA !• US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE • SCALE IN FEET • • HS-118� 1'�' ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 1995 � HS -116 \ WINFIELD A4 U HS -12` \ �� G Ap <\ c HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE CONTROL �` .S -1 \ � I AaA. ', n� MONITORING LOCATIONS ON SOIL SURVEY OREST WF3 ® / A HS -119 WF1 AWF2 000 HS -12 ps PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. 0_1 HS -124 D5 {�e3A AaA SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: BFG /TLJ •�.0" HS -123 k DATE: 05/09/14 FILE: HELLSWP_SOILS_2013 At �° n �t2 TaB � CP #1745.59.66 '� V 5 A t �' 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE SUITE 2 yc �_A(Pow%ZR WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 Z �[) - \, S O �- ENVIRONM NTOALR CPORATED TEL ONSULTANTS FAX 910/392 -9139 FIGURE 3 --ftop 11000, PP4 C PP1 ` `PP2 A PP3 O ACCESS ROAD PLUM'S PIT HS -1 CONTROL FOREST HS -5 HS -6 s O • HS -7• SOURCE: HS -123 AS BUILT LIDAR PROVIDED BY: JONATHAN RICKETTS ENGINEERING, 3450 NORTHLAKE BLVD., PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PHONE 561_630_6700 LEGEND HS -3 ACCESS ROAD PROJECT BOUNDARY (1,296.87 ACRES) • • HS -4 1,13)0 ACCESS ROAD HS -2 • WELL LOCATIONS HS -1 • HS -10 • HS -15 CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS 6 HS -14 6.000 HS -8 HS -9 HS -11 HS -12 HS -13 6,0n0 8.000 HS -16 HS -190 HS -20 HS -21 HS -23 HS -25 7.000 9 7.000 8.000 HSR1 HS -17 HS> HS -22 HS -24 9.000 HSR2 11 1 9.00 14,000 HSR3 HS -27 HS -29 HS -31 HS -32 HS -33 HS -35 ° ° ° ° °HS -30 e HS -26 HS-28 • e • HS -34 • HS -36 HS -37 HS -38 HS -40 HS -41 HS -42 HS -45 HS -46 • • • • • • • 0 0 O • • HS -39 HS -43 HS -44 HS -47 WINDLEY CONTROL HS -48 HS -51 HS -54 HS -55 HS -58 FOREST • O O A • e • • • • • HS -49 HS -50 HS -52 HS -53 HS -56 HS -57 HS -59 O HS -60 HS -61 HS -64 HS -65 HS -66 O HS -67 HS -69 HS -70 • O HS -620 • • • O O O O • HS -63 HS -68 HS -71 H• S -72 HS -74 HS -75 HS -76 HS -77 HS-78 HS -79 HS -81 HS -S3 • ° ® • O ° S ° • • HS -73 H80 HS -82 HS -84 HS -85 HS -86 HS -90 HS -92 ACCESS ROAD HS -94 • • o HS -87 HS -88 HS -89 a 0 HS -91 ° HS-93 a HS -95 0 HS -102 HS -104 • ° • • O • HS -96 HS -97 HS -98 HS -99 HS -100 HS -101 O • O HS -103 e HS -105 HS -107 HS -108 HS -110 HS -112 ACCESS ROAD ® ° a • /WF7 HS -106 HS -109 HS Ill HS -113 WF6 HS -114 HS -115 /A A HS -117 HS -118 WF5 O • • e / WF4 HS -116 WINFIELD A / CONTROL HS -120 FOREST WF3 • A HS -119 HS -121 ACCESS ROAD HS -122 LWF1 F2 HS -124 = SOURCE: HS -123 AS BUILT LIDAR PROVIDED BY: JONATHAN RICKETTS ENGINEERING, 3450 NORTHLAKE BLVD., PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PHONE 561_630_6700 LEGEND 2 0.000 PROJECT BOUNDARY (1,296.87 ACRES) CONTROL FOREST 1,13)0 ACCESS ROAD GATE • WELL LOCATIONS HS -1 WELL NUMBER A CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS El moans 7aele 1 0.04 52133. 2 0.000 1.000 3 1,13)0 2.013) 4 Z.000 5 31)00 4.00) 6 4,000 6.000 7 6,0n0 8.000 8 8,000 7.000 9 7.000 8.000 ■ 10 8.000 9.000 ■ 11 1 9.00 14,000 12 10.000 11.000 13 11.000 12.000 14 12.000 13.000 0 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET I — Legend A CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS — CONTROL FOREST 'L---'HELL SWAMP -SCOTT CREEK ELEVATION (FEET) �0 �0 -1 �1 -2 �2 -3 =3 -4 =4 -5 =5 -6 n �11� 1 e - a =6- 7 0 800 1,600 3,200 =7-8 I I I I = 8 _ 9 Scale in Feet =9 -10 O10 — 11 SOURCE: NORTH CAROLINA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM, SEPTEMBER 2004, 11 - 12 BEAUFORT COUNTY, LIDAR, INC STATEPLANE, NAD 83, FEET, WWW.NCFLOODMAPS.COM AND NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, BEAU2021P, INC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, 12 -13 HTTP:// GISDATA.LIB.NCSU.EDU /DEM /NC_20F 1 / I f / °I I I �- I I I I I I I 1 N-ow.4- SMn r• h k 1k 4a HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE CONTROL FOREST WELL LOCATIONS ON 2004 LIDAR PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY DRAWN BY: BFG/TLJ FILL: 1745566 /OONTOU R_ DATA/ DATE: 05/09/14 HELSWMP /2013 ANNUAL REPORT/ HELL SWAMP LIDAR 2013 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE SUITE 2 CP #1745.59.66 �$ WILMINGTON, INC 28403 INCOaao aAreD TEL: 910/392 -9253 FIGURE 4B FAX: 910/392 -9139 {.. . N- `S C14311" A ` ., „ I — Legend A CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS — CONTROL FOREST 'L---'HELL SWAMP -SCOTT CREEK ELEVATION (FEET) �0 �0 -1 �1 -2 �2 -3 =3 -4 =4 -5 =5 -6 n �11� 1 e - a =6- 7 0 800 1,600 3,200 =7-8 I I I I = 8 _ 9 Scale in Feet =9 -10 O10 — 11 SOURCE: NORTH CAROLINA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM, SEPTEMBER 2004, 11 - 12 BEAUFORT COUNTY, LIDAR, INC STATEPLANE, NAD 83, FEET, WWW.NCFLOODMAPS.COM AND NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, BEAU2021P, INC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, 12 -13 HTTP:// GISDATA.LIB.NCSU.EDU /DEM /NC_20F 1 / I f / °I I I �- I I I I I I I 1 N-ow.4- SMn r• h k 1k 4a HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE CONTROL FOREST WELL LOCATIONS ON 2004 LIDAR PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY DRAWN BY: BFG/TLJ FILL: 1745566 /OONTOU R_ DATA/ DATE: 05/09/14 HELSWMP /2013 ANNUAL REPORT/ HELL SWAMP LIDAR 2013 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE SUITE 2 CP #1745.59.66 �$ WILMINGTON, INC 28403 INCOaao aAreD TEL: 910/392 -9253 FIGURE 4B FAX: 910/392 -9139 National Water &Climate • • • Figure 5. 2013 HELL SWAMP and WETS- AURORA RAINFALL 12 NOTES: Data for WETS Monthly Rainfall for all of 2013 comes from WETS /Aurora rainfall totals due to inactive Belhaven Station . "Range of Normal" and "WETS Monthly Rainfall Total" plotted on last day of each month. 10 "Range of Normal" refers to the 30th and 70th percentile thresholds of the probability of onsite rainfall amounts outside of the normal range (based on historical averages from 1971 - 2000). 8 WETS Data subject to periodic revision. Data shown are latest available from Portland, OR office of Water &Climate Services Cpntpr c 2- = 0 6 c 2. 4 CFO 0 2 0 y3 �� 5e, Oti Oti py O> pti Oy� Oti Oti Oti Oti Oy p, X2013 Hell Swamp Rain Gauge Daily Rainfall -2013 Hell Swamp 30 -day Rolling Total • 2013 Monthly WETS /Aurora Rainfall Totals 2013 WETS 30 -yr 30% less chance 1971 -2000 2013 WETS 30 -yr 30% more chance 1971 -2000 2013 Hell Swamp Monthly Rainfall National Water &Climate • • • Figure 5. 2013 HELL SWAMP and WETS- AURORA RAINFALL NOTES: VALLEY ARRAY SYMBOLS MAY NOT BE VISIBLE ON PP4Q SOME PRINTED VERSIONS — SEE ELECTRONIC VERSION. PP1 COLORED POLYGONS ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION PP2A OF TOTAL ACRES REPRESENTED BY WELL PP3 HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON 1 WELL PER 10 ACRES OF WETLAND FLAT, 2013 AERIALS OF ACCESS ROAD THE SITE, AS BUILT LIDAR, AND KNOWLEDGE OF PLUM'S PIT THE SITE CONDITIONS. POLYGONS DO NOT CONTROL FOREST REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORY BOUNDARIES. c� 0 HS -50 0 HS ACCESS ROAD 0 S -30 S-4 HS -6 HS-2 O S 8 S -100 O HS -14 Hs -15 0 1200 2400 13C HS -1 HS -12 13 12C H _190 - = USC -10C SCALE IN FEET HS 6 HS -21 HS-22 1-15-23 HS -25 O HS -170 12 O O O O O REF1 HS -18 11 9C HS -24 REF2 USC 8C REF3 HS -27 HS -29 30 gq 7C HS -35 O O HS-320 H 33 O S 28 O O HS -31 7A O HS -34 O WINDLEY 6A 6C 37 CONTROL HS -36 HS - HS -38 HS -45 HS -46 FOREST O O O OHSH 41O HS -45A O OHS -44 0 0 HS -470 5C HS -4 HS -48 U 1 C 4A HS -54 HS -55 UT6 6C 3A UT7 C O O O 6 O O 3C O O O 49 S -50 0 51 HS OS 2C UT2 HS -56 S -C HS -5 HS -59 2C 1 3A 3C 2A H - HS -67 2A 2C HS 69 5A 2A 2C HS -60 HS -6 UT1- = USC -3 2 1A HS -71 O O H -620 0 HS -640 O O 1C 1q OHS -68 4C OHS- 0 S -63 HS -65 S -66 1 A 4A 1 C 1C 9C HS -75 = 5-78 = 2C \HS 80 UT5 \b H HS -74 0S -72 9A 8C 7C 5C OHS -7 HS -707 HS -79 HS -73 8A 4C 3C 1C 2A HS -81 HS 82 HS -83 7A A 5A 4A 3A 2A 1q Access ROAD OS -84 OHS -85 O -86 O O o o T3 1A 1C HS -94 1C HS -92 0 HS -95 HS -87 HS -88 HS -89 S -90 HS -91 HS -93 1A HS -97 2A U 4 LSC 0 O O 0 O O OS1 O n S -96 S -98 HS -99 HS -100 HS -101 HS -103 HS -104 —HS -105 ACCESS ROAD W H - 06 6A HS -112 HS -113 S -107 8 HS -110 O O HS -109 6C O - O O WINFIELD HS -111 CONTROL WF6 � 5A FOREST - HS -114 HS -115 5C HS -11 WF5 0 0 4A HS0-11 O HS011 WF4 UT8 4C ACCESS ROA S -1 0 WF3 0 3A 0 HS -119 C H -121 WFF11 0 WF2 124 HS -122 2A PUNGO CREEK HS -123 1C o (SR 1715) OAD q EXISTING CULVERT LEGEND HELL SWAMP BOUNDARY CONTROL FOREST ACCESS ROAD LSC LOWER SCOTT CREEK USC UPPER SCOTT CREEK O WELL LOCATIONS HS -1 WELL NUMBER CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS — VALLEY WELL ARRAY /FLOW OBSERVATION POINT VALLEY WELL ARRAY /FLOW OBSERVATION POINT WITH TREE /SHRUB MONITORING PLOT O WELL MALFUNCTION RESULTED IN AN ESTIMATION OF EXACT HYDROPERIOD LENGTH; REPORTED HYDROPERIOD COULD POSSIBLY BE SHORTER THAN WHAT ACTUALLY OCCURRED HYDROLOGIC ZONES WETLAND HYDROPERIODS 0 • _ <6% OF THE GROWING SEASON HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE (59.27 ACRES) WINDLEY CONTROL FOREST (0.72 ACRES) WINFIELD CONTROL FOREST (41.72 ACRES) D O = >6 — 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE (231.92 ACRES) WINDLEY CONTROL FOREST (16.83 ACRES) WINFIELD CONTROL FOREST (30.70 ACRES) PLUM'S PIT CONTROL FOREST (9.80 ACRES) D Q = >12.5 — 25 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE (205.98 ACRES) WINDLEY CONTROL FOREST (0.79 ACRES) O Q = >25 — 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE (702.63 ACRES) WINDLEY CONTROL FOREST (15.51 ACRES) WINFIELD CONTROL FOREST (15.80 ACRES) PLUM'S PIT CONTROL FOREST (27.32 ACRES) ® O = >75 — 100 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON HELL SWAMP MITIGATION SITE (60.25 ACRES) NOTE: LIDAR CONTOURS WERE USED TO DRAW HYDROPERIOD ZONE POLYGONS. CONTOURS ARE NOT SHOWN. •Q ACCESS ROAD HS -1 12 0 HS -50 •� HS- / HS -3 HS -4 O HS -6 0 2 4/ ■ HS2 O• / O HS -9 Q 0 Q • Or --- nO HS -10 • •0 • / HS -8 HS -11 HS -12 HS -13 HS -19•Q HS -20 = USC -10C /HS -16 HS -21 HS -22 � AH0 • ea::, HS -17 HS -18 REF1 31 REF2 U`SC' REF3 X HS -29 HS -31 OH• -26 �• S -27 0� S -28 �• O• HS -30 •0 / HS -36 • Q HS-37 • O HS -38 �• �• HS 39 40 • HS 41 • HS -42 O G WINDLEY CONTROL L FOREST HS -48 • •� HS -49 • HS -50 UT1 O• �• HS -51 HS -52 10 HS -61 O HS -60.0 0• HS -62 • HS -72 - PP= PP1 HS -74 O O• HS_;;: HS-84 HS -85 HS -86 0• •O 0 HS -33 HS -35\ HS -32D O HS -34 D `\ Q O HS -45O HS -46 HS -43 HS -44 HS -47 ` HS -54 HS 55 UT6 O O UT7 [-U-T72 HS XS-57 S -57 HS -5 HS -59 HS -64 HS -53 HS -67 HS -69 Q I HS -71 • • • • • +O • HS -70 0 HS -63 HS -65 Q HS -660 HS -68 HS -75 = 6A HS -78 = 2C HS i8 5 O 3.76 H .77 HS -79 T i THS -81 HS -82 UT3 OHS8 HS 89 0 HS -92 HS-87 -90 � HS -97 O HS-96o • HS-98 HS-99 H�S_100 NF7 HS -106 HS -107 HS -108 A • •O •o W F6 `\ WF5 HS -114 WF4 0 WINFIELD A CONTROL FOREST WF3 O• AL HS- W - WF2 ACCESS ROAD PUNGO CREEK HS -12: ASR 1715) OAD % HS -102 1 UT4 HS-101 C:�• c5:IH S -103 HS -115 / O HS -11 / UT8 HS -120 19 HS -1210 04es -110 •";> HS -113 HS -111 HS -112 (� 31 HS-1 �ft— %*. HS -124 --17 122 HS-94 HS-93 LSC •HS -105 S-104 ACCESS ROAD 15 HS -83 ACCESS ROAD L7 0 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET 2013 Nuisance Plot Summary (123 10'x10' plots) Total stems found in all plots 530 Total nuisance stems in all plots 204 Percent of nuisance stems in all plots 38.5 Total loblolly pine ( #stems /percent all stems) 131/24.7 Total sweet gum ( #stems /percent all stems) 47/8.9 Total red maple ( #stems /percent all stems) 26/4.9 LEGEND — — PROJECT BOUNDARY (1,296.87 ACRES) - PP= PP1 CONTROL FOREST A PP2 A PP3 ACCESS ROAD EXISTING ROAD PLUM'S PIT CONTROL FOREST GATE • WELL LOCATIONS �ACCESS ROAD O• `� HS 15 HS -14 O HS -1 A 1 X1 WELL NUMBER CONTROL WELL LOCATIONS TREE /SHRUB PLOT MONITORING LOCATION NUMBER OF PINE STEMS �^ ♦ NUMBER OF RED MAPLE STEMS HS -23 O HS-25 • • • O HS -24 O 1 ♦ NUMBER OF SWEET GUM STEMS HS -33 HS -35\ HS -32D O HS -34 D `\ Q O HS -45O HS -46 HS -43 HS -44 HS -47 ` HS -54 HS 55 UT6 O O UT7 [-U-T72 HS XS-57 S -57 HS -5 HS -59 HS -64 HS -53 HS -67 HS -69 Q I HS -71 • • • • • +O • HS -70 0 HS -63 HS -65 Q HS -660 HS -68 HS -75 = 6A HS -78 = 2C HS i8 5 O 3.76 H .77 HS -79 T i THS -81 HS -82 UT3 OHS8 HS 89 0 HS -92 HS-87 -90 � HS -97 O HS-96o • HS-98 HS-99 H�S_100 NF7 HS -106 HS -107 HS -108 A • •O •o W F6 `\ WF5 HS -114 WF4 0 WINFIELD A CONTROL FOREST WF3 O• AL HS- W - WF2 ACCESS ROAD PUNGO CREEK HS -12: ASR 1715) OAD % HS -102 1 UT4 HS-101 C:�• c5:IH S -103 HS -115 / O HS -11 / UT8 HS -120 19 HS -1210 04es -110 •";> HS -113 HS -111 HS -112 (� 31 HS-1 �ft— %*. HS -124 --17 122 HS-94 HS-93 LSC •HS -105 S-104 ACCESS ROAD 15 HS -83 ACCESS ROAD L7 0 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET 2013 Nuisance Plot Summary (123 10'x10' plots) Total stems found in all plots 530 Total nuisance stems in all plots 204 Percent of nuisance stems in all plots 38.5 Total loblolly pine ( #stems /percent all stems) 131/24.7 Total sweet gum ( #stems /percent all stems) 47/8.9 Total red maple ( #stems /percent all stems) 26/4.9 APPENDIX A 2013 Hydrogeomorphic Stream Surveys and Cross Section Measurements BAKER ENGINEERING 2013 HELL SWAMP CROSS SECTION MEASUREMENT 1.0 Geomorphic Monitoring For monitoring stream success criteria, 34 permanent cross - sections were installed following construction in 2010. In accordance with the Hell Swamp Mitigation Plan (July 2009), three cross - sections were established per 1,000 foot reach of stream/valley restoration. The permanent cross - sections are used to monitor channel formation and scour over time. For the riparian headwater systems (no defined channel construction), these cross - sections were measured for the as -built report and will also be measured at Years 3 and 5 if channel features form. For the Scott Creek single thread channel stream restoration segment, two cross - sections were measured for the as -built report and are surveyed annually during the monitoring period. 1.1 Geomorphic Success Criteria Valleys should remain stable with minimum changes through the monitoring period; however, these cross - sections may show minor changes in flow patterns as valleys develop. 1.1.1 Permanent Cross - section Monitoring Results Two permanent cross - sections (7 and 8) are established in the Scott Creek single thread channel. Year 4 monitoring data from these two cross - sections were collected in December 2013. Cross - sectional data collected during this monitoring event were compared to the as- built baseline data collected in 2010, Year 2 data collected in 2011 and Year 3 data collected in 2012 (Figures 1 and 2). Cross - sectional graphs and data from each of the monitored cross - sections are presented below. In the presented cross - section graphics, the floodprone lines displayed are relative to the maximum thalweg depth of each individual channel. Cross - section 7 is a riffle and will have a lesser value than that of the deep pool in cross - section 8, resulting in the differences of the floodprone elevation lines. Permanent cross - section 7 is located across a riffle at station 47 +66 on Scott Creek (Figure 3). This cross - section also transects the UT1 valley approximately at station 23 +50. According to the Year 4 survey data, the channel features in riffle cross- section 7 have remained relatively stable since as -built conditions. No significant areas of concern regarding the channel along this cross - section were noted following Year 4 monitoring. However, the survey data did record some changes in the thalweg portion of cross - section 7. It was noted following Year 4 monitoring that the thalweg elevation is approximately 0.4 feet lower in 2013 than was measured following as -built elevation conditions. This lowered thalweg elevation observed in the channel doesn't appear unstable and is a natural process in channel development. The cross - section also indicates some lower elevation changes in the thalweg region on the lower portion of UT1 since as -built conditions. This measured elevation change may indicate a movement toward channel development with the UT1 valley. During the cross - section survey no indications of instability were present. This area of UT 1 will be closely observed during Year 5 of monitoring. The survey data also recorded some changes in the floodplain along cross - section 7 in Year 2, Year 3 and Year 4. The channel and floodplain changes observed are attributed to channel development, flood deposition, soil settling, vegetation maturity, and slight differences in Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site A -1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix A May 2014 survey rod point locations. Both the riffle and floodplain observations noted are expected with newly constructed restoration sites, where some minor adjustments are common. Permanent cross - section 8 is located across a pool at station 52 +81 on Scott Creek (Figure 3). According to the Year 4 survey data, the channel features in pool cross- section 8 have also remained stable since as -built conditions. The Year 4 survey data show that cross - section 8 has experienced some minor deposition within the pool area of the channel since as -built conditions. Minor deposition is common for pools in restored meandering channels, and will likely vary from year to year depending upon the flow frequency and magnitude. The Year 4 survey data also recorded some changes in the floodplain along cross - section 8. The changes observed were found to be very similar to the Year 3 survey data, indicating very little adjustment since 2012. The channel and floodplain changes observed along cross- section 8 are attributed to flood deposition, soil settling, vegetation maturity and slight differences in survey rod point locations. Both the pool and floodplain observations noted are expected with newly constructed restoration sites, where some minor adjustments are common. According to the Year 4 survey data, cross - sections 7 and 8 have experienced some slight adjustments and settling since as -built conditions. The channel, pool, and floodplain changes observed along cross sections 7 and 8 can be attributed to flood deposition, soil settling, vegetation maturity, and/or slight differences in survey rod locations. Both the pool and floodplain observations noted are within expectations for a recently constructed restoration site where minor adjustments are common as the site matures. No areas of appreciable scour were observed within the Scott Creek single thread channel stream restoration segment. 1.1.2 Additional Monitored Cross - sections Seven additional permanent cross - sections (1, 2, 25, 26, 27, 33, and 34) were noted during monitoring Year 3 to have exhibited slight changes within the channel during a site field visit in November 2012. In accordance with the Site Mitigation Plan, these additional cross - sections were not re- surveyed during Year 4 monitoring. However, these cross - sections and possible others are scheduled to be re- surveyed following monitoring Year 5. 1.1.3 Areas of Concern No areas of concern have been identified for the restored headwater prongs. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site A -2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix A May 2014 4 3 c 0 2 c� m w 1 A 5 4 3 c 0 2 (D 1 w 0 -1 Figure 1. Hell Swamp Cross - section 7 Note: The floodprone lines displayed are relative to the maximum thalweg depth of each individual channel. As -Built Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - -[� -- Bankfull - - -0 -- Floodprone 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Station (ft) Figure 2. Hell Swamp Cross - section 8 9--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - --o Note: The floodprone lines displayed are relative to the maximum thalweg depth of each individual channel. As -Built Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - - -0 - -• Bankfull -- o -- Floodprone 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Station (ft) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site A -3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix A May 2014 A 5OOT7 NOTE: POST - CONSTRUCTION CONTOURS WERE DEVELOPED FROM LIDAR DATA COLLECTED BY TUCK MAPPING SOLUTIONS INC. AND PROCESSED BY MATRIX EAST. LLC. Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. Figure rA 5 - 388ftegencyParkway 0 725 1,450 2,900 .`' G ' Cary,Ntlh C—Ina 27518 Stream Mitigation Plan Map Phone: 9194815488 Feet Fax 919 463 Hell Swamp Site U, c.,,,„,,, ic r.,,,.i, nn,, cot,. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix A P(r Phn h�f.f _ —, Ins May 2014 APPENDIX B 2013 Evidence of Flow and Stream Survey Results in Each Tributary or Headwater System 2013 STREAM SURVEYS OF HELL SWAMP HEADWATER VALLEY SYSTEMS On 9 -10 July and 10 -11 December 2013, all the headwater valleys at Hell Swamp were walked to document active flow with video (as appropriate) or evidence of past flow with photographs and GPS data. A table showing the daily rainfall immediately preceding the surveys is at the end of this text. Every valley contained water, even if only confined to its lower end. Active flow in varied water depths was visible and documented with video in all the unnamed tributaries with the exception of UT2. Active flow was documented for the first time in the project's history near the mouth of UT5 during the December survey. In addition to the December 10 -11 survey visit, biologists returned to the valleys of UT5 and UT6 the following week on December 18 in an attempt to re- acquire flow video lost due to corrupted files. Flow was documented where conditions similar to those during the December 10 -11 survey existed. During each survey, each system was walked from the downstream end to the upstream reaches and evidence of flow events and formation of any channel features were noted. In addition to active flow, physical features noted included bed and bank, sediment transport and /or scour, debris wrack, vegetation matted down parallel to downstream flow, or lack of vegetation. When evidence of channel formation was longer than 10 feet, the perceived channel was walked with a GPS unit and data points were collected along the axis, and at the beginning and end of the feature. Until the planted trees and shrubs reach enough height to shade the valleys, development of dense herbaceous vegetation will continue to occur in many areas. This herbaceous layer can attenuate flow events and reduce velocity below the point of scour and can also obscure other incipient channel formation features. Photos of certain stream features are included after the text descriptions below. Lower Scott Creek (LSC). This segment includes the most downstream reach of the stream portion of the project (fill of the channelized section of old Scott Creek and diversion of upstream flow back into the swamp above the filled channel section) and ends upstream at the first stream crossing constructed at the location of the old Scott Creek culvert under the former farm road. No stream arrays are located in the lower Scott Creek filled ditch or vegetated swamp forest. During both the July and December surveys, the lower end of the filled ditch up to the mouth of UT6 continued to exhibit stream features including bed and bank formation, a meandering profile, sediment transport, lack of vegetation, and low- to high - velocity active flow. The filled segment contained water from bank to bank from the project edge upstream beside the old ditch spoil to the mouth of UT 6 where it enters into the vegetated Scott Creek swamp forest and becomes indistinct (Photos 1 and 2). Distinct segments of scour ranging in depth from 2 to 6 inches were evident from the mouth of UT6 up to the beginning of the filled ditch (Photo 3). Active flow during the July and December surveys was video recorded near the confluence of Lower Scott Creek and the filled ditch section and further above near the confluence of LSC and mouth of UT6 (Videos 1 to 3). The discontinuous flow paths noted in the 2012 surveys entering the swamp through breaks in old construction spoil piles between the downstream end of UT6 and the constructed crossing (former farm road) were not observed in 2013 due to almost complete inundation. No other flow or evidence of flow was noted upstream of the UT6 confluence except for a short 35- to 40 -foot channel just below the stream crossing. During the December survey, medium flow was observed entering LSC through this channel with scour and sinuosity (Video 4). As observed in previous surveys, diffuse flow visible upstream across the constructed crossing became concentrated and directed into LSC most noticeably at this feature. Constructed Single Thread Channel of Upper Scott Creek. This segment begins approximately halfway between stream well arrays one and two (Photo 4). Below this segment, flow is diffuse and no channel development was evident. Also, Typha species were dense in valley areas below this segment. Though vegetation in portions of this channel segment was dense to very dense (with Juncus species), low to medium flow was observed in this segment during both surveys (Videos 5 to 7). Vegetation is very clearly oriented in the direction of flow throughout the constructed channel. Upper Scott Creek (USC). This segment begins above the constructed single thread portion of Scott Creek approximately 100 feet upstream of valley well array four, and vegetation began to decrease in the flow paths (Photos 5 and 6). Flow paths and vegetation matted parallel to flow were evident from Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 above the confluence with the single thread channpel to above the permanent stream crossing (between well arrays five and six) in both the July and December surveys. Very low to low flow was observed during the December survey just upstream of the single thread channel and around valley well array 5 but was not evident with video. The valley began to widen upstream of the USC stream crossing, and a braided channel was distinguishable up to well array six. Very low flow could be seen in 6 to 10 inches of water but was again unnoticeable in video. Upstream of array six Juncus and Carex species density increased slightly, and flow paths were indistinct until approximately midway between arrays seven and eight where a flow path becomes obvious (Photo 7). Low, diffuse flow was recorded at the flow monitoring location USC -713 in approximately 5 inches of water (Video 8). Juncus species became exceptionally thick and continuous just upstream of well array eight obscuring any flow path(s) until approximately halfway to array nine (Photo 8) where the flow path continued up to flow monitoring location USC -913 with low to medium flow recorded during both stream surveys (Videos 9 and 10). Active flow in visible flow paths during both 2013 surveys continued upstream to USC -10B (Videos 11 and 12). Areas of bed and bank formation, a nick point feature, and a fork or island feature in the channel were all persistent flow evidence noted from previous surveys and continued to be observed just downstream of USC -10B (Photos 9 to 11). UT8. The length of the entire UT8 stream valley was inundated during both the July and December stream surveys, but some stream features such as bed and bank and sediment scour were still visible. Active medium flow was observed in 7 to 8 inches of water near the most downstream well array and beyond leading into the roadside ditch at the southern project boundary (Videos 13 and 14). Increased flow and channel sinuosity were observed during the December survey up to and slightly above the UT8 permanent stream crossing (Video 15). This channel has been noted in previous annual surveys and appears to show continued development. Upstream of the stream crossing flow was reduced and more diffuse. Low flow over an approximately 20 to 25 -foot wide channel continued upstream to valley well array two (Videos 16 and 17) and diffuse flow in 6 to 9 inches of water continued up to UT8 -3B (Videos 18 and 19). Just upstream of well array three, water was ponded in a depression to the northwest of the UT8 stream valley, and no flow was visible in this area (Photo 12). Water was distributed out in the valley between UT8 -3B and UT8 -4B and clumps of Juncus species give way to wetland grasses with a few clumps of Typha species (Photo 13). Very low to low flow was observed in places, but was not noticeable on video. Recordable flow was not observed until the vicinity of UT8 -5B, where approximately 75 feet upstream of UT8 -5B, low flow was observed during both 2013 stream surveys on both sides of a persistent fork with bed and bank features (Videos 20 and 21). Medium flow was evident in another fork with sediment scour just upstream of the last fork feature during the December survey (Video 22). The uppermost limit of video recordable flow during the July survey was approximately 200 feet upstream of well array five (Video 23); though, an extremely low flow rate not evident with video was observed at UT8 -6B. Low flow in 4 inches of water just upstream of UT8 -6B was observed in the December survey, but flow above this point became diffuse and not visible (Video 24). UT7. No stream features, flow paths, or other evidence of flow from previous stream surveys were noted during last year's (2012) stream surveys. Low flow was visible during both 2013 stream surveys at UT7 -1 B in a flow path which continued upstream for approximately 20 -30 feet (Videos 25 and 26). This flow path was easily recognized with slight scour and vegetation oriented in the direction of flow, but no definite bed and bank was evident. Thick vegetation obscured any evidence of or visible flow upstream until approximately midway between well arrays one and two. Low to medium flow could be seen during both surveys in a flow path near and in between a small colony of black willow trees (Videos 27 and 28). Vegetation was still very thick here and some sediment scour was noticed between the trees. The sediment scour and willows may be located in or near an old filled agricultural drainage ditch. Thick vegetation continued to cover the valley floor, and no potential flow paths or active flows were observed until the flow location UT7 -2B. Low flow was observed here in July and was the upper limit of flow (Video 29). Upstream from UT7 -213, very dense Baccharus and Juncus vegetation prevented observation of flow or other potential evidence of flow. Water was ponded throughout most of the valley width and all the way to the uppermost portion of UT7. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 UT6. Stream features observed in previous years' surveys were again visible in the 2013 surveys; a well- formed channel at the confluence of UT6 and lower Scott Creek with bed and bank and sinuosity contained active flow which continued into LSC (Video 30). Pools of ponded water connected the previously mentioned channel to where the UT6 valley becomes more apparent again just above UT6 -3B (Photo 14). [Large, deep vehicle ruts were likely the cause of the depressions where water has ponded in this area] However, a new feature was observed in the December 2013 survey between the mouth of UT6 and UT6 -3B with active flow, sediment scour, and vegetation matted parallel to flow for approximately 20 -25 feet (Video 31 -18 December 2013). This feature was collected as a line feature with GPS equipment. Upstream of UT6 -3B low flow could be observed in a braided channel between UT6 -3B and well array four during the December survey (Video 32 -18 December 2013). No flow paths or other evidence of flow were observed at array four. Between UT6 -4B and UT6 -5B water appeared to be only ponded and was confined in the lowest elevations of a narrow valley. Low flow was observed over approximately 30 -35 feet during both surveys in the vicinity of UT6 -5B in a few inches of water (Video 33; Video 34 -18 December 2013). The vegetation dramatically increased upstream of array five and remained similar for the rest of the valley. Very low to low flow was observed furthest upstream around UT6 -6B. Flow was seen during both surveys to approximately 20 feet above UT6 -6B (Video 35; Video 36 -18 December 2013). Continued dense and matted vegetation obscured possible flow or evidence of flow any further upstream. UT5. Natural channel development appears to be inhibited, or at least interrupted, by a large tracked vehicle rut up the long axis of the valley and the entire lower valley is dissected by ruts across the long axis, and the same conditions existed during the July survey. However, low to medium flow was observed just upstream of the ponded water in the vicinity of the most downstream well array (Video 37- 18 December 2013). Sediment scour was noticeable in portions of a flow path of approximately 5 -10 feet in length. A point feature was collected with GPS equipment at this location. In addition, a perceived flow path, with an appearance unlike numerous man -made ruts in the valley, was observed approximately 200 feet downstream of well array two (Photo 15). Though no active flow was observed, this feature showed slight sediment scour, vegetation oriented parallel to flow, and was collected as a line feature with GPS equipment. UT4. A short meandering flow path near the downstream end between UT4 -1 B and the forested swamp around Lower Scott Creek had active low flow during the December survey (Video 38); this segment was dry in 2012. Low to medium flow was observed approximately 20 feet upstream of the UT4 -1 array and 50 feet downstream of UT4 -1 B (Videos 39 and 40). No active flow was observed at UT4 -2B, and standing water in the valley continued upstream. Below the old farm road many man -made ruts dissect this valley and were often the only portions of the valley above UT4 -2B filled with standing water during both stream surveys. UT3. Active flow was observed during both stream surveys near UT3-1B, but no defined flow path or channel development was evident (Video 41). Large ruts exist and run perpendicular to the stream valley between UT3-1B and UT3 -2B interrupting natural stream development. Medium sized Baccharus shrubs are extremely dense in this section. Low flow was visible for approximately 10 -20 feet in either direction of UT3 -2B (Videos 42 and 43); channel development was present but weak. Around UT3 -2B and up to UT3 -3 array the vegetation thins and the invert of the valley becomes more apparent. During the July survey, low flow was observed in 3 inches of water approximately 10 feet upstream and downstream of UT3 -3B (Video 44) and approximately 100 feet upstream of UT3 -4B (Video 45). No flow was observed at UT3 -4B in December; however, a flow path with slight sediment scour and lack of vegetation was clearly visible at the flow location and continued upstream 20 to 30 feet (Photo 16). Five to 6 inches of water with no discernible flow was observed near UT3 -5B and continued above the UT3 permanent stream crossing with several colonies of Typha species present throughout the valley. Ponded water and thick, matted vegetation obscured previously noted 10 -20 foot flow paths. Man -made ruts aligned perpendicular to the stream valley were abundant upstream of the stream crossing. No defined flow path or channel development was noted, but active low flow was documented during both surveys approximately 20 -30 feet upstream of UT3 -6B (Video 46). Woody vegetation was reduced just upstream of well array seven. UT3 -7B is upstream from the well array, and low to medium -low flow was observed in an approximate 20 -foot flow path at this location (Videos 47 and 48). Very thick and Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 overhead high vegetation was evident around well array eight, and low flow was observed in July at UT3- 8B (Video 49). Above this point standing water (approximately 5 -10 inches) covered most of the valley up to just beyond the most upstream well array (UT3 -9). UT2. There was no evidence of flow at the time of either 2013 survey. The valley is densely rutted and heavily vegetated with herbaceous species in the top portion of the valley. Standing water (1 -3 inches) was present in the upper portion of the valley during the December survey. Approximately 0.5 to 3 inches of water was ponded near the first well array in both surveys. UT1. Active low to medium -low flow was observed at the mouth (confluence with the constructed single thread of USC) and just upstream at UT1 -1 B during both stream surveys (Videos 50 and 51). Flow lessened and the channel appeared to become braided approximately 25 feet upstream of UT1 -1 B. The valley also widens in this vicinity, and flow is noticeably less channelized. Dense, matted vegetation not oriented in the direction of flow covered the valley floor up to UT1 -313, and very low flow was visible over short lengths in some areas. No active flow was observed at or upstream of UT1 -213 in the December survey. In July, some slight sediment scour was visible in the flow path of the upper most active flow at UT1 -313 (Video 52). UT1 is not as rutted in the upper portions as some other valleys, but there is some interruption of potential development by ruts. Rainfall immediately preceding stream surveys in 2013. Date Rainfall (in) Date Rainfall (in) 6/27/2013 0.2 12/1/2013 0.00 6/28/2013 0.42 12/2/2013 0.00 6/29/2013 0.58 12/3/2013 0.05 6/30/2013 0.64 12/4/2013 0.01 7/1/2013 0.75 12/5/2013 0.00 7/2/2013 0.07 12/6/2013 0.12 7/3/2013 0.04 12/7/2013 0.46 7/4/2013 0.00 12/8/2013 0.00 7/5/2013 0.00 12/9/2013 0.16 7/6/2013 0.01 12/10/2013 0.01 7/7/2013 0.00 12/11/2013 0.00 7/8/2013 0.00 7/9/2013 1.5 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Lower Scott Creek (Photos 1 to 3) Photo 1. View upstream, flow and channel formation in the filled ditch segment; view upstream and to west. 09 July 2013. Photo 2. Flow and channel formation upstream from photo 1 location and near mouth of UT 6 (dead trees in distance to right). 09 July 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Photo 3. High flow and sediment scour above the filled ditch segment near the confluence of UT 6. 10 December 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Constructed Single Thread Channel Scott Creek (Photo 4) Photo 4. Biologist (center of background) standing at downstream end of single thread; vegetation oriented in direction of low flow. 11 December 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Upper Scott Creek (Photos 5 to 11) ti Photo 5. View upstream from the upper end of the constructed single thread portion of Scott Creek. Low flow in the foreground decreased upstream into visible flow paths lacking vegetation. 11 December 2013. Photo 6. View downstream of flow path near valley well array five. 10 July 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Photo 7. View upstream, visible flow path approximately midway between well arrays seven and eight. 11 December 2013. Photo 8. View downstream from approximately midway between well arrays eight and nine; flow path with some bed and bank and sediment scour visible. 11 December 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Photo 9. View upstream, persistent fork feature just downstream of USC- 10B with active flow. 10 July 2013. Photo 10. View upstream, close to same location as above. 11 December 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Photo 11. Nick point feature and sediment scour just downstream of fork feature shown in photos 9 and 10. 11 December 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 UT8 (Photos 12 and 13) Photo 12. View upstream, water ponded to the northwest of stream valley just upstream of well array three. 10 December 2013 Photo 13. View upstream, UT8 stream valley view upstream above UT8 -4B; wetland grasses other than JuncusRover the stream valley. 09 July 2013 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 UT6 (Photo 14) Y 1 Photo 14. Valley becomes more evident just above UT6 -313; view downstream. 10 July 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 UT5 (Photo 15) Photo 15. View downstream, flow path approximately 200 feet downstream of the most upstream well array (UT5 -2). 18 December 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 UT3 (Photo 16) Photo 16. View downstream, lack of vegetation in a flow path just upstream of UT3 -46. 11 December 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report- Appendix B May 2014 Table B -1. Daily rainfall immediately preceding and during monthly site visits to Hell Swamp in 2013. Date Rainfall (in) Date Rainfall (in) Date Rainfall (in) 1/1/2013 0.1 6/6/2013 0.49 10/6/2013 0.04 1/2/2013 0.39 6/7/2013 0.68 10/7/2013 1.42 1/3/2013 6/8/2013 0.13 10/8/2013 0.88 1/4/2013 6/9/2013 10/9/2013 0.81 1/5/2013 6/10/2013 0.38 10/10/2013 0.18 1/6/2013 0.03 6/11/2013 10/11/2013 0.01 1/7/2013 6/12/2013 10/12/2013 1/8/2013 0.01 10/13/2013 1/9/2013 7/1/2013 0.75 10/14/2013 0.01 7/2/2013 0.07 10/15/2013 2/1/2013 7/3/2013 0.04 10/16/2013 2/2/2013 0.03 7/4/2013 10/17/2013 2/3/2013 0.01 7/5/2013 2/4/2013 0.01 7/6/2013 0.01 11/5/2013 0.01 2/5/2013 7/7/2013 11/6/2013 0.75 2/6/2013 7/8/2013 11/7/2013 2/7/2013 0.32 7/9/2013 1.5 11/8/2013 2/8/2013 0.72 7/10/2013 11/9/2013 0.01 11/10/2013 2/28/2013 0.01 7/29/2013 0.24 11/11/2013 0.02 3/1/2013 7/30/2013 11/12/2013 0.01 3/2/2013 7/31/2013 0.27 11/13/2013 0.01 3/3/2013 8/1/2013 0.24 11/14/2013 0.04 3/4/2013 8/2/2013 0.16 11/15/2013 0.16 3/5/2013 0.32 8/3/2013 0.04 11/16/2013 0.05 3/6/2013 0.11 8/4/2013 0.01 8/5/2013 12/3/2013 0.05 3/24/2013 0.34 8/6/2013 0.01 12/4/2013 0.01 3/25/2013 0.01 8/7/2013 12/5/2013 3/26/2013 8/8/2013 0.21 12/6/2013 0.12 3/27/2013 12/7/2013 0.46 3/28/2013 8/27/2013 12/8/2013 3/29/2013 8/28/2013 0.13 12/9/2013 0.16 3/30/2013 8/29/2013 0.04 12/10/2013 0.01 3/31/2013 0.13 8/30/2013 0.01 4/1/2013 0.11 8/31/2013 0.01 4/2/2013 4/3/2013 9/1/2013 0.46 9/2/2013 0.21 4/25/2013 9/3/2013 0.62 4/26/2013 9/4/2013 0.01 4/27/2013 9/5/2013 0.01 4/28/2013 4/29/2013 0.28 4/30/2013 0.01 5/1/2013 0.48 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site B -16 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc Fourth Annual Report May 2014 Table B -2. Hell Swamp - Flow Observation Data for 2013 (depth in inches). Arrays at UT6 -1 B and -21B were not set up because deep wet ruts prevented valley construction. In flow column: H = high, M = moderate, L = low, N = none, and P = ponded with no discernible flow. A shaded cell denotes flow was observed. NM= Monitoring of UT5 did not begin until June 2013. FEII 1/8- 1/9/13 Flow Depth 11 2/6- 2/7/13 Flow Depth 3%6/13 Flow Depth 4/2- 4/3/13 Flow Depth 4/30/13 - 5/1/13 Flow Depth 6/11-6/12/13 Flow Depth 7/9- 7/10/13 Flow I Depth 8/6- 8/7/13 Flow Depth 9/3- 9%5/13 I Flow Depth 10/15- 10/16/13 Flow Depth 11/12- 11/13/13 Flow Depth 12/10- 12/11/13 Flow Depth USC -1B N 5 - N 5.5 N 2.5 N 4 N 0 *L 8 N 0.25 N 2 N 0 *L 5.5 USC -2B *L 14 - N 14.5 N 12 N 14 N-7-7- *L 19.5 N 0 N 11 N 9.75 *L 17.25 USC -3B *L 10 N 8.5 *L 11 N 6 N 9 N 0 *L 18.5 N 4.25 N 5 N 5.25 *M 16 USC -4B *L 4 *L 2.75 *M 5.75 L 1 *M 3 N dry *H N 0.25 N 0 N 0 *W USC -5B N 2 N 1.5 N 3 N 1.5 *L 2.5 N dry *L 3 qN N 0.25 N 0 N 0 *L 2 USC -6B N 7 N 6.75 N 10 N 7.75 N 8 N 4 *L 9 L 6 N 5.5 N 5 *L 7.5 USC -7B N 5.5 N 5 N 7 N 5 N 6 N 1.5 *L 10.5 N 2 N 3 N 2.75 *L 4.25 USC -8B N 4 N 2.5 N 4 N 3 N 4 N dry *L 4.5 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 2.5 USC -9B *M 3 N 3 *L 4 N 2 *L 3 N dry *M 3.5 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 1.5 USC -10B *M 3.75 *L 3.25 *L 4 N 2 *L 3 N dry *L 3.5 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 1.5 USC -116 *L 9.75 N 9 N 11.5 N 8.5 N 10 N 4 N 9.25 N 0 N 2.25 N 0.00 N 0 N 7 UT1 -1B *L 2 N 2 *L 2 N 0 *M 2 N 0 *L 8 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 *M 5.75 UT1-2B N 4.5 N 4.5 N 5.5 N 4 N 6 N 0 *L 6.5 N 0 N 1.25 N 0 N 0 N 3.25 UT1 -3B N 4 N 2.25 N 4.5 N 2.5 *L 4 N 0 N 1 N 0 N 0.25 N 0 N 0 *M 4.5 UT1 -4B N 4 N 4.5 N 4 N 3 N 4.5 N 0 N 1.5 N 0 N 1 N 1.25 N 0 N 4.25 UT2 -1B N 1 N 0.25 N 0.5 N 0 N 0.25 N dry N 1 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 1 UT3 -1B N 1.5 N 1.25 N 3 N 0.25 *L 2 N 0 N 3 N 0 N 0 N 0.25 N 0 *L 2 UT3 -2B N 2 N 1 *L 3 N 0.25 *M 2 N 0 *L 2.25 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 1.75 UT3 -3B N 1.5 N 0.5 N 0.5 N 0.5 L 2 N 0 *L 1.5 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 2.25 UT3 -4B N 2 N 2 N 1.5 N 1.25 N 2.25 N 0 *L 2.75 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 1.5 UT3 -5B N 5 N 5 N 5 N 2.5 N 4 N 0 N 6.5 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 4.75 UT3 -6B N 3 N 2.5 N 2 N 1.5 N 3 N 0 *L 5.25 N 0 N 1 N 0 N 0 *L 2 UT3 -7B N 2 N 2 N 2 N 1 *L 2.75 N 0 *M 3.75 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 2 UT3 -8B N 4 N 1.25 N 3 N 1 *L 2 N 0 N 5 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 2 UT3 -9B N 5 N 6 N 6 N 4.5 N 5 N 0 N 6 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 5.5 UT4 -1B N 2 N 2 N 3 N 0.25 N 2 N 1.75 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 2.5 UT4 -2B N 2 N 1.5 N 3 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 1.75 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 2 UT5 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM N 0 N 1.5 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 3 UT6 -3B N 4.5 N 4.5 N 5 N 4 N 0.25 N 0 *L 8.5 N 0 N 1 N 9.25 N 2.5 N 4 UT6 -4B N 1.25 N 0.5 N 1.5 El N 0 N 0.25 N 0 *L 2 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 1.5 UT6 -5B N 1.75 N 2 N 2 N 0.1 N 0.25 N 0 *L 7 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 2.25 UT6 -6B N 3.25 N 3 N 4 N 2 N 3 N 0 *L 4.25 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 2.25 UT7 -1B N 2.5 N 2 N 2.5 N 1.5 N 0.5 N 0 *M 5.25 N 0 N 0.25 N 0 N 0 *L 2.5 2T7-2B N 1.5 N 1 N 1.5 N 1 N 0.5 N 0 L 3.75 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 2.5 UT7 -3B N 2 N 0.25 N 2 N 0.25 N 0.25 N 0 N 2.75 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 UT8 -16 *L 6 *L 6 *M 6.5 N 5 *L 6 N 0 *M 6.75 N 1.75 N 1.5 - - N 0 H 8,5 UT8 -2B *L 5 *L 3 L 5 N 3.25 N 4 N 0 *L 4 N 0 N 0 - N 0 *L 5.5 UT8 -3B *L 7 *L 7 M 9 N 2 N 6.5 N 0 *L 9.75 N 0 N 0 - N 0 *M 9 UT8 -4B N 6 N 5 N 6 __N__72 N 4 --N-7-0 N 5 N 0 N 0 - N 0 N 5.5 UT8 -5B *L 4 N 3 L 3.5 N 1 N 3 N 0 N 2.25 N 0 N 0 - N 0 *L 4 UT8 -6B *L 5.5 N 5 L 5 N 0.5 N 4.5 N 0 IL *L 3.5 N 0 N 0 N 0 *L 4.45 *Video of flow available. - Accidentally skipped. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report B -17 Table B -3. Flow Observation Data for 2013 at other sites monitored by PCS (depth in inches). In flow column: v = very, H = high, M = moderate, L = low, N = none, and P = ponded with no discernible flow. A "Y" indicates flow but no rate determined. Flow events are highlighted. Date 1/3/13 2/12/13 3/12/13 E-4/11/13 5/8/13 1 6/4/13 1 7/1 /13 7/31/13 1 8/28/13 1 9/25/13 10/22/13 11 /19/13 12/17/13 Site Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Flow Depth Bay City DRY N DRY N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY UD1 WF2 N DRY N 0.5 N DRY N DRY N BCF1 M 5 L 5.5 L 4 L 3.5 N 0.25 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 2 L 2 M 5 BCF2 H 5 H 4 L 4.5 L 3 N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 L 1 L 1.75 M 4 BCF3 M 11 M 9 N 6.5 N 7 L/M 3 N DRY L 4 N 0 N 0 N 2 L 4 L 4.75 L 9.5 BCF4 M -H 9 M 7.5 11 N 5.5 L 6 L 2.75 N DRY M 4 11 N 0 N 0 N 0.25 M 2 L 2.5 M 8 HF1 j H 10 L M 8.25 N DRY N 0 N 0 N DRY N 2.25 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY N 6.5 Controls Scarp 1/23/13 2/20/13 3/19/13 4/17/13 5/14/13 6/13/13 7/18/13 8/20/13 9/17/13 10/9/13 11/6/13 12/4 - 12/5/13 UD1 -F1 N DRY L 3 N DRY N DRY N DRY N 0 N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY UD1 WF1 N DRY N 0 N DRY N DRY N DRY N DRY N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY UD1 WF2 N DRY N 0.5 N DRY N DRY N DRY N DRY N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY UD8F1 L 2 L 2.5 L 3 L 2 N DRY L 0.25 N 0 L 1.5 N 0 L 2 N 0 6�;�37q5� N L 3 L 4.5 L 3.5 L 3 L 3 M 1.5 N 0 M 2 L 2 H 4 L 2.5 Porter Creek 1/3/13 1/29/13 2/27/13 3/26/13 4/25/13 5/21/13 6/19/13 7/16/13 8/13/13 9/10/13 10/8/13 11/5/13 12/3/13 12/30/13 PCF1 M 4.75 L 2.5 M 6.25 M 1 M 3 N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY N DRY *PCF2 L 4 L 3 H 12.75 L 4.25 L 5 N 0 N 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - *PCF2 removed from field on 6/20/13 Duck Creek 1/3/13 1/30/13 2/28/13 3/27/13 4/24/13 5/21/13 6/19/13 7/17/13 8/14/13 9/11/13 10/9/13 11/6/13 12/4/13 12/30/13 DKCW1 F L 3 L 1.5 L 2.5 N 0 N 1.5 N 0 N 0 N 0.25 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY M 2.75 DKCW2F L 4 M 3.5 M 4.5 N 3 N 3 N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY M 3 DKCW3F L 6.5 L 7-ELI M 6.25 N 5 N 6 N 0.5 N 0 N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY N 3.75 DKCW4F L 6 M 6 M 5.75 L 4 L L 4 N 2 N 0 N 0 N DRY N 0 N 0 N 0 N DRY L 2.75 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report B -18 APPENDIX C Baseline and 2013 Stem Counts at Individual Plots at Hell Swamp Appendix C1. Hell Swamp baseline (BL) and fourth (4th) 2013 annual riparian buffer plot totals. Number in each column indicates trees and shrubs unquestionably alive at sampling. Shrubs are indicated with an asterisk. Plot size is 0.017 acre. Plot was not monitored at baseline. 2 Plots have not been established. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -1 USC -1113 USC -5113 USC -8113 USC -11B UT1 -1B UT1 -3B UT2 -2B UT3 -1B UT3 -4B UT3 -7B UT4 -1B UT5 -21131 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown Carya aquatics water hickory 1 1 1 *Cepha/anthus occidentalis buttonbush 1 Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 1 1 *Cornus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 5 7 Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 1 2 2 3 2 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 Ilex decidua possumhaw *l. glabra ink berry L opaca American holly 1 1 1 *l. verticillata winterberry Tea virginica Virginia willow 1 1 1 2 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 1 1 1 4 1 2 2 1 Nyssa aquatics water tupelo Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 2 4 4 2 2 4 4 1 1 3 3 6 1 3 3 2 3 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 1 1 1 3 1 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus alba white oak 4 4 Q. falcata southern red oak 1 1 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 2 1 3 3 4 4 2 3 2 Q. lyrata overcup oak 3 3 3 3 6 7 1 1 1 2 2 5 4 3 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 2 1 4 4 1 4 4 1 1 1 1 4 4 3 1 1 1 1 Q. nigra water oak 2 8 9 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 1 Q. phellos willow oak 1 Q. spp. oak *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 1 6 6 4 4 4 4 3 2 1 1 2 2 Ulmus americana American elm 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 11 2 16 16 18 15 20 18 14 14 19 11 23 20 15 8 10 12 13 13 16 7 0 10 Plot was not monitored at baseline. 2 Plots have not been established. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -1 Appendix C1. Hell Swamp baseline (BL) and third (3rd) 2012 annual riparian buffer plot totals. Number in each column indicates trees and shrubs unquestionably alive at sampling. Shrubs are indicated with an asterisk. Plot size is 0.017 acre. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -2 UT6 -1 B2 UT6 -3113 2 UT6 -5B UT7 -2B UT8 -1 B UT -4113 UT8 -6113 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 1 6 Carya aquatica water hickory 1 *Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 1 1 3 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 3 2 *Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 2 1 2 2 1 1 13 13 Ilex decidua possumhaw *1. glabra ink berry I. opaca American holly 1 1 1 *I. verticillata winterberry *Itea virginica Virginia willow 2 1 1 1 2 2 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble 1 1 *Lindera benzoin spicebush Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 3 1 1 1 1 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 3 1 2 2 1 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 1 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus albs white oak Q. falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak 2 2 1 1 Q. lyrata overcup oak 1 1 3 3 5 2 2 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 3 3 3 3 2 1 Q. nigra water oak Q. pagoda cherrybark oak Q. phellos willow oak 1 1 2 2 Q. spp. oak 1 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 3 1 4 3 5 5 Ulmus americana American elm 4 4 2 2 1 1 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 0 0 0 0 18 11 17 16 17 6 21 17 22 20 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -2 Appendix C2. Hell Swamp baseline (BL) and fourth annual (4th) 2013 plot totals. Number in each column indicates trees and shrubs unquestionably alive at sampling. Shrubs are indicated with an asterisk. Plot size is 0.22 acre. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 1 4 1 1 1 2 4 Carya aquatics water hickory 6 6 Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 3 3 2 6 4 Cyrilla racemiflora titi Corpus amomum silky dogwood 6 4 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 4 6 Fagus grandifolia American beech 9 8 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 4 4 11 9 9 8 1 1 2 2 5 5 Ilex decidua possumhaw L glabra ink berry 4 3 1. opaca American holly *l. verticillata winterberry Tea virginica Virginia willow 1 1 1 2 4 4 5 5 5 2 12 11 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush 1 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 13 5 3 1 7 5 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 10 6 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 23 15 5 4 2 3 11 8 14 12 19 18 30 29 5 5 3 3 11 8 31 26 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay Prunus serotina black cherry 4 4 Quercus alba white oak 11 10 Q, falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak 5 1 18 22 6 5 1 1 31 28 6 6 Q. lyrata overcup oak 1 1 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 14 5 15 10 31 23 37 35 24 24 16 16 22 19 18 16 18 18 13 13 12 8 Q. nigra water oak 7 8 17 18 24 30 7 9 19 19 22 27 3 5 27 19 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 29 24 22 22 14 13 55 52 27 21 10 11 Q. phellos willow oak Q. spp. oak 1 5 7 2 1 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 11 11 Ulmus americana American elm 7 4 3 8 5 1 17 13 14 12 7 5 12 8 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 1 2 3 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 77 43 62 51 1 93 76 90 79 1 85 75 1 90 84 1 80 74 90 79 1 84 77 1 84 79 1 80 75 1 86 61 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -3 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -4 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 1 1 1 2 2 1 Carya aquatics water hickory Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 2 2 2 1 1 4 4 2 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 13 12 9 8 11 6 2 1 3 3 18 17 3 3 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1. glabra ink berry 1 4 3 1 1 1 1. opaca American holly 2 *l. verticillata winterberry 1 *Itea virginica Virginia willow 2 2 2 1 3 3 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush 4 1 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 3 1 1 5 1 2 2 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 3 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 9 8 32 32 12 11 10 5 8 5 38 25 13 12 2 2 5 4 20 17 31 29 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 2 1 1 Prunus serotina black cherry 1 2 Quercus alba white oak Q, falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak 15 10 12 13 13 24 21 12 10 1 1 35 33 Q. lyrata overcup oak 5 5 8 8 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 28 20 14 12 26 23 48 47 36 36 23 18 18 15 13 14 14 27 26 28 26 24 24 Q. nigra water oak 28 17 18 15 18 7 12 11 2 2 5 2 3 4 20 20 52 52 21 22 1 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 9 9 12 11 6 3 1 1 1 1 Q. phellos willow oak 1 3 4 4 Q. spp. oak 1 2 2 1 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 4 3 14 12 2 2 Ulmus americana American elm 26 17 16 14 29 29 1 1 2 2 22 22 7 6 10 10 9 10 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 1 2 2 9 9 4 4 1 1 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 93 64 85 74 110 106 93 89 81 62 67 25 86 70 97 80 94 88 96 92 86 81 102 97 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -4 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -5 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 1 2 3 2 1 2 Carya aquatics water hickory Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 2 2 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 9 9 17 16 23 23 9 9 6 6 8 8 20 17 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1. glabra ink berry 4 4 1 1 1 1. opaca American holly *l. verticillata winterberry *ltea virginica Virginia willow 2 1 8 8 2 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 2 3 3 3 1 10 6 4 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 5 1 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 3 2 5 3 1 3 3 6 6 13 11 4 29 25 40 35 28 29 2 1 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 2 1 1 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus alba white oak Q, falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak 6 6 11 16 20 19 35 33 21 17 3 2 23 23 34 35 18 16 31 27 Q. lyrata overcup oak 1 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 52 52 19 16 20 15 20 19 27 23 32 32 4 4 22 20 31 31 5 5 16 14 18 19 Q. nigra water oak 26 22 32 29 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 24 21 36 29 17 12 23 21 6 6 18 16 Q. phellos willow oak 2 1 1 7 8 1 Q. spp. oak 3 7 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 19 15 Ulmus americana American elm 24 21 8 7 42 41 13 12 3 3 28 27 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 4 4 3 2 1 2 5 5 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum 2 2 TOTALS 95 91 72 65 95 82 103 91 104 92 98 88 90 81 1 70 60 103 97 83 78 100 93 103 80 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -5 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -6 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 2 3 5 1 1 2 2 2 8 2 Carya aquatics water hickory Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 4 4 Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 1 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 1 4 5 1 1 Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 11 11 33 32 14 14 10 9 12 11 21 20 10 9 9 9 3 2 17 16 29 27 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1. glabra ink berry 1 1 1. opaca American holly *1. verticillata winterberry Tea virginica Virginia willow 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 1 1 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble 1 *Lindera benzoin spicebush 1 2 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 2 7 4 1 1 3 3 8 4 3 10 6 16 7 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 3 3 7 4 13 3 4 1 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 8 7 5 4 8 6 8 7 13 10 10 3 2 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 3 1 1 1 6 5 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus alba white oak Q, falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak 30 27 13 11 37 32 27 28 15 13 27 22 22 17 Q. lyrata overcup oak 20 18 12 11 10 8 26 26 10 10 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 31 25 17 17 26 25 15 9 24 23 1 2 2 43 40 13 13 37 39 11 12 28 27 Q. nigra water oak 1 1 2 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 17 10 20 20 24 25 2 2 Q. phellos willow oak 9 7 14 15 25 24 2 2 6 6 3 6 Q. spp. oak 2 3 1 1 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 9 9 16 16 4 4 5 4 10 10 Ulmus americana American elm 6 6 29 26 28 26 19 16 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 4 2 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 105 82 106 89 117 104 73 58 89 85 85 64 76 57 99 88 77 74 110 100 114 87 85 73 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -6 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -7 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 Carya aquatics water hickory Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 7 8 Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 1 1 2 Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 23 19 31 14 14 4 4 17 17 26 26 36 34 15 15 15 13 25 23 26 26 14 14 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1. glabra ink berry 1. opaca American holly 6 4 *l. verticillata winterberry *Itea virginica Virginia willow 2 1 1 5 5 1 2 2 2 2 5 5 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble 1 *Lindera benzoin spicebush 1 2 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 4 2 2 1 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 1 1 7 7 3 7 1 6 1 20 3 1,9 12 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 5 10 8 17 14 5 5 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood 1 1 Persea palustris red bay 2 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus alba white oak Q, falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak 9 15 19 30 29 17 17 1 1 2 Q. lyrata overcup oak 2 2 20 22 18 19 12 11 27 28 27 11 14 14 24 25 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 8 12 22 17 18 19 18 10 10 1 1 4 9 9 15 16 23 22 Q. nigra water oak 22 25 1 1 7 13 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 3 16 19 1 37 36 Q. phellos willow oak 2 4 6 22 20 8 8 7 21 9 9 15 18 Q. spp. oak 2 9 8 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 2 2 16 12 5 3 1 7 4 6 15 11 10 9 8 Ulmus americana American elm 19 18 6 6 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 42 46 94 0 100 90 94 87 114 99 71 68 71 65 71 58 64 70 97 76 111 106 97 91 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -7 Appendix C2. (continued) 1 The area in the vicinity of plot 105 was not planted Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -8 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 1 5 2 2 2 4 2 Carya aquatics water hickory Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 1 1 2 2 1 1 Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 4 1 1 2 1 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 2 1 2 Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 9 9 20 20 19 19 23 23 3 3 10 10 17 10 9 14 13 10 10 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1. glabra ink berry 1. opaca American holly 1 *l. verticillata winterberry *ltea virginica Virginia willow 12 10 1 2 6 6 6 5 3 2 5 5 3 3 2 1 1 5 4 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush 4 5 2 2 1 1 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 19 17 22 15 21 12 36 11 13 12 16 19 1 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 21 16 9 9 3 2 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 1 6 4 2 2 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus alba white oak Q, falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak Q. lyrata overcup oak 1 10 10 30 30 12 14 13 17 30 30 29 28 23 24 40 41 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 22 24 10 10 22 27 14 14 2 3 17 18 7 7 27 27 Q. nigra water oak 10 25 30 41 13 11 1 22 32 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 12 12 2 6 17 18 Q. phellos willow oak 20 20 9 9 14 19 1 13 14 14 13 13 12 Q. spp. oak 18 16 1 1 3 11 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 4 1 26 25 7 7 12 12 21 18 8 6 13 8 8 6 Ulmus americana American elm 4 4 19 20 6 6 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 1 1 1 1 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 92 82 91 73 77 74 115 113 96 89 97 89 82 58 92 82 62 70 101 67 95 72 102 99 1 The area in the vicinity of plot 105 was not planted Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -8 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -9 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 7 2 1 2 7 3 1 1 5 14 Carya aquatics water hickory 17 16 1 Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 2 2 6 6 Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 2 1 3 3 5 5 1 1 2 1 1 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 1 Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 6 6 1 Fagus grandifolia American beech 10 10 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 7 8 1 18 18 16 16 31 29 36 29 10 9 20 19 3 3 19 19 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1 1 1. glabra ink berry 1. opaca American holly 4 3 2 *l. verticillata winterberry 3 2 *ltea virginica Virginia willow 3 4 1 1 1 1 5 3 2 2 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush 2 1 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 1 4 3 2 1 1 6 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 1 25 17 7 2 11 2 20 12 8 6 5 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 10 10 11 4 15 14 4 2 2 2 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 Prunus serotina black cherry 7 4 Quercus alba white oak 27 28 Q, falcata southern red oak 10 10 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 1 Q. lyrata overcup oak 1 1 2 26 26 10 16 18 17 33 34 16 15 11 10 7 6 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 22 26 11 10 1 3 10 10 3 3 1 17 18 Q. nigra water oak 2 4 3 5 3 3 15 16 17 23 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 10 14 2 6 30 24 Q. phellos willow oak 28 28 7 9 3 4 15 16 18 18 20 20 Q. spp. oak 17 1 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 10 10 12 10 33 31 36 35 29 29 17 15 1 21 18 12 12 22 10 Ulmus americana American elm 14 14 8 7 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 3 1 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 95 76 54 44 67 67 110 100 106 99 98 99 109 85 82 72 90 77 76 69 79 45 103 88 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -9 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -10 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 5 2 1 1 4 2 1 2 1 4 8 Carya aquatics water hickory 4 4 12 11 2 2 Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 2 2 3 1 6 2 Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 3 2 2 2 1 1 3 2 3 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 2 1 Corpus amomum silky dogwood 1 1 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 5 4 Fagus grandifolia American beech 1 15 16 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 16 16 16 14 10 10 47 44 38 36 15 8 1 1 5 4 14 4 26 25 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1 1. glabra ink berry 1 1 1. opaca American holly 3 2 *1. verticillata winterberry 4 4 *Itea virginica Virginia willow 6 5 1 1 3 1 3 1 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush 2 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 4 3 4 1 2 1 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 14 11 11 6 11 4 28 2 6 14 1 14 2 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 8 5 27 26 4 2 1 1 2 1 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 2 2 1 2 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus alba white oak 7 6 14 14 Q, falcata southern red oak 9 10 20 20 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 17 18 5 6 1 2 1 Q. lyrata overcup oak 8 8 11 11 20 20 25 23 26 24 25 24 3 4 10 4 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 13 12 27 26 4 3 8 8 1 15 11 Q. nigra water oak 14 14 10 10 9 8 1 2 23 20 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 40 41 22 15 Q. phellos willow oak 3 18 18 28 30 21 25 14 14 3 2 15 15 4 3 Q. spp. oak 1 1 *Rosa palustris swamp rose 1 Taxodium distichum bald cypress 33 31 2 2 25 19 6 5 27 15 14 18 25 14 13 7 Ulmus americana American elm 18 17 1 1 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum 4 TOTALS 107 93 96 91 82 73 102 94 91 81 132 122 110 96 114 65 54 47 68 40 70 22 104 74 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -10 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -11 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 6 1 1 1 2 1 Carya aquatics water hickory 11 10 12 13 18 19 Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush 2 2 Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 1 1 1 Corpus amomum silky dogwood 1 1 4 4 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 2 2 8 9 Fagus grandifolia American beech 5 4 9 9 4 3 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 9 8 17 17 7 7 18 27 5 4 9 9 30 30 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1 1 3 3 1. glabra ink berry 1. opaca American holly 3 3 1 1 2 1 *1. verticillata winterberry 2 2 4 4 1 Tea virginica Virginia willow 5 5 3 3 2 3 7 5 2 1 3 1 2 3 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble *Lindera benzoin spicebush 1 2 1 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 4 2 7 6 1 1 5 2 1 4 3 2 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 17 8 20 15 9 1 16 7 20 3 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 10 8 22 13 5 2 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood 2 Persea palustris red bay 3 1 2 1 2 1 Prunus serotina black cherry 3 1 2 2 2 Quercus alba white oak 12 8 22 22 23 23 2 Q, falcata southern red oak 20 16 14 13 8 9 2 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 21 23 1 2 Q. lyrata overcup oak 8 8 24 24 25 34 2 17 16 17 17 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 14 15 27 27 21 19 11 10 24 2 12 10 3 3 Q. nigra water oak 22 23 24 23 30 30 17 17 18 2 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak 15 14 1 21 2 Q. phellos willow oak 9 10 19 19 15 18 18 19 20 20 Q. spp. oak 1 *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 13 12 24 23 15 13 14 12 8 8 Ulmus americana American elm 5 5 18 18 4 2 2 2 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 1 2 1 1 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum 2 TOTALSI 92 82 1 89 81 1 96 81 1 111 102 1 89 75 1 98 97 1 95 90 1 95 102 1 0 0 1 81 34 101 80 106 87 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -11 Appendix C2. (continued) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -12 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 4 3 1 4 1 Carya aquatics water hickory 14 14 15 16 12 13 19 19 19 19 Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 1 2 2 1 1 Corpus amomum silky dogwood 1 1 2 2 2 2 6 6 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon 1 1 2 2 4 4 1 1 2 2 Fagus grandifolia American beech 6 4 10 10 15 6 6 4 9 8 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 22 22 17 17 30 30 15 15 11 12 15 15 7 6 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1. glabra ink berry 1. opaca American holly 4 4 1 1 5 3 3 3 2 1 *1. verticillata winterberry 3 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 *Itea virginica Virginia willow 5 5 1 1 3 4 5 6 4 4 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble 1 1 *Lindera benzoin spicebush 3 2 2 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 1 1 3 2 2 4 4 1 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 7 8 12 10 20 10 18 15 4 3 1 16 9 10 7 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 1 9 8 1 2 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 2 2 1 1 1 Prunus serotina black cherry 1 1 4 1 3 2 4 2 Quercus alba white oak 26 26 19 19 24 25 27 26 20 20 Q, falcata southern red oak 23 24 21 21 16 25 9 10 7 7 Q. laurifolia laurel oak 1 1 1 Q. lyrata overcup oak 14 14 46 47 17 17 31 31 12 19 6 6 22 22 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 6 6 16 14 9 14 2 2 Q. nigra water oak 24 24 16 16 17 16 26 25 28 28 Q. pagoda cherrybark oak Q. phellos willow oak 21 21 17 13 8 10 14 14 20 20 1 1 18 17 27 28 Q. spp. oak *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 16 15 8 8 19 18 33 32 13 13 24 22 25 25 Ulmus americana American elm 1 1 1 2 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry 1 *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 102 96 117 111 103 101 94 90 104 100 97 85 114 108 95 102 98 91 97 92 94 83 97 94 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -12 Appendix C2. (concluded) Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -13 121 122 123 124 Scientific name Common name BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th BL 4th Unknown Unknown 1 4 4 Carya aquatics water hickory 1 Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush Clethra alnifolia sweet pepperbush 1 1 2 Cyrilla racemiflora titi 1 Corpus amomum silky dogwood Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Fagus grandifolia American beech Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash 17 17 10 11 12 19 18 18 Ilex decidua possumhaw 1. glabra ink berry 1. opaca American holly 2 *1. verticillata winterberry *Itea virginica Virginia willow 4 4 3 3 4 *Leucothoe racemosa Swamp doghobble 1 *Lindera benzoin spicebush 1 Magnolia virginiana sweet bay 5 Nyssa aquatica water tupelo 15 12 7 3 12 1 14 4 Nyssa biflora swamp black gum 1 Oxydendron arboreum sourwood Persea palustris red bay 1 1 4 Prunus serotina black cherry Quercus alba white oak Q, falcata southern red oak Q. laurifolia laurel oak 4 3 Q. lyrata overcup oak 26 26 25 25 22 23 13 13 Q. michauxii swamp chestnut oak 15 15 7 9 Q. nigra water oak Q. pagoda cherrybark oak Q. phellos willow oak 17 16 24 24 8 9 25 25 Q. spp. oak *Rosa palustris swamp rose Taxodium distichum bald cypress 19 19 12 11 7 9 15 13 Ulmus americana American elm 2 2 *Vaccinium corymbosum high bush blueberry *Viburnum nudum possumhaw viburnum TOTALS 100 96 94 89 96 77 93 77 Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Report C -13 /_1, »01I9]►:497 Selected Fourth Annual (2013) Restoration Vegetation Photographs The photos represent a range of conditions on the site. A 10 -ft pole marked with one -foot increments is in each photo for a height reference. The fourth annual photos (bottom photos) are paired with the baseline photo (top photo) from the same location. HS8 photo station; view is to the east. 13 July 2010. n HS8 photo station; view is to the east. 29 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 HS34 photo station; view is to the south. 14 July 2010. HS34 photo station; view is to the south. 29 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 UT1 -3 photo station; view is upstream (west- northwest). 14 July 2010. 11� �16 UT1 -3 photo station; view is upstream (west - northwest). Planted oak is visible in the right foreground. 29 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 HS112 photo station; view is to the north. 13 July 2010. HS112 photo station; view is to the north. 30 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 q USC -2 photo station; view is downstream. 14 July 2010. USC -2 photo station; view is downstream. 29 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 UT8 -6 photo station; view is downstream (southwest). 13 July 2010. UT8 -6 photo station; view is downstream (southwest). 30 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 UT3 -7 photo station; view is towards well 7C (north - northwest). 13 July 2010. UT3 -7 photo station; view is towards well 7C (north- northwest). 30 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014 HS37 photo station; view is to the east. 13 July 2010. HS37 photo station; view is to the east. 29 October 2013. Hell Swamp /Scott Creek Mitigation Site D -8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Fourth Annual Report May 2014