20190681 Ver 1_Longhorn_100114_MY3_2022_20230127

ID#* 20190681
Select Reviewer:
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 02/01/2023
Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/27/2023
Version* 1
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?*
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Jeremiah Dow
Project Information
ID#:* 20190681
Existing ID#
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Longhorn Buffer Mitigation Site
County: Randolph
Document Information
O Yes O No
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:* 1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Longhorn_100114_MY3_2022.pdf 11.38MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature: *

MY03Monitoring Report
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
RandolphCounty, NC

DMS Project No. 100114
DMS Contract Number: 7866
DWR Project Number: 2019-0681

Randleman Lake Watershed
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030003
RFP #16-007703

Prepared For:

NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
November2022

MY03Monitoring Report
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC

DMS Project No. 100114
DMS Contract Number: 7866
DWR Project Number: 2019-0681

Randleman Lake Watershed
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030003

PREPARED FOR:

NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

PREPARED BY:
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions

604 Macon Place
Raleigh, North Carolina
Authorized Representative: Mr. Kevin Yates
Phone: [phone]

Contributing Staff:
Kevin Yates, Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Christian Preziosi, Davey Resource Group
Wes Fryar, Davey Resource Group
Kim Williams, Davey Resource Group
November2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Mitigation Project Summary ........................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Goals .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Pre-Construction Site Conditions .............................................................................................. 2

2.0. Determination of Credits ................................................................................................................. 2

3.0. Baseline Summary ........................................................................................................................... 3
3.1 Planting Preparation .................................................................................................................. 3
3.2 Riparian Area Restoration and Enhancement Activities .......................................................... 4

4.0 Annual Monitoring .......................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 5
4.2 Tables ......................................................................................................................................... 5
4.3 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................... 5
4.4 Maintenance and Management ................................................................................................ 7

5.0 References ........................................................................................................................................ 7
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDICES
Figure 1 ....................................................................................................................................... Vicinity Map
Figure 2 ................................................................................................................................. Watershed Map
Figure 3 .................................................................................... USGS Glenola 7.5 Minute Topographic Map
Figure 4 ..................................................................................................................... NC DOT QL2 LiDAR Map
Figure 5 .................................................................................................... Randolph County NRCS Soil Survey
Figure 6 .......................................................................................................... 1998 NAPP Aerial Photography
Figure 7 .......................................................................................... 2016 Aerial with Conservation Easement
Figure 8 ................................................................................................................... Mitigation Plan Overview
Figure 9 ............................................................................................................. Current Condition Plan View

Table 1........................................................................................................Buffer Project Attributes
Table 2. ............................................................................................ Buffer Project Areas and Assets
Table 3 ......................................................................................................................... Planting Plan
Table 4 ............................................................................................. Planted and Total Stem Counts

Appendix A. ............................................................................................................... Figures/Tables
Appendix B................................................................................... Veg Data/Veg Plot Photos/Photo Stations
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report i | Page
DMS Project No. 100114
November 23rd, 2022

1.0Mitigation Project Summary
The LonghornRiparian Buffer Restoration Project (“the Site”) is a buffer restoration projectlocated in
Randolph County, approximately 1.5 miles northwest of the Town of Sophia, North Carolina and
approximately 9 miles south of High Point (NC). The property is situated just east of NC Highway 311 and
is bounded to the south by Marlboro Church Road (refer to Figure 1). The Longhorn Buffer Mitigation Site
is located within the Muddy Creek 12-digit HUC (030300030106) of the Randleman Lake watershed (Figure
2). The buffer restoration and enhancement areas are located along an unnamed tributary (UT) of Bob
Branch and drainages that flow directly into Randleman Lake Reservoir approximately 2 river miles
downstream (refer to Figure 3 and Figure 4). Prior to project completion, the Site was surrounded by areas
managed for cattle production and lacked existing forested buffer along a majority of the streams and
pond dissecting the site. The Site is expected to generate 376,644.994 riparian buffer credits (BMU).
The Site is located within Hydologic Unit Code (HUC) 03030003010060 and North Carolina Department of
Water Resources (NC DWR) Sub-Basin 03-04-07. The buffer mitigation site consists of one stream reach
(A1) and an in-line pond (P1) as illustrated in Figure 8. Reach A1 is a perennial stream that flows from the
in-line pond (P1) to the north and into Bob Branch approximately 1,300 lf downstream. Bob Branch has a
NC DEQ surface water classification as a WS-IV* waterbody.
1.1 Project Goals
The main goals of the project are to provide high quality compensatory mitigation for authorized riparian
buffer impacts credited through the NC DMS in-lieu-fee program and occurring within the Randleman
Lake Watershed by creating a riparian corridor and restoring the historic riparian buffer. The project
addresses the watershed goals identified in the Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Plan (RBRP) (NC EEP,
2010). These goals include:
-point source pollution (including nitrogen, phosphorous, and fecal bacteria)
resulting from current land-use practices (principally cattle pasture);
-off/sediment loading to creek waters resulting from cattle hoof
shear, bank instability, and lack of riparian buffer woody vegetation;

stream ecology and aquatic/semi-aquatic habitats; and

These goals will be achieved via the restoration and protection of riparian buffers and adjacent riparian
areas along an unnamed tributary of Bob Branch (which flows east into Randleman Lake Reservoir).
Specific objectives of the proposed project to achieve the desired goals include:
re into wooded riparian buffer and wooded riparian areas
along the existing stream channel and pond via planting of characteristic hardwood species and
installation of cattle-exclusion fencing;
gs (i.e. increased woody root
material) and cattle exclusion fencing;
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report 1 | Page
DMS Project No. 100078
November 22, 2022

buffer mitigation area;
te in
perpetuity; and

Ancillary benefits of the proposed riparian buffer and adjacent riparian area restoration effort include:
Increase of organic material as food for invertebrate, fish and wildlife;
Supply of woody debris that provides increased niche habitat for fish, invertebrates and
amphibians;
Reduction of sunlight reaching the stream and modulation of surface water temperatures; and
Floodwater attenuation via temporary storage, interception and slow releases from heavy rains.

1.2Pre-construction Site Conditions
The project includes 20.81 acres of mostly open cattle pasture with one stream reach (A1) and an in-line
pond (P1) which drains to Bob Branch. An additional 0.89-acres was added to the project area to include
the pond dam within the conservation easement and will be reflected in an amendment to the
Conservation Easement Plat. The Site has historically been managed for agricultural and cattle production.
Site drainage and hydrology have been historically altered via the impoundment of waters. Based upon
a review of available aerial photography, the tributary was impounded in the early 1970s (between 1970
and 1973). A portion of the site was in cropland as early as 1948. The remaining land was cleared and
converted to agricultural production in the 1950s.
The buffer mitigation site consists of one stream reach (A1) and an in-line pond (P1) as illustrated in Figure
8. Reach A1 is a perennial stream that flows from the in-line pond (P1) to the north and into Bob Branch.
There is approximately 625 lf of stream associated with Reach A1 within the proposed buffer easement
area. Pond (P1) is an in-line pond that is approximately 5.3-acres and lies entirely within the proposed
conservation easement area.

The stream reach (A1) and an in-line pond (P1) have been restored as a forested riparian buffer to 200-ft
(approximately 12.73 acres) while approximately 0.40 acres of partially forested areas are considered
suitable for buffer enhancement. An additional 0.21 acres of existing, wooded riparian area will be
enhanced as cattle exclusion fencing will be installed around the conservation easement boundary. As
indicated above, an amendment to the Conservation Easement Plat to include the pond dam will be
provided to NCDMS and NCDWR following recordation. The project attributes are listed in Table 1, located
in Appendix A.

2.0 Determination of Credits
On June 19th, 2019, Ms. Katie Merritt of the Division of Water Resources (DWR) performed an evaluation
of surface water features and adjacent riparian areas within the proposed mitigation site for the
determination of riparian buffer mitigation pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (effective November 1,
2015). Based upon this evaluation, DWR determined that areas within 200 ft of Reach A-1 and Pond P-1
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report 2 | Page
DMS Project No. 100078
November 22, 2022

are eligible for buffer credit. Inclusive of this area are approximately 12.73 acres of non-forested
restoration site per 15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (n). In addition, 0.40 acres of partially forested areas are
considered suitable for buffer enhancement per 15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (n) (i.e. areas classified such that
the establishment of woody stems (i.e., tree or shrub species) will maximize nutrient removal and other
buffer functions).

In addition to buffer restoration and enhancement on subject streams, per the Consolidated Buffer
Mitigation Rules (15 A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)), alternative mitigation is proposed on the site in the form of:
1) enhancement of grazing areas adjacent to streams. The project is in compliance with these rules as it
meets the following criteria:

Enhancement of Grazing Areas Adjacent to Streams (15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)(6)):

Buffer credit at a 2:1 ratio shall be available for an applicant or mitigation provider who proposes
permanent exclusion of grazing livestock that otherwise degrade the stream and riparian zone through
trampling, grazing, or waste deposition by fencing the livestock out of the stream and its adjacent buffer.

An additional 0.21 acres of existing, wooded riparian area will be enhanced as cattle exclusion fencing will
be installed around the conservation easement boundary.

There are no known site constraints that would impede or adversely affect the restoration, enhancement,
and preservation of riparian buffer within the recorded easement area. Diffuse flow of runoff will be
maintained in the riparian buffer.
Mitigation credits are presented in Table 2 and Figure 8 in Appendix A and are based upon the
conservation easement survey.

3.0 Baseline Summary
The project team restored high quality riparian buffers along all unnamed tributaries and an in-line pond
within the Site. The project design ensured that no adverse impacts to wetlands of existing riparian buffers
occurred during implementation. Refer to Figure 8 for the conceptual design of the project. Details of the
restoration activity that occurred follows in the sections below.
3.1PlantingPreparation
Based upon pre-project assessment of compaction within the proposed planting areas, all areas targeted
for vegetative plantings within the buffer restoration project were ripped to reduce compaction and to
enhance microtopography. Spot spraying of herbicide was initiated for control of invasive species within
the restoration, enhancement and preservation areas (i.e. Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Multiflora
rose (Rosa multiflora, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and Chinese tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus
altissima)). Treatment areas are depicted on Figure 9. The existing 84-ft pond spillway was stabilized prior
to planting. The spillway was widened to approximately 10-feet and tapered down to 6-feet. The side
slopes were lined with coir fiber matting, and the bottom of the spillway lined with rip-rap. Appropriate
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report 3 | Page
DMS Project No. 100078
November 22, 2022

erosion control measures were implemented before, during, and after the spillway maintenance to
prevent sediment loss into downstream waters. No other site preparation occurred. No observed drain
tiles were observed prior to, or during, construction and planting and no other land disturbance was
needed to maintain diffuse flow as required.
3.2Riparian Area Restoration and Enhancement Activities
The conservation easement boundary was marked using 6-inch diameter treated post buried 2 feet,
standing 5 feet above the ground surface, within the pasture. Woven wire fencing with a top strand of
barbed wire was installed along the entire easement boundary. One pedestrian access gate was installed
for future monitoring and access. Three 12-ft wide gates were installed in appropriate locations to allow
cattle to exit in case they were to breach the fence and enter the conservation easement. The easement
boundary was marked with standard yellow Conservation Area signs, per the 01/23/14 NCDMS Boundary
Marking Standards.

The planting plan consisted of the planting at least four hardwood species on a density of approximately
538 stems per acre. Species selection and distribution were matched closely to micro-site hydrologic and
edaphic conditions and include species characteristic of riparian assemblages in the watershed. In other
words, species more tolerant of poorly drained soils (i.e. river birch, green ash, and willow oak) were
planted within lower landscape positions generally consisting of the Chewacla and Wedhakee soil series
while species characteristically occurring in better drained soils (Wynott-Enon complex) will be planted in
higher landscape positions (i.e. hillside slopes). The selected native trees are well-suited to the site-specific
conditions of the property to promote high survivorship rates. No one tree species planted was greater
than 50% of the established stems. Site planting was conducted on April 1st, 2020 by Carolina Silvics, Inc.
and supervised by project managers from both Clearwater Mitigation Solutions and Land Management
Group.
Table 3 summarizes the planting plan for the Longhorn mitigation site.

1
Table 3. Planting Plan
Common Name Scientific Name % Composition Acreage Quantity
American Sycamore Plantanus occidentalis 30 3.94 2,119
Yellow Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 25 3.28 1,766
River Birch Betula nigra 25 3.28 1,766
Willow Oak Quercus phellos 15 1.97 1,060
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 0.66 353
Total N/A 10013.13 7,064
1
Note the planted area includes approximate 0.74 acres of conservation area. While no credit is proposed for this area, it was
planted per the same specifications (species density and composition) as those contained within final, approved mitigation plan.

Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report 4 | Page
DMS Project No. 100078
November 22, 2022

4.0Annual Monitoring
Annual Monitoring will be conducted during the growing season for a period of five years. The report will
include all information required by DMS monitoring guidelines including photographs, plot locations, and
documentation of existing species density and composition. Monitoring will be performed in accordance
with the Consolidated Mitigation Buffer Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) and current DMS standards.The
performance criteria for the Site follows approved performance criteria presented in the guidance
documents outlined in the Consolidated Buffer Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295). Performance criteria will be
evaluated throughout the five-year post-construction monitoring.
4.1Methods
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 260 planted stems per acre in the riparian buffer
at the end of the required monitoring period (MY05). Native hardwood and native shrub volunteer species
may be included to meet the final performance standard of 260 stems per acre. In addition, the Site must
contain at least four native hardwood species. Vegetative monitoring included the establishment of
eleven (11) permanent plots consistent with the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) protocol Level 2
(version 4.2) (refer to Figure 9 for plot locations). Reference photos of the vegetation plots and Site were
taken at each predetermined photo point location. Any vegetative problem areas in the site will be noted
and reported in each monitoring report. Vegetative problem areas may include areas that either lack
vegetation or include populations of exotic vegetation. Monitoring reports will identify any contingency
measures that may need to be employed to remedy site deficiencies.
Permanent photo stations were established across the project area in order to document site stability for
five years post construction. Markers were established and located with GPS equipment so that the same
locations and view directions on the Site are photographed each year. Photo reference stations are shown
on Figure 9 and photos are included in Appendix B.
Visual assessments will be performed annually during the five-year monitoring period. Problem areas of
vegetative health will be noted and areas of concern will be mapped, photographed, and documented in
the subsequent annual monitoring report. Problem areas that are found will be re-evaluated in each
subsequent monitoring event.

4.2 Tables
(MY3) vegetation plot photographs and the planted and total stem counts (Table 4) are included in
Appendix B.
4.3 Results and Discussion
Annual monitoring (MY03) was conducted on October 19, 2022 by DRG staff. An average stem density of
485 planted stems per acre was tallied across the site (approximately 72% of the recorded baseline (MY0)
density (673 stems per acre)). Stem densities within individual monitoring plots range from 121 to 1,093
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report 5 | Page
DMS Project No. 100078
November 22, 2022

planted stems per acre. Stem counts within individual plots range from 3 to 27 stems with an average of
12 planted stems per plot. Six different hardwood species were observed across the site, exceeding the
minimum diversity criteria. All but one vegetation plot (Plot 2) are on track to meet the final stem density
success criterion of 260 stems/acre for MY05. Plot 2 experienced high seedling mortality during MY01.
Plot 2 seedling mortality was likely caused by inundation and flooding of the plot. Based upon review of
the area during MY01, it appeared that an increase in surface water had filled the western and side
channel following construction of the new pond outlet due to a shift and rehabilitation of the dam outlet
structure. Many dead trees were observed buried in alluvial deposits during MY01. During MY02,
additional seedling mortality was observed due to inundation in the same location. During MY02, a
supplemental plot was established just to the south of Plot 2 (Plot 2A). Ten (10) planted stems were
enumerated within Plot 2A during MY02 and MY03 and all exhibited excellent vigor. In addition, the
remainder of the enhancement area was walked, and numerous planted stems were observed. Based on
the enumerated stems in Plot 2A during MY03 and observed stems within the remainder of the
enhancement zone, it is anticipated that Plot 2 is the only area within the enhancement zone experiencing
high mortality due to inundation and alluvial deposition.

Plot 5 mortality during MY01 was likely caused by dry conditions post-planting and the subsequent
overtopping by dense grasses. During MY01 and MY02, the area around Plot 5 appeared to have been
affected by dry conditions and exhibited higher mortality. Supplemental planting was implemented within
this area in the Winter of 2022 (January – February). The supplemental planting area equated to
approximately 0.75-acres. Additional planted stems were observed during MY03 and all exhibited
excellent vigor. The remainder of the area around Plot 5 was walked, and numerous planted stems were
observed.

It should be noted that during MY01, Plots 7, 9, and 10 all exhibited relatively higher stem mortality and
lower vigor. It is believed that these areas experienced mortality due to dry conditions following site
planting and competition from fescue grass. Although these three plots were exceeding the final stem
success criteria during MY01, supplemental planting was proposed to occur in these areas in the Winter
of 2021 (January – February). However, a selective, broad spectrum, postemergence herbicide (Poast)
was used for control of fescue grass and mortality has ceased in these areas. Most of the stem mortality
occurred between MY0 and MY01. During MY03 these areas are on track to meet the final stem density
success criteria. Refer to Figure 9 (Current Condition Plan View) and Table 4 in Appendix B for additional
information.
Small areas of invasive species were treated on the Site in MY03 (i.e. small areas over approximately 1.6-
acres). Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) have been observed within
the proposed buffer enhancement and preservation areas and along the eastern bank of Stream A1. A
small cluster of Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) were also observed within the easement. These
areas were treated prior to site planting and again concurrently during MY01 & MY02 & MY03. Treatment
appears to be working and invasive densities are steadily declining across the Site. Though some invasive
species are present throughout the Site, none are currently affecting the survival of the planted stems or
the success of the project. Invasive species populations will continue to be monitored and spot herbicide
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report 6 | Page
DMS Project No. 100078
November 22, 2022

treatments will be conducted as needed during the appropriate time of year. Please refer to Appendix B
for visual assessment data and for vegetation plot data and vegetation plot photographs.
4.4 Maintenance and Management
Overall, the Site appears to be progressing well towards the target success criteria. Supplemental planting
during the Winter of 2022 appears to have successfully brought Plot 5 back into compliance with the MY05
success criteria of 260/planted stems per acre. The site will continue to be monitored for problem areas.
In addition, invasive treatment areas will continue to be monitored, and invasive vegetation management
will continue to be implemented if additional exotic species volunteer into the site. If it is determined that
the Site’s ability to achieve the performance standards are jeopardized, staff members of NCDMS/NCDWR
will be notified, and an adaptive management plan will be developed to address these issues.
5.0 References
Lee, Michael T. Peet, Robert K., Steven D. Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4.2. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Web Soil Survey of Randolph County.
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities
2009. http://www.nceep.net/services/lwps/cape_fear/RBRP%20Cape%20Fear%202008.pdf
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). 2017. Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer
Baseline & Annual monitoring Report Template (Version 2.0, 05-2017). Raleigh, North Carolina.
https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fspublic/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Li
brary/Guidance%20and%20Templa te%20Documents/RB_NO_Base_Mon_Template_2.0_2017_5.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 2011. Surface Water Classifications.
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-standards/classifications
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Year 03 Monitoring Report 7 | Page
DMS Project No. 100078
November 22, 2022

APPENDIX A:

Figures/Tables

¯

^_
¯

¯

SITE
Legend
CmA: Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded
CnB2: Coronaca clay loam, 2-8% slopes, moderately eroded
CnC2: Coronaca clay loam, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded
HeB: Helena sandy loam, 2-6% slopes
HeC: Helena sandy loam, 6-10% slopes
MaC: Mecklenburg loam, 8-15% slopes
MeB2: Mecklenburg clay loam, 2-8% slopes, moderately eroded
Longhorn Conservation Easement
MeC2: Mecklenburg clay loam, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded
WtB: Wynott-Enon complex, 2-8% slopes
WtC: Wynott-Enon complex, 8-15% slopes
WvB2: Wynott-Enon complex, 2-8% slopes, moderately eroded
Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors
WvC2: Wynott-Enon complex, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded
WzB: Wynott-Wilkes-Poindexter complex, 2-8% slopes
03507001,400
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.
Feet
¯
Map Source: NRCS Randolph County Soil Survey, 2006
Longhorn Riparian
Buffer Mitigation Site
Figure 5
Cataloging Unit 03030003
Soils Map
Randolph County, NC
Map Date: 0--
LMG #

Bob Branch
SITE
Legend
Parcel Boundary: ~45. Acres
NCCGIA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors
Longhorn Conservation Easement: ~ Acres
0200400800
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.
Feet
¯
Map Source: 1998 NAPP Aerial Photography
Longhorn Riparian
Buffer Mitigation Site
Figure 6
Cataloging Unit 03030003
1998 Aerial Photograph
Randolph County, NC
Map Date: 0--
LMG #

Bob Branch
SITE
Legend
Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri,
DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,
Parcel Boundary: ~45. Acres
USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Longhorn Conservation Easement: ~ Acres
0200400800
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.
Feet
¯
Map Source: 2016 ESRI World Imagery
Longhorn Riparian
Buffer Mitigation Site
Figure 7
Cataloging Unit 03030003
Aerial Photograph
Randolph County, NC
Map Date: --
LMG #

Longhorn Conservation Easement & Fence
SITE
Access Gates
1 TOB
_
^
Buffer Restoration (0 ft - 100 ft)
Buffer Restoration (101 ft - 200 ft)
Buffer Enhancement
Buffer Enhancement (Cattle Exclusion)
2
PS 1
_
^
_
^
Invasive Species Treatment Areas: ~1.6-Acres
2A
3
Supplemental Planting Areas: ~0.75-Acres
_
^
4
_
^
Vegetation Plots
PS 2
_
^
Photo Stations
_
^
PS 3
_
^PS 4
_
^
PS 5
_
^
5
_
^
7
_
^
PS 6
_
^
6
PS 7
_
^
_
^
8
_
^
11
_
^
10
_
^
9
_
^
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri,
DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,
PS 8 USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
_
^
L:\\WETLANDS\\2019 WETLANDS FILES\\LMG19.249 --- Longhorn Buffer Project,
Kevin Yates\\Annual Monitoring\\Baseline Monitoring\\Figures
0100200400
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.
Feet
¯
Map Source: 2016 ESRI World Imagery
Longhorn Riparian
Buffer Mitigation Site
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 9
Randolph County, NC Current Condition Plan View
Map Date: 11-22-22 MY03
LMG #19.249

Project
Restoration
digit)
Buffer
(14
99
79.882810
Riparian
2020
2020
2020
Buffer
Page
2020
Fear
1st,6th,
,
163
Longhorn0303000301006035.841600,RiparianFebruary
CapeDB376,644.99AprilApril
PG)
(DB,
Long)
(Lat,
Date
Date
Code
Date
Instrument
Date
(BMU)
DateDateDateDateDate
Location
Unit
Plan
CreditsMonitoringReport
Name
of
Planting
Basin
Credits
ReportReportReportReportReport
Protection
ProjectHydrologicRiverGeographicSiteTotalTypesMitigationInitialBaselineBaselineMY1MY2MY3MY4MY5

APPENDIX :
Veg Data/
Veg Plot Photos

takes
takes
s
s
ite
ive
S
ive
l
ite
l
S

itigation
M
xcluding
ncluding
uffer
Stems
e
i
B

Mitigation
r
parian
2
tems
tems
Ri
s
ffe s
20
–
onghorn

Bu
L
100114

lanted
lanted
ame:
N
p
p
f
f
ear
o
No.

o
Project
Y

Riparian
lanted and Total

RBMS.
P
L
oject
.
umber
stems
ode
4
N
C
Number
Pr

ll:
roject
Total
P
P-A
CVS
Table LonghornDMS Monitoring
PnoLS:T:

A PPENDIX B.V EG P LOT P HOTOS

(1) Plot 1 (2) Plot 2

(3) Plot 3 (4) Plot 4

(5) Plot 5 (6) Plot 6

Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Appendix B 1| Page
DMS Project No. 100114

A PPENDIX B.V EG P LOT P HOTOS

(7) Plot 7 (8) Plot 8

(9) Plot 9 (10) Plot 10

(11) Plot 11 (12) Plot 2A
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Appendix B 2| Page
DMS Project No. 100114

A PPENDIX B. P HOTO S TATIONS

(1)PS1 (looking south)(2) PS2 (looking north towards restoration area)

(3) PS2 (looking east)

(5) PS3 (looking north into enhancement area) (6) PS4 (looking west towards dam)

Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Appendix B 1 | Page
DMS Project No. 100114

A PPENDIX B. P HOTO S TATIONS

(7) PS4 (looking south into easement) (8) PS5 (looking west along conservation easement)

(9) PS6 (looking north along pond edge) (10) PS7 (looking southwest into restoration area)

(11) PS8 (looking north into restoration area)

Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site – Appendix B 2| Page
DMS Project No. 100114