20170921 Ver 1_MajorHill_100015_MY4_2022_20230201 (2)

ID#* 20170921 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 02/01/2023
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/1/2023
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* O Yes O No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Lindsay Crocker [e-mail]
Project Information
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20170921 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Major Hill Full Delivery Mitigation Site
County: Alamance
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: MajorHill_1 0001 5_MY4_2022.pdf 9.44MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Lindsay Crocker
Signature:

MONITORING REPORT
2022 (Year 4)
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100015
Full Delivery Contract No. 7193
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01472
DWR No. 17-0921
RFP No. 16-006990
Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030002
Data Collection: January 2022 — October 2022
Submission: February 2023
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652

Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina
Ph: [phone]
Fx: [phone]
Response to Monitoring Year 4 (2022) DIMS Comments
Major Hill Mitigation Site (DMS #100015)
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002, Alamance County
Contract No. 100015
Comments Received (Black Text) & Responses (Blue Text)
General-
1. IRS may elect to remove page 29-32 because this data was presented in last year's report. Fine to leave in if
wanted.
Response: We acknowledge MY4 is an off year for stream monitoring and data represented in .pdf pages
29-32 (Tables 7A-7B. Baseline Stream Data Summary) was provided in the 2021 MY3 Report. For table
number consistency between monitoring years, IRS has elected to included keep all Appendix C, Stream
Geomorphology Data, in the 2022 MY4 Report.
2. VP 1 and 4 are listed as not meeting success for MY4 in the stream portion of report CCPV. Please note that
there are no MY4 success for the stream portion. It also appears that VP1 has 445 stems, which may meet
IRT criteria for MY3 and MY5 depending on if the volunteers are in the planting list. IRS may leave as -is, but
please note comment for credit release purposes.
Response: Noted, thank you.
Digital Comments:
1. The report indicates invasive species treatment in 2022 but no area of concern is noted on the CCPV or in
the visual assessment table. Please verify the visual assessment was correct at the time of report
submission.
Response: The visual assessment is correct. Footnote 4 of Table 6 (Vegetation Conditions Assessment
states,
"The list of high concern species are those with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody
stems in the short-term (e.g. monitoring period or shortly thereafter) or affect the community structure for
existing, more established tree/shrub stands over timeframes that are slightly longer (e.g. 1-2 decades).
The low/moderate concern group are those species that generally do not have this capacity over the
timeframes discussed and therefore are not expected to be mapped with regularity, but can be mapped, if
in the judgement of the observer their coverage, density or distribution is suppressing the viability, density,
or growth of planted woody stems.
The current level of invasive species on -site do no meet the criteria of "high concern" nor "low/moderate
concern." Species treated are sporadic in nature, and do not pose a threat to young woody stems in the
short-term nor suppressing the viability, density or growth of planted woody stems.
2. Water quality summary data is included in the report, but no data was submitted in year 4; if applicable
please provide missing data.
Response: Water quality data is measured onsite, using digital meters, and readings are recorded by hand.
Data is then entered directly into Table 9 of the document, and therefore, no raw data exists.
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492

Major Hill Year 4, 2022 Monitoring Summary
General Notes
• No encroachment was identified in Year 4.
• No evidence of nuisance animal activity (i.e., beaver, heavy deer browsing, etc.) was observed.
Streams
• Stream measurements were not performed in year 4 (2022) in accordance with the monitoring
schedule.
• Across the Site, all in -stream structures are intact and functioning as designed. The channel
geometry compares favorably with the proposed conditions outlined in the Detailed Restoration
Plan and as constructed. No stream areas of concern were identified during year 4 (2022)
monitoring. Stream visual assessment results are documented in Tables 5A-5C (Appendix B). Tables
for year 3 (2021) data and annual quantitative assessments are included in Appendix C.
• Two bankfull events were documented during year 4 (2022), monitoring for ten bankfull events to
date during the monitoring period (Table 11, Appendix D).
• Channel formation was evident in UT 1 during year 4 (2022). The two streamflow gauges and trail
cameras recorded 149 and 216 consecutive streamflow days (Tables 10A-B, Appendix D)
Wetlands
• All six groundwater gauges met success for the Year 4 (2022) monitoring period. Wetland
hydrology data is in Appendix D.
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)
Gauge
Year 1 (2019)
Year 2 (2020)
Year 3 (2021)
Year 4 (2022)
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
(2023)
(2024)
(2025)
No/14 days*
Yes/136 days
Yes/74 days
Yes/93 days
1
6.0 percent
57.9 percent
31.4 percent
39.4 percent
No/19 days*
No/19 days
No/21 days
Yes/44 days
2
8.1 percent
8.0 percent
8.9 percent
18.6 percent
Yes/25 days
Yes/235 days
Yes/226 days
Yes/204 days
3
10.6 percent
100 percent
95.8 percent
86.4 percent
Yes/34 days
Yes/72 days
Yes/60 days
Yes/155 days
4
14.5 percent
30.5 percent
25.4 percent
65.7 percent
Yes/119 days
Yes/135 days
Yes/53 days
Yes/77 days
5
50.6 percent
57.4 percent
22.5 percent
32.6 percent
Yes/77 days
Yes/44 days
Yes/80 days
Yes/81 days
6
32.8 percent
18.7 percent
33.9 percent
34.3 percent
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Executive Summary
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Vegetation
• According to the mitigation monitoring plan, vegetation monitoring was not scheduled to take
place during Year 4 (2022). However, vegetation measurements were cataloged for riparian buffer
monitoring. These results are included in the Riparian Buffer Year 4 (2022) Monitoring Report
(Appendix F) and indicate an average of 364 planted stems per acre (excluding live -stakes) for the
eight permanent plots and 405 total stems per acre across the Site, including three temporary
plots. No vegetation areas of concern were observed during year 4 (2022). Vegetation visual
assessment results are documented in Table 6 (Appendix B).
MY 4 (2022) Monitoring Activity and Reporting History
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
MY 4 (2022) Vegetation Data Collection
NA
MY 4 (2022) Stream Data Collection
NA
MY 4 (2022) Monitoring Report
October 2022
February 2023
Site Maintenance Report (2022)
Invasive Species Work
Maintenance work
07/08/2022
Johnson Grass, Cattail, Tree -of -Heaven, Privet,
None
Multiflora Rose
2023 Planned Vegetation Maintenance
Restoration Systems continues to monitor fescue throughout the Site. Based on permanent and random
vegetation monitoring plots and visual observations, planted stems are establishing within areas where
fescue was a concern. Currently, no additional planting or fescue specific herbicide treatments are
proposed.
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Executive Summary
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

MONITORING REPORT
2022 (Year 4)
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100015
Full Delivery Contract No. 7193
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01472
DWR No. 17-0921
RFP No. 16-006990
Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030002
Data Collection: January 2022 — October 2022
Submission: February 2023
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652
Prepared by:
And
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Contact: Worth Creech
919-755-9490(phone)
919-755-9492(fax)
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Contact: Grant Lewis
919-215-1693(phone)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY..................................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Goals & Objectives...................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project Background.................................................................................................................. 3
1.3 Project Components and Structure......................................................................................... 3
1.4 Success Criteria........................................................................................................................3
1.4.1 Stream Success Criteria..............................................................................................4
1.4.2 Wetland Success Criteria............................................................................................ 4
1.4.3 Vegetation Success Criteria........................................................................................ 4
2.0 METHODS................................................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Stream Monitoring.................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Wetland Monitoring................................................................................................................ 6
2.3 Vegetation Monitoring............................................................................................................ 6
3.0 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................8
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Background Tables
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Units
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Attributes
Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A-5C. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Appendix C. Stream Geomorphology Data
Tables 7A-7B. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Tables 8A-8D. Monitoring Data (Dimensional Morphology Summary & Stream Reach Data Summary)
Table 9. Water Quality Data
Appendix D. Hydrology Data
Table 10A. UT1 Upstream Channel Evidence
Table 10B. UT1 Downstream Channel Evidence
Stream Gauge Graphs
Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Soil Temperature Graph
Figure E1. 30-70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Appendix E. Riparian Buffer MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Alamance County, North Carolina
Table of Contents i
Restoration Systems, LLC
February 2023

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
Restoration Systems, LLC has established the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (Site).
1.1 Project Goals & Objectives
Project goals are based on the Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report (NCEEP 2009)
and on -site data collection of channel morphology and function observed during field investigations. The
Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03030002050050. The RBRP report documents
benthic ratings vary between "Fair" and "Good -Fair" possibly due to cattle, dairy, and poultry operations.
The project is not located in a Regional or Local Watershed Planning Area; however, RBRP goals are
addressed by project activities as follows with Site specific information following the RBRP goals in
parenthesis.
1. Reduce and control sediment inputs (reduction of 10.0 tons/year after mitigation is complete);
2. Reduce and manage nutrient inputs (livestock removal from streams, elimination of fertilizer
application, and marsh treatment areas may result in a direct reduction of 852.4 pounds of
nitrogen and 70.6 pounds of phosphorus per year);
3. Protect and augment designated natural heritage areas.
Site -specific mitigation goals and objectives were developed through the use of the North Carolina Stream
Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) analyses of
existing and reference stream systems at the Site (NC SFAT 2015 and NC WFAT 2010) (see Table 1).
Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions. Goals. and Obiectives
Targeted Functions
Goals
Objectives
Compatibility of Success Criteria
(1) HYDROLOGY
(2) Flood Flow (Floodplain
• BHR not to exceed 1.2
Access)
• Attenuate flood flow
• Construct new channel at historic
floodplain elevation to restore
•Document four overbank
(3) Streamside Area
across the Site.
events in separate monitoring
Attenuation
• Minimize
overbank flows and restore
jurisdictional wetlands
years
(4) Wooded Riparian
downstream
•Livestock excluded from the
Buffer
flooding to the
• Plant woody riparian buffer
a Remove livestock
easement
maximum extent
• Attain Wetland Hydrology
e Deep rip floodplain soils to
possible.
Success Criteria
reduce compaction and increase
• Connect streams to
• Attain Vegetation Success
(4) Microtopography
soil surface roughness
functioning wetland
Criteria
a protect riparian buffers with a
systems.
• Conservation Easement
perpetual conservation easement
recorded
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 1
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

stream/wetiana i argetea Functions, ums, ana unjectives (continuea)
Targeted Functions Goals Objectives Compatibility of Success Criteria
(1) HYDROLOGY (Continued)
(3) Stream Stability
1 (4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(1) WATER QUALITY
(2) Streamside Area
Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant
Filtration
1 (3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(1) HABITAT
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -Stream Habitat
(2) Streamside Habitat
(3) Streamside Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
Wetland Landscape Patch
Structure
Wetland Vegetation
Composition
• Increase stream
stability within the
Site so that channels
are neither
aggrading nor
degrading.
• Remove direct
nutrient and
pollutant inputs
from the Site and
reduce contributions
to downstream
waters.
• Improve instream
and streamside
habitat.
• Construct channels with proper
pattern, dimension, and
longitudinal profile
• Remove livestock
• Construct stable channels with
cobble/gravel substrate
• Plant woody riparian buffer
• Remove livestock and reduce
agricultural land/inputs
• Install marsh treatment areas
• Plant woody riparian buffer
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional
wetlands adjacent to Site streams
• Construct stable channels with
cobble/gravel substrate
• Plant woody riparian buffer to
provide organic matter and shade
• Construct new channel at historic
floodplain elevation to restore
overbank flows and plant woody
riparian buffer
• Protect riparian buffers with a
perpetual conservation easement
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional
wetlands adjacent to Site streams
• Cross-section measurements
indicate a stable channel with
cobble/gravel substrate
• Visual documentation of stable
channels and structures
• BHR not to exceed 1.2
• ER of 1.4 or greater
• < 10% change in BHR and ER in
any given year
• Livestock excluded from the
easement
• Attain Vegetation Success
Criteria
• Livestock excluded from the
easement
• Attain Wetland Hydrology
Success Criteria
• Attain Vegetation Success
Criteria
• Cross-section measurement
indicate a stable channel with
cobble/gravel substrate
• Visual documentation of stable
channels and in -stream
structures.
• Attain Wetland Hydrology
Success Criteria
• Attain Vegetation Success
Criteria
• Conservation Easement
recorded
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 2
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

1.2 Project Background
The Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site") encompasses 16.7
acres along warm water, unnamed tributaries to Pine Hill Branch. The Site is located approximately 3.5
miles southeast of Snow Camp and 6 miles north of Silk Hope in southern Alamance County near the
Chatham County line (Figure 1, Appendix B).
Before construction, Site land use consisted of disturbed forest and agricultural land used for livestock
grazing and hay production. Livestock had unrestricted access to Site streams, which had been relocated
to the floodplain edge, ditched, impounded, trampled by livestock, eroded vertically and laterally, and
received extensive sediment and nutrient inputs from stream banks and adjacent pastures. Approximately
60 percent of the stream channel was degraded, contributing to sediment export from the Site resulting
from mechanical processes such as livestock hoof shear. In addition, streamside wetlands were cleared
and drained by channel downcutting and land uses. Preconstruction Site conditions resulted in degraded
water quality, a loss of aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment retention, and unstable channel
characteristics (loss of horizontal flow vectors that maintain pools and an increase in erosive forces to
channel bed and banks). Site restoration activities restored riffle -pool morphology aiding in energy
dissipation, increased aquatic habitat, stabilized channel banks, and will greatly reduce sediment loss from
channel banks.
1.3 Project Components and Structure
Site restoration activities generated 3058 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and 0.76 Wetland Mitigation
Units (WMUs) as the result of the following:
• 1738 linear feet of Priority I stream restoration
• 3299 linear feet of stream enhancement (Level II)
• 0.54 acre of riparian wetland restoration
• 0.44 acre of riparian wetland enhancement
Additional activities that occurred at the Site included the following.
• Installation of a marsh treatment area to treat drainage prior to entering UT1.
• Fencing the entire conservation easement by leaving some pre-existing fencing, removing fencing,
and installing additional fencing.
• Planting 8.11 acres of the Site with 8600 stems (planted species and densities by zone are included
in Table 5 [Appendix Q.
• Removing a small, abandoned farm pond by 1) notching the dam to dewater; 2) removal of the
dam to the elevation of the adjacent floodplain; 3) excavating sediment that was unsuitable for
channel bank construction; 4) backfilling areas of sediment removed with soil suitable for channel
construction (as necessary); 5) excavation of the design channel, 6) stabilization of the channel
with coir matting, seed, and mulch; and 7) installation of structures.
Site design was completed in February 2018. Construction started on July 25, 2018 and ended within a
final walkthrough on September 6, 2018. The Site was planted in December 2018-January 2019.
Completed project activities, reporting history, completion dates, project contacts, and background
information are summarized in Tables 1-4 (Appendix A).
1.4 Success Criteria
Project success criteria have been established per the October 24, 2016, NC Interagency Review Team
Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 3
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

1.4.1 Stream Success Criteria
From a mitigation perspective, several goals and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated by
restoration activities without direct measurement. Other goals and objectives will be considered
successful upon achieving vegetation success criteria. The following summarizes stream success criteria.
• All streams must maintain an Ordinary High -Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05-05.
• Continuous surface flow must be documented each year for at least 30 consecutive days.
• Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured cross-section.
• Entrenchment ratio (ER) must be no less than 1.4 at any measured riffle cross-section.
• BHR and ER at any measure riffle cross-section should not change by more than 10% from
baseline condition during any given monitoring period.
• The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met
through four separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring
years 1-7.
1.4.2 Wetland Success Criteria
The following summarizes wetland success criteria.
• Saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum, 10
percent of the growing season during average climatic conditions
According to the Soil Survey of Alamance County, the growing season for Alamance County is from April
17 — October 22 (USDA 1960). However, the start date for the growing season is not typical for the
Piedmont region; therefore, for this project, hydrologic success will be determined using data from March
1 - October 22 to represent the period of biological activity more accurately. Based on growing season
information outlined in the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (USACE 2010), this will be confirmed annually by soil
temperatures exceeding 41 degrees Fahrenheit at 12 inches depth and/or bud burst.
Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for 10 percent of the monitored
period (March 1-October 22) during average climatic conditions. During years with atypical climatic
conditions, groundwater gauges in reference wetlands may be used for comparison to the Site; however,
reference gauge data will not be tied to success criteria. These areas are expected to support hydrophytic
vegetation. A jurisdictional determination will be performed if wetland parameters are marginal as
indicated by vegetation and/or hydrology monitoring. The jurisdictional determination will not supersede
monitoring data or overturn a failure in meeting success criteria; however, this information may be used
by the IRT, at the discretion of the IRT, to make a final determination on Site wetland re-establishment
success.
1.4.3 Vegetation Success Criteria
The following summarizes vegetation success criteria.
• Within planted portions of the Site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at year 3;
and a minimum of 210 stems per acre must be present at year 7.
• Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5, and 10 feet in height at year 7.
• Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved planting
list for the Site; natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on a case -
by -case basis.
• Any single species can only account for 50% of the required stems within any vegetation plot.
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 4
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

2.0 METHODS
Monitoring requirements and success criteria outlined in this plan follow the October 24, 2016 NC
Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc. Annual monitoring reports of the data
collected will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December 31 of each
monitoring year data is collected. The monitoring schedule is summarized in the following table.
Monitorine Schedule
Resource
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Streams
X
X
X
X
X
Wetlands
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Vegetation
X
X
X
X
X
Macroinvertebrates
X
X
X
Water Quality
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Visual Assessment
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Report Submittal
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2.1 Stream Monitoring
Annual monitoring will include development of channel cross -sections and substrate on riffles and pools
(Figure 2, Appendix B). Data presented in graphic and tabular format include 1) cross -sectional area, 2)
bankfull width, 3) average depth, 4) maximum depth, and 5) width -to -depth ratio. Longitudinal profiles
were monitored for asbuilt; however, profiles will not be measured unless monitoring demonstrates
channel bank or bed instability. In this case, longitudinal profiles may be required by the USACE along
reaches of concern to track changes and demonstrate stability.
Stream Monitorine Summary
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Asbuilt (unless otherwise
All restored stream
Stream Profile
Full longitudinal survey
required)
channels
Stream Dimension
Cross -sections
Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7
10 cross -sections
All restored stream
Visual Assessments
Yearly
channels
Only if instability is
Channel Stability
Bank Pins
Yearly
documented during
monitoring
Only if instability is
Additional Cross -sections
Yearly
documented during
monitoring
Two gauges on UT1
Continuous monitoring
Continuous recording
(upstream and
Stream Hydrology
water level gauges and/or
through monitoring
downstream) and one
trail camera
period
trail camera on UT1
(downstream)
Water Quality
Water samples
Yearly
Two locations
Macroinvertebrates
Qual 4 sampling
Years 3, 5, and 7
Two locations
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Alamance County, North Carolina
page 5
Restoration Systems, LLC
February 2023

Stream measurements were not performed in year 4 (2022) in accordance with the monitoring schedule.
Across the Site, all in -stream structures are intact and functioning as designed. The channel geometry
compares favorably with the proposed conditions outlined in the Detailed Restoration Plan and as
constructed. No stream areas of concern were identified during year 4 (2022) monitoring. Stream visual
assessment results are documented in Tables 5A-5C (Appendix B). Tables for year 3 (2021) data and annual
quantitative assessments are included in Appendix C.
2.2 Wetland Monitoring
Six groundwater monitoring gauges were installed within the drained pond area and the remaining
wetland restoration areas to take measurements after hydrological modifications were performed at the
Site (Figure 2, Appendix B). Hydrological sampling will continue throughout the entire year at intervals
necessary to satisfy jurisdictional hydrology success criteria. In addition, an on -site rain gauge will
document rainfall data for comparison of groundwater conditions with extended drought conditions, and
a trail camera was installed to confirm overbank flooding events. Growing season soil temperatures will
also be documented using a continuously logging soil temperature probe, this data will be provided with
wetland hydrology data.
Wetland Monitoring Summary
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Data Collected
6 gauges spread
Soil temperature at the
Wetland
Groundwater
As -built, Years 1, 2,
throughout
beginning of each monitoring
Restoration
gauges
3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
restored
period, groundwater and rain
wetlands
data for each monitoring period
Summary of Monitoring Period/Hydrology Success Criteria by Year
Soil Temperatures/Date Bud
Monitoring Period Used for
10 Percent of
Year
Burst Documented
Determining Success
Monitoring Period
2019 (Year 1)
March 1, 2019
March 1-October 22
24 Days
(235 days)
2020 (Year 2)
March 1, 2020
March 1-October 22
24 Days
(235 days)
2021 (Year 3)
March 1, 2021
March 1- October 22
24 Days
(236 days)
2022 (Year 4)
March 1, 2022*
March 1- October 22
24 Days
(236 days)
*An on -site soil temperature data logger installed 12 inches below the ground surface read 46.13°F on March 1, and the soil
temperature remained well -above 41OF thereafter. Additionally, bud bursts were documented on February 28.
All six groundwater gauges met success criteria for the year 4 (2022) monitoring period. Year 4 (2022)
groundwater gauge data and graphs are located in Appendix D.
2.3 Vegetation Monitoring
Planting occurred in December 2018-January 2019 within 8.11 acres of the Site and included 8600 stems.
After planting was completed, an initial evaluation was performed to verify planting methods and to
determine initial species composition and density.
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 6
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

In early January 2020, a winter -time visual assessment of the Site was performed, and it was determined
that although Year 1 (2019) vegetation data, including random transects, showed a high density of trees,
a light supplemental planting would help ensure the long-term success in several areas. On January 31,
2020, three areas that visually exhibited low stem density and/or poor vigor were supplementally planted
(Figure 2, Appendix B). During the supplemental planting effort, 370 stems were planted across 1.20 acres
(approximately 300 stems per acre). As the planting was designated for visual purposes and was not an
effort to increase stem density data, no stems were planted within permanent vegetation plots.
Preparation included the application of 100 Ibs of lime, 50 Ibs of fertilizer, and 3 Ibs of seed to stabilize
bare areas. The following table lists species included in the supplemental planting list.
2020 Supplemental Planting Species List
Species
Number of Stems
Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata)@
20
Chinkapin (Castanea pumila)@
20
Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis)'
50
Hawthorn (Crataegus marshallii)@
20
Crab Apple (Malus angustifolia)@
50
Red Mulberry (Morus rubra)@
100
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)*
50
Shumard Oak (Quercus shumardii)@
50
Total
370
* Included in mitigation plan planting list
Not included in mitigation plan planting list but meets target community
Species selected based on lack of availability of mitigation plan planting list and target community species
In addition, three random vegetation transects (MY2 2000 Random Vegetation Transects) were measured
after planting was complete to determine that those areas met the required stem densities; results
indicated a range of stems per acre of 364 to 1012.
An assessment was made during early Fall 2018 to treat fescue within the Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest
planting zones to reduce competition with planted stems. Treatment was conducted in December 2018.
Treatments of invasive plant species continued during 2019 throughout the Site. Japanese Stiltgrass and
Tree -of -Heaven were high priorities during the 2019 invasive treatment season. Restoration Systems will
continue to treat and monitor the Site for invasive species throughout the monitoring period.
Site Maintenance Report (2022)
Invasive Species Work
Maintenance work
07/08/2022
Johnson Grass, Cattail, Tree -of -Heaven, Privet,
None
Multiflora Rose
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 7
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

2023 Planned Vegetation Maintenance
Restoration Systems continues to monitor fescue throughout the Site. Based on permanent and random
vegetation monitoring plots and visual observations, planted stems are establishing within areas where
fescue was a concern. Currently, no additional planting or fescue specific herbicide treatments are
proposed.
Vegetation Monitorine Summary
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Data Collected
Permanent
Species, height,
vegetation plots
As -built, Years 1, 2,
8 plots spread
location, planted
0.0247 acre (100
3, 5, and 7
across the Site
volunteer, and age e
Vegetation
square meters) in size
establishment and
vigor
Random vegetation
plots, 0.0247 acre
As -built, Years 1, 2,
2 plots randomly
Species and height
(100 square meters)
3, 5, and 7
selected each year
in size
During quantitative vegetation sampling, 8 sample plots (10-meter by 10-meter) were installed within the
Site as per guidelines established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al.
2008). According to the mitigation monitoring plan, vegetation monitoring was not scheduled to take
place during Year 4 (2022). However, vegetation measurements were cataloged for riparian buffer
monitoring. These results are included in the Riparian Buffer Year 4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Appendix
F) and indicate an average of 364 planted stems per acre (excluding live -stakes) for the eight permanent
plots and 405 total stems per acre across the Site, including three temporary plots. No vegetation areas
of concern were observed during year 4 (2022). Vegetation visual assessment results are documented in
Table 6 (Appendix B).
3.0 REFERENCES
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B.
Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. U.S.
Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation.
Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem
Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring
Guidelines. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005. Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
Available: https:// https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/basin-
planning/water-resource-plans/cape-fear-2005 [December 8, 2016]. North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 8
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016. Standard Operating Procedures for Collection
and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Version 5.0). (online). Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeg/Water%20QuaIity/Environmental%2OSciences/BAU/NCDWRMacroin
vertebrate-SOP-February%202016 final.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2009. Small Streams Biocriteria Development.
Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file? u uid=2d54ad23-0345-4d6e-
82fd-04005f48eaa7&gro u p Id=38364
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2009. Cape Fear River Basin Restoration
Priorities 2009 (online). Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=
864e82e8-725c-415e-8ed9-c72dfcb55012&groupld=60329
North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment Method
(NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1.
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland Assessment Method
(NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Simon A, Hupp CR. 1986. Geomorphic and Vegetative Recovery Processes Along Modified Tennessee
Streams: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Disturbed Fluvial Systems. Forest Hydrology and
Watershed Management. IAHS-AISH Publ.167.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2016. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [August 2016].
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1960. Soil Survey of Alamance County, North Carolina.
Soil Conservation Service.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2021. Natural Resources Conservation Service National
Weather and Climate Center. AgACIS Climate Data. Burlington Regional Airport WETS Station
(online). Available: http://agacis.rcc-acis.org
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) page 9
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Appendix A
Background Tables
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Units
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Attributes Table
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

O U -0C
� O a) O m m
�
aL) O Y �;
v +O'
CO(a 7
M
°a m-0
U
r_
a)
-0E
o m O
a)C
`aJ m N
Of
O
O C n+ L Q uo
6
W
U
auo UC0 v � m
0 �
c
�
-0 ,J .N E a)
C N an `�°
—�
O o O
6
>>a)
aJ
U U a) U
v
00 U O
C
O (n
}
m
�
�
N
d4 w
lD
M
lD
M
of
N
}
O
O
U
C
O
w m
ul
V1
Lq
a+ 1=
N
N
N
`�
N
C
O C
C O C
O 'a+ N
i
^
M
N
L.0
m
t�D
m
O
m
M
O
00
Vr1
,�
00 O
O
O
W cr
a)
N
N
C
C
C
C
C:
O
O
O
O
a!
ma)�
__
__
m
__
cu
LO
E
a)
O a)
O
W
W
O
W
U
C
IA J
N
N
N
m
�'
OC
OC
OC
C
W
� al
ice+
al
U m ma)
^
00
0
L ai
w
O
�
m
M
m
u.
r-O a
N
N
O
O
O LL
U
C
O
bQ
00
m m m
m
w
m
m
,r)
'' L
'a—�+ a G u
w
O
N
O
O
LLa
am ai
aa)
r_ bQ bQ
m
m
r-
00
N
Zm
N
m
m
m
m 0 i
W
0000
O
—,
M
N
O
o a LL
aJ
O
00
\
T
�
1
0+
to
01
+
tluD
E ~
.O
L r-O
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
m C
ma)
m C
m a)
.O
Y z 1°
o
m
O
ao
O
S- :
S-
(n m
o
m
o
�o
O
oc oc
oc oc
H
+
+
+
+
+
o`
-A
o
0
CD
0
_0
_0
s
—A
—A
N
N
m
cu
cu
m
Z)
Z)
Z)
Z)
Z)
a>1
a>1

a
al
m
T
m
p
U
v
C
i +
O
C
f6
ELO
�
Lr)
O
iF
O
U
c
^y
O
pp
Z
m
N
O
=�
a_+
O
w
C
C
L
00
x
m
M
Ol
C
M
N
O
E
m
w
N
E
m
al
_ay
W
L
W
—
C
aJ
>
>
J
)
C
a)aJ
o
c
+�
E
O
C
a)
ar
a)
U
i
O
E
C
O
N
a,
a)
n3
-r-
cl�
u
C
w
C
w
Y
C
(a
v
C
O
C
O
VI
O
C
�
O L
U �
O
VI C
C
O +
Q
N
O ba
C
N N
Ala N
C 0
N U
N
O aJ
L C
U C
fa �
O U
L
�-. C 0 �
Cal a)
C
a1 �
N 0
ca O
N
C N
+ O a1
O ca aJ
aJ 7
6 U
N
I U �
O w
-0 C:
C
L �
N U �
O C C
O� O aJ
L
CL
oa
0
O
C
C
L
O -O
Fu C
aJ O
E
U -c- -O
C +' a)
to C: -0
t C n3
L
a) UO
a)
E -0
� U
� C 000
0 N
� O
0 C X
O �
a! O O
a
L a)) L
(a a! U
aJ � ca
C + ap
n O
-O O
(V C >'
n3
� ate'
En3
.2 v E
o
-O N L
M Q
Q
a � a
0
Y
�
O
O
L
CJ
�
O
l0
n
n
O
iLn
O
M
T
;
m
O
E
E
7
i�
i
IA
m
a"
w
f0
O
L
w
E
a
%
m
L
O
c�
w
v
v
C
C
a
m
Q
R

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History - Major Hill Restoration Site
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Technical Proposal Issue Date (RFP No. 16-006990)
September 16, 2016
September 16, 2016
Institution Date (NCDMS Contract No. 7193)
May 22, 2017
Mitigation Plan
February 2018
404 Permit Date
June 28, 2018
Construction Plans
July 2018
Site Construction
--
July 25-September 6, 2018
Planting
--
December 2018-January 2019
Asbuilt Stream Data Collection
September 19, 2018
--
Asbuilt Vegetation Data Collection
January 8, 2019
Asbuilt Baseline Monitoring Report
March 2019
MY1 (2019) Vegetation Data Collection
September 9, 2019
MY1 (2019) Stream Data Collection
September 10, 2019
--
MY1 (2019) Monitoring Report
October 2019
November 2019
Supplemental Planting
January 31, 2020
MY 2 (2020) Vegetation Data Collection
October 2020
--
MY 2 (2020) Stream Data Collection
July/October 2020
--
MY 2 (2020) Monitoring Report
October 2020
November 2020
MY 3 (2021) Vegetation Data Collection
October 2021
--
MY 3 (2021) Stream Data Collection
March 2021
MY 3 (2021) Monitoring Report
October 2021
January 2022
MY 4 (2022) Vegetation Data Collection
NA
MY 4 (2022) Stream Data Collection
NA
MY 4 (2022) Monitoring Report
October 2022
February 2023
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Table 3. Project Contacts Table - Major Hill Restoration Site
Full Delivery Provider
Construction Contractor
Restoration Systems
Land Mechanic Designs
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
780 Landmark Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Willow Spring, NC 27592
Worth Creech 919-755-9490
Lloyd Glover 919-639-6132
Designer
Planting Contractor
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Carolina Silvics, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
908 Indian Trail Road
Raleigh, NC 27603
Edenton, NC 27932
Grant Lewis 919-215-1693
Mary -Margaret McKinney 252-482-8491
Construction Plans and Sediment and
Asbuilt Surveyor
Erosion Control Plans
K2 Design Group
Sungate Design Group, PA
5688 US Highway 70 East
915 Jones Franklin Road
Goldsboro, NC 27534
Raleigh, NC 27606
John Rudolph 919-751-0075
Joshua G. Dalton, PE 919-859-2243
Baseline & Monitoring Data Collection
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis 919-215-1693
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Table 4. Project Attribute Table - Major Hill Restoration Site
Project Information
Project Name
Major Hill Restoration Site
Project County
Alamance County, North Carolina
Project Area (acres)
16.7
Project Coordinates (latitude & latitude)
35.873206,-79.360906
Planted Area (acres)
8.11
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
Project River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS HUC for Project (14-digit)
03030002050050
NCDWR Sub -basin for Project
03-06-04
Project Drainage Area (acres)
17 to 445
Percentage of Project Drainage Area that is Impervious
<2%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Managed Herbaceous Cover & Mixed Upland Hardwoods
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
UT 1
UT 2
UT 3
Length of reach (linear feet)
2796
207
2298
Valley Classification & Confinement
Alluvial, moderately confined to confined
Drainage Area (acres)
71.7
17.2
444.7
NCDWR Stream ID Score
20.25 — 33.5
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Intermittent/Perennial
Intermittent
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
WS-V, NSW
Existing Morphological Description (Rosgen 1996)
Cg5
C4/5
C3
Proposed Stream Classification (Rosgen 1996)
C/E 4
C4/5
C3
Existing Evolutionary Stage (Simon and Hupp 1986)
III/IV
III
I
Underlying Mapped Soils
Efland silt loam, Georgeville silt loam, Herndon silt loam, Orange silt
loam, Worsham sandy loam, Local Alluvial Land
Drainage Class
Well -drained, well -drained, well -drained, poorly drained, well -drained,
poorly drained, respectively
Hydric Soil Status
Nonhydric, nonhydric, nonhydric, nonhydric, hydric, hydric,
respectively
Slope
0.0241
0.0256
0.0130
FEMA Classification
NA
Native Vegetation Community
Piedmont Alluvial Forest/Dry-Mesic Oak -Hickory Forest
Watershed Land Use/Land Cover (Site)
45% forest, 35% agricultural land, 20% low density
residential/impervious surface
Watershed Land Use/Land Cover (Cedarock Reference
Channel)
65% forest, 30% agricultural land, <5% low density
residential/impervious surface
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation
<5%
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Alamance County, North Carolina
Appendix
Restoration Systems, LLC
February 2023

Table 4. Proiect Attribute Table - Maim Hill Restoration Site (Continued)
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetlands
Wetland acreage
0.54 acre drained or impounded & 0.44 acre degraded
Wetland Type
Riparian riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Worsham and Local Alluvial Land
Drainage Class
Poorly drained
Hydric Soil Status
Hydric
Source of Hydrology
Groundwater, stream overbank
Hydrologic Impairment
Incised streams, compacted soils, livestock
Native Vegetation Community
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest
% Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation
<5%
Restoration Method
Hydrologic, vegetative
Enhancement Method
Vegetative
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A-5B. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

O O
Y oN O o
- _ JZpfA Y FZ > o LU
ZZ 1. UO O of
I a J C� -) Q z
o & c�
j( W cmi U n o
Q � O z IL
m01 o co 26 o
a a` Q o o U) a
N \\ `
CY
a°'
t9 U
;off 3a
_ o - ♦` '- Peoa.���WuEi A o
oawo (OCo
�m E
cm
/�
!y a1y r C N 0
JE
�N
N N C N ad+ ad+
��, o ........ r
CL
CL
I
SoU�h F ork Road
I r''-J'� • �_- ehe�
Ok�'•
n

_
/
�
$
}}
\ �\ 3:
/
/ >
\f
�2
\j0
0
LL
\f
�0
)j0
ESRo
]V >
� } \
/
/
/ /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
®2;
0 a)
0
f
c
o
=
_
=
o
/ /
t23
=
o
])2
%
9
9
9
9
3
a
a
<
<
/]/
z
E2) a
>>>>>
a
m
m
m
m
]��V)
C;
CO
Za
f2\
§
/
)
;
)/
k
{
/
=
2
\
!
:
)
»
§
{ /
|
_
=
2
:
J
\
2
LLI
z
}
2
=
\ {
\
\\
\
\
\
k\
)\j\\
)
)(
-a9�
97
uj
:
»
-
§ J
:a!(
_
$
_
)\
|
)
\
)
-_
-
2 3
{
0 LA
okj
2
\)
/
�
\ \
�

\
km
_
/
�
\ �\ 3:
/
/ >
\f
�2
\j0
0
LL
\f
�0
)j0
ESRo
]V >
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
w
7 } \
/
/
/ /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
i i i i i
®2;
0 a)
0
f
c
o
=
_
=
o
/ /
t23
])2
/]/
m
a
m
m
a
o
o
0
o
0
z
R & / �
E)) a
m
a
m
m
a
o
o
0
o
0
]��V)
C;
/
/
=
2
\
!
)
»
§
{ /
|
_
=
2
:
J
-
0{
-
\
2
15
b !
f )
}
2
=
\ {
\
\\
2
-
_
\
\
\
\
k\
,$
w
CO000
)
)(
-a9�
\
-
2
0
-
:a!(
$
20
/
)
\
)
q
-
3 2
w\
w
w u
{
j
w
w
a
}
okj
2
/
Uj
�\)
m

a
d
6
C d
O
O
O
O
O
O
c m V
O
O
O
O
O
O
a Q
N N
a m
O
O
O
O
O
O
E
O
O
O
O Q
U
O C
O
dF
E o
O
O
O
O
O
O
' a
z
a °
m
O
F.-
m
O
F
U •�
o
0
0
0
>
U
is
0
7
E
EL M
I
U
m
U
m
U
m
m d
N
F-
O
O
O
V)
C
O
m
2T
O
V
V)
V
sm
m
�
N
0
d'
t
Q
Ei
+T
d
O
`O
Vi
V)
m
�
E
c
m
O
a
O
Q
y
N
d
O
m
E
3
0
m
y
m
m
O
J
J
d
Q
>
N
m
M
C N
O E y
o
0
o � U
O
O
O
O
wQ
N N
d y
O
O
E
O Q
U
O U,
�O
E O
O
O
z a
C
> •O
U •—
o
0
U y
0
m o
t
IL
Ln
O
m
O
°
V)
C
O
�
O
O
0
z
z
M'n
`r
C
O
U
s
U
U
O
O
0
y
(
m
U
m
U
c
w
C
O
C
m
(
E
d
y
c
m
O
N
w
>
v
ui
ai
o
) c o 0 o v, o-o 0
Cc)m L L L 9 C L
�
Y
.0
m U m
V°I VI
� p
O
a) O O
p E T C)m "o U E "O
Cc)p 'V
°
C)C
0 C)
o 9 c N— o E
L
c o
O m O N O VI
C
�O
YO
O E C N U
9 C N t` tp_ O
O O O O_
O
_ N p
_ U
-p ' � VI 3: p
�
�
-otOaEY�moo�
C
p x `7 O
m
O
E p` N E -p
Ql m m > C Ql
.O
p
�QO-�a�i�"o
ma
cc
U
E O L E co N
N
E
9�oE
9
o
a�
U-oo
o�oDai�am=m
00
O
o ° o
N-
O O m C L O
" f0 ° � N
—
°J5�p9
�
oEa
O U t`0 O 9 oU'-
m c
�
m� O C jp VI m O U
O m
L m E
E
p
m
p
N
O C m 9 T i p
C
O_ O
U
E
m c m U v a
.�
�o
�`•� mo
X
— O
'T
L O C Y m VI "O O
c)�p
N m> O "O Ql T cc O- O
m� > Ql
N L
°
mC E
o
Y m > Y
oo-pmE `oNc=
p-
C
—_ 9ccomm
p� m� o—_ cmE � c
N
m
Ql N
O
m O O > N U L
C O O O
`J
m
U m'..
O
� m
O m +-• O_ O L jp Q O
tU0 M
°_.'j tYUO O O
Uo
�E�,om �._° •
Ql T
f0 O
— v
E C Q O p VI 0 9
"0 0
VI O
p E° O
-p U "°O U o H m t0
E
O E
Q�L O O m
O°
-O -
cm O O O O t`p
VI `•
O p
= C m> O D U> N C
O
�� O
O'cc
=,
Os
12
o
Vi .> L co)>,Ql� O-
E
p 0
a-
f0 O t0 0 9 O
Q
"mcc
c o>
ff O N O c
O T O
c c
p 0
.O o O O O
O O_ 9 N O O E L O- >,O
U p
N
c E o 0 mIEON m
c O O O V m
L O
L O
O O U M O N O
�
VI N
m
O �j
O C
p O
U O
p O0 O x c >T c.
c--E, O j o m U
E o
U
O
ca p9c Im>pcp
C Fm= —
O
t°0 O p
T O
O
p m m x
"O jp N H N O
s m
VI
U m E p O O
m T O
O L
m O ` C
Y m
T to,m c)u
aO
O U
m
o m0 N E N U O
>cc
��
��
o
> �����c)
w v
w o
c) m E a a°
I O I
II �
II O t0 p O O O O t0 � t0

Appendix C
Stream Geomorphology Data
Tables 7A-7B. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Tables 8A-8D. MY1-3 Monitoring Data (Dimensional Morphology Summary & Stream Reach Data Summary)
Table 9. Water Quality Data
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

o
m m
m m
m
m m
m
m m
m m
m
m
L
A
a
A�
16-��
mm�
o\
�omN00
m�oN�°
c
L
C
A
G
O
O
5o
��o
Mm�o
Noom
Quo
gym-.
�oomID
o�
0
M
o
0
oN
F
A
ri
O
Fm
-.
0
0
0
r.
M
A
00
Ca
d
00
0
'
ov
r,
oy �
o
l
N
T H-
d
c
o
W
m
N m
L
o
R
�
�i
. .
.
. .
O
O
. .
I Hi
I
A
F
❑
0
�
�d �
o ,-:
c.i
N N
,-.
U
o\
S o
h
U
"" o
❑
C;j
k
G
W
L
t+iF
W
U
A
o
.a
�
a
.a
.a
bA
A
a°oi'�
P4
U
a
s
L
ro
w
ro
V]
ww
P4 V]
O
O
�
�
R
A
W
W
F
Q

d
A
3
0
A
�
O
N
c
A
o
W
C
c
L
O
C
d
O
O
O
C
O
F �p
3
d
�
o
co N
o o
Ili
0
A
co
0
o
I
Ri
o
w
o�
N I
o
L
c
R
O
�i
O
O
Q
F
W
R
ti
W N
W
c M
O
CO 6]
W
c y
49
N
C
U
G
N
c
C C
U
o
c
h Q
k
��Arr
�G
W
L
Hill
W
U
A
o
.a
�
7.
wbL
�
�
.�
by
��
�, U
'O w
�_ d
C ,� O
L..' L..'
-i -i
L' L'
.. ..
�. �.
�.
��bL`
LY' '�'.
Ly' L'
••
Ly' d
ro i0
": LY'
Y❑. �
� �
p
p
E
o�'a'a`n�
E
o
mE
E
A
CO
id
Q
U
o
�
A
c
20
C
A
W
W
F
Q

IIIIII■III
011111■III
IIIIII■III
lillll■II!
�IIIIIIIII
011111■III
IIIIII■III
@1100■110
IIIIII■III
IIIIII■III
IIIIII■111
naoam■0o�
nano■ne
nanv■ma�
n�ni■ni
a0�oo'■nm
n�meo■oao
Bel101�ll
I
F �
�illlll,
111
,IIIIII�
III
�919111�
III
�919111,
III
,i19111,
III
,IIIIII�
III
�999111m
III
vllllll,
Imll
IIIII
111
illllll�
III
IIIII
III
,aoaon�
0n
no0m
in
,eno�0�
m
oo
nio0
in

0.
E
0
c
u E
a z
�i
e a
a c
z
o
o a
.p
� �
IIIIII■III
011191■III
111191■III
111191■II!
IIIIIIIIII
011111■III
IIIIII■III
19199i■190
IIIIII■III
IIIIII■III
IIIIII■111
IIIIII■III
911111■II!
Illlil■191
IIIIII■III
IIIIII■III
111199■B91
911111BII
III�III�I
III�III�I
191�IIImI
101�111�1
IBlmlll�l
III�III�I
aam�'n,m
IBI�BII�I
��III�II
o Y
a
m �
�o
bz
oa
5 9
2
� �
m x
[' �
�o,000,
��
�iiii
ie
�'�"'�
��
�8�11@�
It
�I�III�
�0
�9�111�
It
�9�111�
It
�I�III�
It
�Ilill�
It
�I,III,
IIIII
III
It
IIIII
il�lll�
III
It
�9�111�
III
It
91111
IIl19
iB�lll�
I�IC
It
'll�ll�
���I�
����
�0

v
v
N
.-- I
M
N
3
E o
> N
M
O.-I
N
M
NaL+
m
O 00
.M-I
. -I
N
O
z
N
00
L
E
L
i
N
M
M
iD
iD
iD
m
N
Q
N
.--I
c-I
>
O
z
C E
M
V1
w
V1
01
3 v
0
o
�
oN
�
,,i
N
o
C
aL+
vl
C.N-�
C
N
M
N
N
14
n
N
01
00
-A
N
O
m
4
00
V1
N
lD
I-
N
m
CL
N
01
01
M
N
V1
V1
I-
C
p
C E
�j N
N
L p
N
M
M
01
n
't
N
't
O
W O
N
.--I
lD
lD
I�
01
NQ
aL+
0 N
-A
-A
-A
-A
O
u
O
N
L
00
y
N
N
L p
O
M
-A
N
00
N
M
01
Q.
O
U
N
v1
V1
w
O
I C
L
0
3 m
i
E O
N
m
m
N
N
m
00
111
QO
C
.^-I
.^-I
lD
iD
O
0 N
N
z
m
m
L
N
E
r+
Gl N
01
01
V1
00
I�
>
M
M
V1
O.
O N
z
E
•--�
M
00
r1l
N
O
V1
N
m
bb N
00
00
N
M
N
w
C
O
00 ^
iD
iD
—A
iD
Ln
O
O
N
N
iD
al
l0
7
L
FI
N
O
++ ^
N
n
a)
Lf'1
OM1
O
M
L
a
E
N
N
iD
m
3bA
a
L
CL
00 ^
N
N
N
iD
L
a
uo
+�
E
_
C
w
E
Q
Q
E
z
7 u
U
E
CL
Q
=
w
v
Q
a
0
0
O �'
v
0
M
U
v
Q

Appendix D.
Hydrology Data
Table 10A. UT1 Upstream Channel Evidence
Table 1013. UT1 Downstream Channel Evidence
Stream Gauge Graphs
Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Soil Temperature Graph
Figure D1. 30-70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Q
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
a)
�
k
®
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
m
3
a)
�
\
$
$
a)
a)
2
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)�
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
a)
�
]
a)
�
-
s
.0=
/
\
\
g
3
\
o
{
/ {
\ .-
\
t
0 /
.(A2
-0 .
a
\
\ \
/
}
\
'\ �
%
a
/
°
j 2 /
L
tio
E
.CL
�
/
\
\ �
\ 2
W
-0
§
\
(
m
&
\ 2 ./cm:2
=
a
_
-
)
(n
3
E
'
\ e =
2
3
e
/
\
\
7
\
_
m
2
(
@
E \ \
\
_
g
-
:
/
`
)
\
\
0
'
�
`
0
0
/
.2
» ° &
&
2
/
)
k
E
\
/
§
\ »
s 7
t
_
_
\
_
( _
_ =
s
2
&
\
°
=
2
s
_%
2
a
2
2
2
=
\
2
t
\
[
\/
§
\ -
u s
-0
t
3
0
/
u
=
I
t s
0§/
§
®
_
®
s = \
® @
a
§
/
\
/
7
3
»
\
\
s
$ % /
_
m
_
o o
E - »
\
k
(
)
a
{
/
{
{
.§
\
} : @
_
�
a
E
»
E
E
y 7 2\$
:
G
§
§
\
}
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
tlz>
CL
\ /
A /
3
\

O

2
�
§
tu
S
�
�
k
�
�
k
LLI
7a)
§
3
E
§
\
a
�
�
�
2
�
Q
�
�
k
z
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
m
\
�
>/
\ k
\
CO
�
G
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
k
a)
/
°
.\
3 \
{
:
\
6
_ /
/
/
/ —
/ �
\
(
3
_
y
6
2
/ {
\ -
»
\
:
0 /
v
)
/
E
»
®
0 0
/
0
§
/ $
\
§
\
u
\
® L
= o
/
/
u
)
\
-0±
uo
c
_
0 >
5
C:
a)
\
C: C:a
/
§
\ .§ #
/
\/_
\
\
\
\
L \
\
2
\
\
\
\
2
/ /
\
LU
[
�
>
5
°
= y
m M
/
5
»
\
2
» o '_
2
°
C
u
k
=
\
)
a
§
3 2
C
s 0
t
=
\
2
%
_
3
_
E ( :
[ f
R
&
_
�
2
\
)
°
�
/
\ \
/ s
E
\
w
/
0
§
a
2
u
I
t s&
o
_
\
\
e
/
_
7
_
c
\
®
\
5
s =
C \{%
2
E
a
»
2
§
E
}
_
\
§
/
{
{
.§ g _
0
E °
0 %
E
/
L
=
a
a
»
�'
y 7\
C
k
\
§
x
E
E
E
E
»
e
)
\
\
\
)
2 2
a)
_
_
D
/
_
/
z
\
ƒ
z
L
u> 2
c°
3
/

O

(ul) s;unouay Ilp}ulea
o in O n o ui o
M N N .-I a-1 O O
T
0
kD
ti
ry
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
11/27/22
11/17/22
11/7/22
10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/22
9/28/22
9/18/22
9/8/22
8/29/22
8/19/22
8/9/22
7/30/22
7/20/22
7/10/22
6/30/22
6/20/22
6/10/22
5/31/22
5/21/22
5/11/22
5/1/22
4/21/22
4/11/22
4/1/22
3/22/22
3/12/22
3/2/22
2/20/22
2/10/22
1/31/22
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22
V N O w to :t N O w to :t N O N tD 00 O
N N N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I
(ul) lanai a24GM

Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events
Date of Data
Date of
Photo
Collection
Occurrence
Method
(if available)
A trail camera captured the stream at bankfull after 1.10
March 19, 2019
January 13, 2019
inches of rain was documented on January 13, 2019 at
1
an on -site rain gauge.
A trail camera captured the stream at bankfull after 2.74
March 19, 2019
February 23, 2019
inches of rain was documented between February 22-23,
2
2019 at an on -site rain gauge.
Stream gauge data indicates a bankfull event occurred
June 27, 2019
April 13, 2019
after 4.11 inches of rain was documented between April
--
12-13, 2019 at an on -site rain gauge.
A bankfull event likely occurred after 3.02 inches of rain
September 9, 2019
July 24, 2019
was documented between July 23-24, 2019 at an on -site
--
rain gauge.
A bankfull event likely occurred after 1.96 inches of rain
September 9, 2019
August 1, 2019
was documented on August 1, 2019 at an on -site rain
--
gauge.
A bankfull event was documented via trail camera after
April 13, 2020
April 13, 2020
approximately 2.31 inches of rain was recorded at an on-
3
site rain gauge
A bankfull event was documented via trail camera after
January 31, 2021
January 31, 2021
approximately 1.19 inches of rain was recorded at an on-
4
site rain gauge
Wrack and laid-back vegetation were observed along the
March 11, 2021
February 15, 2021
top of bank and floodplain of UT-1 indicating a bankfull
5
event occurred after 2.93 inches of rain was
documented between February 11 and 15, 2021.
A trail camera captured the stream at bankfull after 1.47
March 16, 2022
March 16, 2022
inches of rain was documented on March 16, 2022 at an
6
on -site rain gauge.
Wrack piles were observed along the top of bank and
August 2, 2022
July 27, 2022
floodplain of UT-1 indicating a bankfull event occurred
7
after 1.73 inches of rain was documented on July 27,
2022.
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

-e
iJ.R.""'AD p
kn, M
t„
- �. � ..y � �•.=r� p III 3•h� -'�•i �_,K� f.fi..
P r 4
err -•' r .. .J e'. �' .��._Y I y i a
I
I � '
29,82ir,Hg ` 39'F 02 J23 12a1 9 02 : 35PM NI D5
P ��r
o
' � •• - . tip...• "`' ,�..w
Iry ;r•
29.79inHgf d-47155`F 01 113/2019 07 ; 15AM MH D5

MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Alamonce County, North Carolina
Appendix
Restoration Systems, LLC
February 2023

MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamonce County, North Carolina February 2023

Photo 6
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Alamonce County, North Carolina
Appendix
Restoration Systems, LLC
February 2023

Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data — Major Hill Restoration Site
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)
Gauge
Year 1 (2019)
Year 2 (2020)
Year 3 (2021)
Year 4 (2022)
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
(2023)
(2024)
(2025)
No/14 days*
Yes/136 days
Yes/74 days
Yes/93 days
1
6.0 percent
57.9 percent
31.4 percent
39.4 percent
No/19 days*
No/19 days
No/21 days
Yes/44 days
2
8.1 percent
8.0 percent
8.9 percent
18.6 percent
Yes/25 days
Yes/235 days
Yes/226 days
Yes/204 days
3
10.6 percent
100 percent
95.8 percent
86.4 percent
Yes/34 days
Yes/72 days
Yes/60 days
Yes/155 days
4
14.5 percent
30.5 percent
25.4 percent
65.7 percent
Yes/119 days
Yes/135 days
Yes/53 days
Yes/77 days
5
50.6 percent
57.4 percent
22.5 percent
32.6 percent
Yes/77 days
Yes/44 days
Yes/80 days
Yes/81 days
6
32.8 percent
18.7 percent
33.9 percent
34.3 percent
* These gauges did not meet success criteria due to a data shuttle failure that resulted in the loss of data. Based on
rainfall and hydrology data that was not lost, all gauges would have likely met success criteria had the loss of data not
occurred.
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

a�
4
aj 4-
Q
E
N
� N
O
Ln
2 ra
L }
0
fu
n N n N n N
I� n Ln Ln C C M M
jo dwal pos
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
11/27/22
11/17/22
11/7/22
10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/22
9/2s/22
9/1s/22
9/a/22
a/29/22
a/19/22
a/9/22
7/30/22
7/20/22
7/10/22 p
6/30/22
6/20/22
6/10/22
5/31/22
5/21/22
5/11/22
5/1/22
4/21/22
4/11/22
4/1/22
3/22/22
3/12/22
3/2/22
2/20/22
2/10/22
1/31/22
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22

fa
C
(ul) s;unouay Ile}ulea
Ln O vn O in O in O
m m N N c-1 c-1 O O
c
^, 0
fV m
v
vLn -0
.0 t'D c
0 c w
O o
6
m
m
0
0
m
m
N O 00 w V N O rV � lq o0 O N V w w O N V w w O N V w w O
ci c-I c-1 c-1 -- -- -- N N N N N m m m m m V
(ui) lanai ja;empunwg
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
11/27/22
11/17/22
11/7/22
10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/22
9/28/22
9/18/22
9/s/22
8/29/22
8/19/22
s/9/22
7/30/22
7/20/22
7/10/22
6/30/22
6/20/22
6/10/22
5/31/22
5/21/22
5/11/22
5/1/22
4/21/22
4/11/22
4/1/22
3/22/22
3/12/22
3/2/22
2/20/22
2/10/22
1/31/22
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22

fa
C
(ui) s;unouay Ile}uiea
in o in o in o in o
M M N N c-1 c-1 O O
c
^, 0
N ry
to c
0 c w
O 0
LD
00
m
0
v
v
N O w to -zt N O N-z� T o0 O N-zt w w O N-zt w w O N V w w O
c-I c-I c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 N N N N N M M M M M V
(ui) lanai aa;empunwg
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
11/27/22
11/17/22
11/7/22
10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/22
9/28/22
9/18/22
9/s/22
8/29/22
8/19/22
s/9/22
7/30/22
7/20/22
7/10/22
6/30/22
6/20/22
6/10/22
5/31/22
5/21/22
5/11/22
5/1/22
4/21/22
4/11/22
4/1/22
3/22/22
3/12/22
3/2/22
2/20/22
2/10/22
1/31/22
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22

5
(ul) s;unouay Ile}ulea
in O Vn o in o in o
M M N N c-1 c-1 O O
Qj
to C
•
►�
�
mil•'
Ron&
������r
■■■■M
I■E_=
NNER
�C
F
�G
Ismail
IE
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
11/27/22
11/17/22
11/7/22
10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/22
9/28/22
9/18/22
9/8/22
8/29/22
8/19/22
8/9/22
7/30/22
7/20/22
7/10/22
6/30/22
6/20/22
6/10/22
5/31/22
5/21/22
5/11/22
5/1/22
4/21/22
4/11/22
4/1/22
3/22/22
3/12/22
3/2/22
2/20/22
2/10/22
1/31/22
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22
N O 00 W V N O N V l0 00 O N V w w O tV - tD w O tV � w w O
ci c-I c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 N N N N N M M M M M�
(ui) lanai ja;empunwg

Z-7i
fa
C
(ul) s;unouay Ile}ulea
Ui o In o in o in o
M M N
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
cc 11/27/22
ry v 11/17/22
Ln
.0 txo o c c 11/7/22
O o
10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/zz
9/28/22
9/18/22
9/8/zz
8/29/22
8/19/22
8/9/22
7/30/22
V 7/20/22
V
7/10/22
i 6/30/22
6/20/22
LO6/10/22
v
~ T 5/31/22
0
Ln 5/21/22
Ln
i 5/11/22
5/1/22
4/21/22
4/11/22
4/1/22
0 3/22/22
L N 3/12/22
m c° Ln — — 3/2/22
0 2/20/22
C7
2/10/22
1/31/22
Ali j 1
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22
fV O 00 l0 �t N O N V lq o0 O N V l0 00 O N V l0 00 O N V l0 00 O
ci c-I c-1 c-1 -- -- -- N N N N N M M M M M V
(ui) lanai ja;empunwg

fa
C
(ul) s;unouay llejulea
in O in o n O in O
M M N N .--i c-1 O O
11111,1,111111��
�I
''■■■�
-�■��,
_w
■■oo■■NONE
■■■■�E
mC
eeee:�
IE
I
NONE!
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
11/27/22
11/17/22
11/7/22
10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/22
9/28/22
9/18/22
9/8/22
8/29/22
8/19/22
8/9/22
7/30/22
7/20/22
7/10/22
6/30/22
6/20/22
6/10/22
5/31/22
5/21/22
5/11/22
5/1/22
4/21/22
4/11/22
4/1/22
3/22/22
3/12/22
3/2/22
2/20/22
2/10/22
1/31/22
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22
N O 00 w V N O N V w 00 O N V w 00 O N V w wO N V w wO
a-1 c-1 c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N N N M M M M M V
(ul) lanal aalempunoig

T.
Vol
►W
(ul) s;unouay Ile}ulea
In o In o in O in O
m m N N c-1 c-1 O O
12/27/22
12/17/22
12/7/22
c 11/27/22
^� oo 11/17/22
N v
cw c
11/7/22
o c w
u '0 10/28/22
10/18/22
10/8/22
9/28/22
9/18/22
9/8/22
8/29/22
8/19/22
8/9/22
7/30/22
7/20/22
7/10/22
6/30/22
6/20/22
6/10/22
5/31/22
5/21/22
5/11/22
m
5/1/22
m
T 4/21/22
4/11/22
00 4/1/22
3/22/22
c 3/12/22
o - 3/2/22
ti v
cLi tw 2/20/22
m c
2 '3 2/10/22
0
1/31/22
1/21/22
1/11/22
1/1/22
N O w w V N O N V l0 o0 O N V w 00 O tV l w 00 O N V w 00 O
ci c-I c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 N N N N N m m m m m V
(ui) lanai jazempunwg

Appendix E.
Site Photo Log
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamonce County, North Carolina February 2023

POP

YN
- .' _ •i _
F
_ ..1M1�.' r 4Y' '.
-
.;rah. :• 3C Y � �i
Y-2! .p
- '. fie•_ ..�

Major Hill
MY-04 (2022) Photo Log
Photo 5: UT 3 Downstream Piped Crossing — Upstream End
1R. i � -+. '• it '�..y i _'
.k
Photo 6: UT 3 Downstream Piped Crossing — Downstream End
F i' w - T
;r
%;
A
•'r' - ..M1��ar fir.-.-Y'...kw — -
• A
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC

' - • •rt' • � •{ •J � _ 'S.: ITS. � IF' N' �� .•
' _ .�'.i.''' ;yam ...�. - �_�- ._ i. •F � _
ate, .► S � ''� k _� P .� .,. .�:°. �" .
H,i�
''i ' •�L r e .'^�Fd. �,�•,c...._ _.ar..ti'�`'_tire.• - ,•�� ". '�G .i'
Photo 8: UT 3 Upstream
Easement Break— Downstream End
-
- -• . •�: - - -ice,
-c3_y..p- ..
.:_�. '] :vA `$,r{.:; • ' ..
..�'.•r. _ ti.:=..ter
:s
yz
x
F
IV

Major Hill
MY-04 (2022) Photo Log
Photo 9: Bud Burst of Prunus serotina
Photo Taken 2/28/22
r L
4go
y
y--
4 104
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC

Major Hill
MY-04 (2022) Photo Log
Photo 12: Bud Burst of Ulmus americana
Photo Taken 2/28/22
0 4P'.
R
f`
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC

Major Hill
MY-04 (2022) Photo Log
Photo 13: UT1 Flow 1/20/22
ter• _ N � i �ir.� _� % •i J ..
pvwl
rv-.. !?r•' . u • j�J s_•;
�,�,y1 iP��• . .p!��`� v�] Sys �.r �... - � i t....._ � ,
-III. -• '- _�1' F { - ^ •� >': A °- y - ', •.��=i'd�
IL
4A40
-. `: r - ti•- r t S• •�?::.1�%4j� r�� r ,f. '-_ a� vrii% �Y !
to
Ilk
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC

Major Hill
MY-04 (2022) Photo Log
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC

{
!
�
__________________
_
oo
Al
63
,�
71

1
" IN,
w
4W ri,
7.
..�tSb
r "`
,.•x. ., ,.. '�--..— r� .fir. � _ �v :�
' •_^:�-... �. �f`'4_ ::. ��r-.i•,-=fir �f�: .- �5.. ���
i .ixC i.��+,
29.76inH9} 8 59°F 1 10103I2022 10:434M MH UT1
^ _ _ l � �,_'`,�� •: 3x
29.88inHg' A 44'F r 1 0 11 2 ! 20�22 06 30AM MH UT'

Appendix F.
Riparian Buffer Year 4 (2022) Monitoring Report
MY4 (2022) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamonce County, North Carolina February 2023

FINAL RIPARIAN BUFFER MY4 (2022) MONITORING REPORT
MAJOR HILL MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100015
Full Delivery Contract No. 7193
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01472
DWR No. 17-0921
RFP No. 16-006990
Cape Fear River Basin — Haw River Arm
Cataloging Unit 03030002
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652
February 2023
This project with conforms with the North Carolina consolidated buffer mitigation rule 15A NCAC 02B
0295, effective November 1, 2015 and the Jordon Lake Buffer Protection Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0267 &
15A NCAC 02B .0268)

Table of Contents
1.0
MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY.............................................................................................1
2.0
REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................2
3.0
RIPARIAN RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT, & PRESERVATION PLAN .......................................... 2
3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities........................................................................................
2
3.1.1 Site Preparation..........................................................................................................2
3.1.2 Planting.......................................................................................................................4
3.2 Riparian Buffer Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion Activities..................................................4
3.3 Riparian Buffer Preservation Activities....................................................................................
5
3.4 Marsh Treatment Area............................................................................................................
5
4.0
ANNUAL MONITORING.............................................................................................................
5
4.1 Monitoring...............................................................................................................................5
4.2 Performance Standards...........................................................................................................6
4.3 Results and Discussion.............................................................................................................
6
4.4 Maintenance and Management..............................................................................................7
5.0
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................10
Tables
Table 1. Buffer Project Attributes................................................................................................................. 1
Table 2. Buffer Project Areas and Assets......................................................................................................3
Table 3. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation
............................................................................................4
Table 4. Riparian Buffer Monitoring.............................................................................................................
6
Table 5. Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals...................................................................................................
7
Table 6. Total Stems by Plot and Species......................................................................................................8
Table 7. Temporary Vegetation Plot Data............................................................................................................10
Attachments
Attachment 1
Figure A. Riparian Buffer Asset Map
Figure B. Riparian Buffer Planting Map
Year 4 (2022) Vegetation Plot Photos
Year 4 (2022) Planted Stem Height Data
MV4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: Table of Contents
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

1.0 MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
The Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site") encompasses 16.7
acres along warm water, unnamed tributaries to Pine Hill Branch. The Site is located approximately 3.5
miles southeast of Snow Camp and 6 miles north of Silk Hope in southern Alamance County near the
Chatham County line. Project attributes are included in the following table.
Table 1. Buffer Project Attributes
Project Name
Major Hill
Hydrologic Unit Code
3030002050050
River Basin
Cape Fear
Geographic Location (Lat, Long)
35.873206,-79.360906
Site Protection Instrument (DB, PG)
(2789, 896), (2514, 756), (3143, 270), (3150, 920)
Total Credits (BMU)
402,837
Types of Credits
Riparian Buffer Restoration, Enhancement, & Preservation
Mitigation Plan Date
Apr-18
Initial Planting Date
Dec 2018-Jan 2019
Baseline Report Date
Mar-19
MY1 Report Date
Nov-19
MY2 Report Date
Jan-21
MY3 Report Date
Jan-22
MY4 Report Date
Nov-22
MY5 Report Date
The Site drainage area is primarily composed of pasture, forest, agricultural land, and sparse residential
property. Impervious surfaces account for less than five percent of the upstream land surface.
Before construction, Site land use consisted of pasture, hayfields, disturbed forest, and agricultural land
used for livestock grazing and hay production. Livestock had unrestricted access to Site streams, and
stream banks were eroded vertically and laterally and received extensive sediment and nutrient inputs.
Riparian zones in the upper reaches of UT 1 were primarily composed of herbaceous vegetation that was
sparse and disturbed due to livestock grazing, bush hogging, and regular land -management activities. The
downstream reaches of UT 1 and all of UT 3 were primarily wooded with livestock disturbance to stream
channels. UT 2 was the lone tributary not subject to continuous, unrestricted livestock access. Riparian
areas immediately adjacent to UT 2 were forested with a fence to protect this area from livestock access.
The riparian areas were restored in concurrence with the Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
(NC DMS Project ID 10015, SAW-2017-01472) and involved restoring riparian buffers adjacent to restored
streams to help reduce non -point source contaminant discharges to downstream waters in the Haw River
sub -watershed of Jordan Lake. All riparian areas were assessed by DWR (Katie Merritt and Sue
Homewood) during a site visit on February 20, 2018, to determine the Site's viability for buffer mitigation.
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: Page 1
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

The Site is protected with a permanent conservation easement. Riparian restoration, enhancement, and
preservation area widths adjacent to restored streams extend out to a maximum of 200 feet from the top
of stream banks with a minimum width of 50 from the top of banks. Riparian buffer enhancement and
preservation credits generated on this Site are allowed pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o). No riparian
restoration areas less than 20 feet wide, measured perpendicularly from the top of banks, are used to
generate riparian buffer credit.
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Credit was not generated in areas generating wetland mitigation credit.
2.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Credit determination for this Site follows the North Carolina consolidated buffer mitigation rule 15A
NCAC 02B .0295, effective November 1, 2015 (see Table 2 on the following page and Figure A,
Attachment 1).
3.0 RIPARIAN RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT, & PRESERVATION PLAN
This Site was also proposed as a stream and wetland mitigation project; therefore, the restoration of
riparian areas was accomplished through the goals and methods outlined by the Major Hill Stream and
Wetland Mitigation Plan. All applicable federal, state and local permits or authorizations were acquired
to implement the mitigation plan.
Primary goals focused on 1) improving water quality, 2) enhancing flood attenuation and hydrology, 3)
improving aquatic resources, and 4) restoring riparian habitat. Completed mitigation provides floodplain
connectivity, floodplain resistance, stream stability, sediment transport, surface and subsurface
storage/retention, in -stream habitat, riparian habitat and structure, thermal regulation, floodplain
biogeochemical processing, and pollutant filtration/removal of pollutant sources. The riparian area will be
restored through the revegetation of native plant communities.
3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities
3.1.1 Site Preparation
Soil grading occurred during stream restoration activities. Topsoils were stockpiled during construction
activities and spread on the soil surface once critical subgrade was established. The replaced topsoil will
serve as a viable growing medium for community restoration to provide nutrients and aid in the survival
of planted species.
Farm Pond Removal
To complete the stream and wetland restoration activities and subsequent riparian buffer restoration, the
removal of a small farm pond, —0.58 acres, occurred. Stream, wetland, and riparian area restoration within
the abandoned pond included 1) notching the dam to dewater; 2) removal of the dam to the elevation of
the adjacent floodplain; 3) excavating sediment that is unsuitable for channel bank construction; 4)
backfilling areas of sediment removed with soil suitable for channel construction (as necessary); 5)
excavation of the design channel, 6) stabilization of the channel with coir matting, seed, and mulch; and
7) installation of structures.
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: Page 2
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

k
\_
)
Lno
k
' ©
/
rl
0
a
k0
\
co
j
a 2
j
a
k —
o
' D
/
0
§
j
z0
\
2
/
0 2
©0ƒ
�o
t I k
k
0
u z
cam._
\
0)
/
k
2 _
§
d
/
§
CL � ��
/
\
/
Q
G
m
_
_
o
/
o
)§§¥\
@
\
u
/
\
I
} §
/
»
/
# u
S
cn
r
S
5&0
\3m
~
©
£
°
c
m
°
9
7ƒ
Q
ƒ
\LM
u �
�
d
\
)
\
0
2
6
§
6
§
]
�
CA
e [
-
m
)
I
§
u
2
§
2
2
IA
Ch
t E
\
\
(
a
<
,
,
ru
u §
)
)
LU
u
a
—
� q
_ -
§
4 /
4 /
2
e�
ui
/\/\
/
\ §
�Ln
q
tu
k
Q
—
—
—
&
�
j
j
j
§ . _
8
3
N
= f 7 2
®
2
co
en
2 3 \
)
§
a
�
L
0
0
jW
.�_/
\
u
}k
/
®
#u
S
cn
m
5§/�
\ 3 x
m
m
\
A
§ mw
u«
3
�
3
�
co
m
§
N
0
ƒ ƒ
§
)
0
0
\
2 %
a
/
§
w
Ln
Ln
�
o
m
e [
m
uj
)
)
u<
§
u

3.1.2 Planting
Bare -root seedlings within the Piedmont Alluvial and Dry-Mesic Oak -Hickory Forests were planted at a
density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Species in the streamside assemblage and
Marsh Wetland Treatment Areas were planted at a density of approximately 2720 stems per acre on 4-
foot centers. The following table summarizes planted bare -root stems within the Site.
Table 3. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation
Species
Piedmont/Low
Mountain
Alluvial Forest
Dry-Mesic
Oak/Hickory
Forest
Marsh
Treatment
Wetland
Strembla a
Assemblage
ge
Total
Acres
1.1
5.5
0.01
1.5
8.11
Alnus serrulata
5
20
25
Asimina triloba
200
200
Betula nigra
100
200
300
Carpinus caroliniana
600
600
Ceph al an thus
occidentalis
5
20
25
Cercis canadensis
500
500
Cornus amomum
95
5
800
900
Diospyros virginiana
450
450
Fraxinus americana
100
100
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
150
750
900
Liriodendron tulipifera
75
75
Nyssa sylvatia
600
600
Platanus occidentalis
120
780
900
Quercus nigra
110
790
500
1,400
Quercus phellos
100
700
400
1,200
Salix nigra*
400*
400
Sambucus canadensis
11
14
25
TOTALS
750
3,740
26
4,084
8,600
Stems/Acre
682
680
2600
2722
1060
*Live stakes of Salix nigra were planted; all other planted species were planted as bare root plants.
3.2 Riparian Buffer Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion Activities
Riparian buffer enhancement included permanently protecting the existing riparian buffer from livestock
via exclusionary fencing, cutting, clearing, filling, grading, and any similar activities that would affect the
functionality of the riparian buffer. These areas are defined primarily as disturbed mixed hardwoods.
Buffer credits sought in the enhancement area are allowed under 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6). The
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 4
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

enhancement area extends a maximum of 200 feet from the top of the bank with a minimum width of 20
from the top of stream banks.
A small portion of UT-3 generates riparian buffer enhancement credit from only one side of the stream.
Before construction, cattle had access to the entire area; however, the only access point was from the
pasture on the northern side of the stream, the parcel owned by Mr. Lamm. Once fencing was installed
to prevent cattle access from Mr. Lamm's parcel to the stream, cattle were no longer able to access the
south side of the stream. This action will result in compliance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6), which
states that the permanent exclusion of grazing livestock must be done such that the livestock are fenced
out of the stream and its adjacent buffer. The southern parcel, which is not a part of the conservation
easement, is owned by the Caviness family and is a single-family home.
3.3 Riparian Buffer Preservation Activities
Riparian buffer preservation includes permanently protecting existing riparian buffers from cutting,
clearing, filling, grading, and any similar activities that would affect the functionality of the riparian buffer.
Areas specified for Preservation at the Site, in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295, are defined primarily
as mixed hardwoods, with a number of high -value species and over 200 species total per acre. They are
areas where livestock was fenced out before construction —these areas had little or no historical livestock
access.
3.4 Marsh Treatment Area
A marsh treatment area was constructed to intercept surface waters draining through agricultural areas
before discharging into UT1. The marsh treatment area is excluded from credit calculations.
4.0 ANNUAL MONITORING
4.1 Monitoring
Eight vegetation monitoring plots (10-meter by 10-meter) were installed within the Site as per guidelines
established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008); this covers 3.4%
of the area generating riparian buffer restoration credit. Vegetation monitoring will occur annually in the
fall (between September and November), prior to the loss of leaves for a period of five monitoring years
following planting. Parameters to be monitored include species composition and species density. Visual
observations of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species will also be documented by
photograph. In addition, inspections for beaver and other potential nuisance species will occur throughout
the monitoring period.
The following table outlines riparian buffer monitoring for this project; monitoring parameter descriptions
follow.
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 5
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Table 4. Riparian Buffer Monitoring
Required
Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
Eight (8) plots
Vegetation will be monitored for five years or until
Yes
Vegetation
located across all
Annual
performance standards are met. Visual monitoring of the
restored buffer
site will be done all five years. Analysis of vegetation will
zones.
be recorded using level 2 CVS Monitoring protocol.
Yes
Project
NA
Annual
Locations of fence damage, vegetation damage,
Boundary
boundary encroachments, etc. will be mapped.
4.2 Performance Standards
Performance standards were established to verify that the vegetation component supports community
elements necessary for forest development and the maintenance of diffuse flow through the riparian
buffer in accordance with North Carolina Division of Water Resources Administrative Code 15A NCAC
0213.0295 (Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers).
Performance standards are dependent upon the density and growth of at least four native hardwood tree
species where no one species is greater than 50% of the stems. After five years of monitoring, an average
density of 260 woody stems per acre, including planted shrubs (silky dogwood and blueberry), must be
surviving, and diffuse flow maintained. 15A NCAC 02b .0295 (2)(E) dictates that monitoring for planted
stems would also include the health of planted stems. Level 2 CVS monitoring protocol requires the vigor,
a determinant of health, of a monitored stem be recorded. If requested, RS will make available during the
monitoring years, planted stem health, e.g. vigor.
4.3 Results and Discussion
In early January 2020, a winter -time visual assessment of the Site was performed, and it was determined
that although Year 1 (2019) vegetation data, including random transects, showed a high density of trees,
a light supplemental planting would help ensure the long-term success in several areas. On January 31,
2020, three areas that visually exhibited low stem density and/or poor vigor were supplementally planted.
During the supplemental planting effort, approximately 370 stems were planted across 1.20 acres
(approximately 300 stems per acre). As the planting was designated for visual purposes and was not an
effort to increase stem density data, no stems were planted within permanent vegetation plots. The
following table lists species included in the supplemental planting list. Preparation included the
application of 100 Ibs of lime, 50 Ibs of fertilizer, and 3 Ibs of seed to stabilize bare areas (see Figure A for
planting areas).
Supplemental Planting Species List
Species
Number of Stems
Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata)
20
Chinkapin (Castanea pumila)
20
Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis)
50
Hawthorn (Crataegus marshallii)
20
Crab Apple (Malus angustifolia)
50
Red Mulberry (Morus rubra)
100
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
50
Shumard Oak (Quercus shumardii)
50
Total
370
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 6
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Based on the number of stems counted, average densities were measured at 405 hardwood tree stems
per acre (excluding livestakes, shrubs, pines, and vines) in year 4 (2022). In addition, all but three
permanent plots met success criteria based on planted stems alone. Plots 1 and 5 meet success criteria
when including naturally recruited stems of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) and red maple (Acer
rubrum). Additionally, three temporary vegetation transects also met success criteria. The following Table
5 summarizes riparian buffer success criteria, Table 6 summarizes all permanent vegetation plot data by
species, plot, and year, and Table 7 summarizes temporary vegetation plot data. Vegetation plot
photographs are included in Attachment 1.
Table 5. Rioarian Buffer Veeetation Totals
Plot #
Success Criteria Met?
MY 4 (2022)
Planted Stems/Ac
MY 4 (2022)
All Stems/Ac
1
Yes
202
445
2
Yes
283
283
3
Yes
405
405
4
No
202
202
5
Yes
243
324
6
Yes
486
526
7
Yes
445
445
8
Yes
647
688
T-1
Yes
--
405
T-2
Yes
364
T-3
Yes
--
364
Average Planted
Stems/Acre
Yes
364
405
4.4 2023 Maintenance and Management
Restoration Systems continues to monitor fescue throughout the Site. Based on permanent and random
vegetation monitoring plots and visual observations, planted stems are establishing within areas where
fescue was a concern. Currently, no additional planting or fescue specific herbicide treatments are
proposed.
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 7
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

IIN
IIIIIII
III
I
II
E
a
p E E
E Q
E E

Table 7. Temporary Vegetation Plot Data
Species
50m x 2m Temporary Plot
T-1
T-2
T-3
Carpinus caroliniana
1
Cercis canadensis
1
Diospyros virginiana
2
3
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
5
Morus rubra
2
Quercus nigra
5
Quercus phellos
1
3
Quercus rubra
1
Total Stems
10
9
9
Total Stems/Acre
405
364
364
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 9
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

5.0 REFERENCES
Jordan Lake Water Supply Watershed Buffer Rules 15A NCAC 02B .0267, 15A NCAC 02B .0268, and 15A
NCAC 02B .0295
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot Version 4.2. Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: page 10
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

ATTACHMENT 1
Figure A. Riparian Buffer Asset Map
Figure B. Riparian Buffer Planting Map
Year 4 (2022) Vegetation Plot Photos
Year 4 (2022) Planted Stem Height Data
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015) Appendix F: Page 11
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina February 2023

Major Hill
MY-04 (2022) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken September 2022
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Attachment 1
Restoration Systems, LLC

Major Hill
MY-04 (2022) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken September 2022
MY4 (2022) Riparian Buffer Monitoring Report (Project No. 100015)
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Attachment 1
Restoration Systems, LLC

Plot
Scientific Name
X
Y
Height (cm)
DBH (cm)
Vigor
1
Liriodendron tulipifera
7.3
1.3
243
2.1
4
1
Carpinus caroliniana
9.2
4.1
250
1.1
4
1
Quercus
6.6
4.7
140
0.2
4
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1.6
1 3.8
111
3
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
6.7
9.7
115
3
2
Quercus phellos
2.9
0.5
375
4.2
4
2
Carpinus caroliniana
4.8
3.4
135
4
2
Carpinus caroliniana
7.1
6.5
75
3
2
Platanus occidentalis
10.0
7.1
210
1.8
4
2
Nyssa sylvatica
4.5
8.0
Missing
2
Quercus phellos
1.6
5.9
247
2.3
4
2
Diospyros virginiana
7.8
2.6
155
0.3
4
2
Carpinus caroliniana
7.5
4.6
135
4
3
Carpinus caroliniana
2.4
1.4
315
2.4
4
3
Quercus phellos
5.3
1.4
205
1.9
4
3
Carpinus caroliniana
8.1
1.3
84
3
3
Carpinus caroliniana
6.8
1 2.7
115
3
3
Quercus phellos
10.0
3.0
98
4
3
Carpinus caroliniana
6.3
5.3
40
3
3
Cercis canadensis
4.2
10.0
Missing
3
Cercis canadensis
1.3
10.0
51
1 4
3
Diospyros virginiana
1.3
8.1
1 237
1.4
4
3
Nyssa sylvatica
1.7
5.3
175
0.3
4
3
Quercus phellos
3.8
7.9
155
0.2
4
4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
7.6
0.9
75
3
4
Betula nigra
7.6
3.3
54
3
4
Asimina triloba
8.3
8.2
1 30
1
4
Quercus nigra
6.2
8.0
63
3
4
Diospyros virginiana
2.4
7.2
112
3
5
Quercus nigra
0.3
1.0
215
1.7
4
5
Platanus occidentalis
2.8
0.1
400
4.4
4
5
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2.1
3.7
235
1.8
4
5
Diospyros virginiana
5.1
4.3
Missing
5
Quercus nigra
5.5
1.2
110
4
5
Quercus nigra
7.5
8.0
70
4
5
Quercus nigra
0.2
6.5
225
1.1
4
5
Betula nigra
2.5
7.2
Missing
6
Quercus nigra
2.2
0.3
139
0.8
4
6
Carpinus caroliniana
3.0
2.7
90
4
6
Diospyros virginiana
0.9
3.4
180
0.8
4
6
Quercus phellos
6.5
0.8
160
0.6
4
6
Carpinus caroliniana
8.4
2.4
180
0.8
4
6
Quercus nigra
9.8
3.9
175
1.4
4
6
Platanus occidentalis
7.6
4.8
315
2.4
4
6
Fraxinus americana
9.0
7.0
265
1.4
4
6
Fraxinus americana
6.8
7.2
215
1.4
4
6
Fraxinus americana
4.6
1 8.0
260
1.8
4
6
IQuercus nigra
0.5
8.1
1 218
0.8
4
6
JPIatanus occidentalis
2.2
6.7
1 280
2.4
4

Plot
Scientific Name
X
Y
Height (cm)
DBH (cm)
Vigor
7
Platanus occidentalis
2.6
2.5
Missing
7
Quercus phellos
4.8
0.9
315
2.6
4
7
Quercus phellos
5.3
3.0
340
3.1
4
7
Betula nigra
5.7
4.9
252
1.4
4
7
Quercus nigra
7.6
3.5
145
0.3
4
7
Quercus phellos
8.8
1.2
261
1.4
4
7
Asimina triloba
8.5
6.1
335
5.4
4
7
Quercus phellos
6.3
7.1
355
4.4
4
7
Quercus nigra
8.8
8.5
374
5.1
4
7
Quercus nigra
1.2
6.9
205
1.8
4
7
Quercus phellos
1.7
5.1
235
2.1
4
7
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
3.6
8.2
355
4.8
4
8
Diospyros virginiana
4.3
1.5
153
0.3
4
8
Fraxinus
4.8
3.2
145
0.4
4
8
Diospyros virginiana
1.3
4.6
171
0.8
4
8
Cercis canadensis
7.3
0.4
45
3
8
Fraxinus americana
9.9
2.9
100
3
8
Betula nigra
7.3
2.8
92
4
8
Quercus nigra
5.1
5.0
140
0.3
4
8
Carpinus caroliniana
7.5
5.7
40
3
8
Cercis canadensis
9.8
6.0
45
3
8
Quercus phellos
7.4
6.2
1 240
1.3
4
8
Diospyros virginiana
7.2
7.6
215
1.1
4
8
Quercus phellos
8.4
8.7
170
0.3
4
8
Fraxinus americana
5.0
8.5
86
4
8
Diospyros virginiana
3.0
7.1
140
0.2
4
8
Quercus phellos
1.7
9.2
140
0.6
4
8
Quercus phellos
1.3
1.3
105
4