20141127 Ver 1_MudLickCreek_93482_MY5_2022_20230201

ID#* 20141127
Select Reviewer:
Ryan Hamilton
Initial Review Completed Date 02/01/2023
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/1/2023
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#:* 20141127
Existing ID#
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site
County: Chatham
Document Information
O Yes O No
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:* 1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: MudLickCreek_93482_MY5_2022.pdf 14.51MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature: *

FINAL
MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 5 (2022)
MUD LICK CREEK MITIGATION SITE
Chatham County, North Carolina
NCDMS Project No. 93482
Contract No. 7683
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2014-00736 & DWR Project No 2014-1127
SCO No. 1209857-01
Data Collection: April -September 2022
Submission: January 2023
PREPARED FOR:
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1601 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1601

FINAL
MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 5 (2022)
MUD LICK CREEK MITIGATION SITE
Chatham County, North Carolina
NCDMS Project No. 93482
Contract No. 7683
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2014-00736 & DWR Project No 2014-1127
SCO No. 1209857-01
Data Collection: April -September 2022
Submission: January 2023
PREPARED BY:
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
218 SNOW AVENUE
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603

PROJECT SUMMARY
The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) has established the Mud Lick Creek
Mitigation Site (Site) located within the Cape Fear River Basin Cataloging Unit (CU) 03030003 in the
Upper Rocky River local watershed planning (LWP) area and 14-digit HUC 03030003070010. The Site
was identified as a priority mitigation project in the Detailed Assessment and Targeting of Management
Report (Tetra Tech 2005). The main stressors to aquatic resources identified during the watershed
assessments described in the LWP documents include the following.
• Nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorous) loading from farming;
• Sediment loading from overland runoff, disturbed surfaces, and streambank erosion;
• Cattle access to streams increasing bank erosion and fecal coliform contamination; and
• Insufficient bank vegetation.
The project will contribute to meeting management recommendations to offset these stressors as
described above for the LWP area by accomplishing the following primary goals.
• Control and reduce nutrient sources from the Site;
• Reduce sediment loads from disturbed areas on the Site and from eroding stream banks;
• Increased aeration of flows within the project extent promoting increases in dissolved oxygen
concentrations;
• Reduce sources of fecal coliform pollution;
• Improve instream habitat;
• Reduce thermal loadings;
• Reconnect channels with floodplains and raise local water table; and
• Restore riparian habitat.
These goals will be accomplished through the following objectives:
• Restore riparian vegetation on the Site and thereby reduce sediment loads to streams from stream
banks and existing pastures, increase on -Site retention of sediment and nutrients, create riparian
habitat, and provide shade for streams to reduce thermal loadings;
• Stabilize eroding streambanks to reduce sediment inputs;
• Install fencing around the perimeter of the conservation easement to eliminate livestock access
to streams, thereby reducing sediment, nutrient, and fecal coliform inputs;
• Plant restored and stabilized streambanks with native species to improve stability and habitat;
• Install instream structures to improve stability, create habitat, and help aerate stream flows;
• Raise streambeds to reconnect restored channels to floodplains and raise local water tables; and
• Restore streams and vegetation so the Site looks natural and aesthetically pleasing.
Stream Success Criteria: The stream restoration performance criteria for the Site will follow approved
performance criteria presented in the 2015 Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site Final Mitigation Plan as
described below.
Stream Dimension: Riffle cross -sections on the restoration reaches and enhancement II reaches, where
banks were re -graded (three reaches of Mud Lick Creek), should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, maximum depth, and width -to -depth ratio. Bank -height -ratios shall not exceed 1.2 and
entrenchment ratios shall be at least 2.2 for restored channels to be considered stable. All riffle cross -
sections should fall within the parameters defined for channels of the appropriate stream type. If any
changes do occur, these changes will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs
of instability. Indicators of instability include a vertically incising thalweg or eroding channel banks.
Changes in the channel that indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Executive Summary page i
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

the width -to -depth ratio in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not
be taken if channel changes indicate a movement toward stability.
Stream Pattern and Profile: The as -built survey will include a longitudinal profile for the baseline
monitoring report. Longitudinal profile surveys will not be conducted during the seven-year monitoring
period unless other indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical and lateral
instability.
Substrate: Substrate materials in the restoration reaches should indicate a progression towards or the
maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller particles in the pool features.
Hydraulics: Two bankfull flow events, in separate monitoring years, must be documented on the restoration
reaches and enhancement II reaches where banks were re -graded (three reaches of Mud Lick Creek) within
the seven-year monitoring period.
Vegetation Success Criteria: The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 planted
stems per acre in the riparian corridor along restored and enhanced reaches at the end of the required
monitoring period (year seven). The interim measure of vegetative success for the Site will be the survival
of at least 320 planted stems per acre at the end of the third monitoring year and at least 260 stems per acre
at the end of the fifth year of monitoring. If this performance standard is met by year five and stem density
is trending towards success (i.e., no less than 260 stems/acre), monitoring of vegetation on the Site may be
terminated with written approval by the USACE in consultation with the NC Interagency Review Team.
The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and controlled as necessary throughout he
required monitoring period (seven years).
Photo Documentation: Photographs should illustrate the Site's vegetation and morphological stability on
an annual basis. Cross-section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks.
Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of persistent bars within the channel or vertical incision.
Grade control structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane arms is
preferable. Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
Visual Assessments: Visual assessments should support performance standards as described above.
As per Sections 7.2 and 12.4 of the Mitigation Plan, physio-chemical and biological parameters were
included as part of specialized monitoring, depending on the data that could be obtained during the baseline
period. Monitoring of these parameters was for investigative purposes only and not tied to mitigation
success or credit. The sample size and variability of the pre -construction physio-chemical data was
inadequate for the purposes of post -construction comparison and therefore, these will not be monitored
moving forward. However, fish and macrobenthos will be monitored at the stations indicated in the asset
and monitoring features map (Figure 2, Appendix B).
Site Background: The Site is located in northwestern Chatham County, north of Siler City and northwest
of Silk Hope (Figure 1, Appendix B). The Site is located within United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Hydrologic Unit and Targeted Local Watershed 03030003070010 (North Carolina Division of Water
Resources Subbasin 03-06-12) of the Cape Fear River Basin. Prior to construction, the Site was used for
agricultural livestock production. The proposed project will improve water quality as well as provide
numerous ecological benefits within the Cape Fear River Basin. The project will help meet management
recommendations of the Upper Rocky River Local Watershed Plan by restoring a vegetated riparian buffer
zone, stabilizing eroding stream banks, and removing livestock from streams and riparian zones. These
activities will result in reduced nutrient, sediment, and fecal coliform inputs; improved aquatic and riparian
habitat, and other ecological benefits.
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Executive Summary page ii
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Mitigation Components: Project mitigation efforts will generate 2832 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs)
as the result of the following (Table 1, Appendix A & Figure 2, Appendix B).
• Restoration of 1215 linear feet of Site streams
• Enhancement (Level II) of 2426 linear feet of Site streams
Site design was completed in June 2015. Site construction occurred May 24—August 25, 2017 (final
walkthrough) and the Site was planted in February 2018. Completed project activities, reporting history,
completion dates, project contacts, and project attributes are summarized in Tables 1-4 (Appendix A). The
assets and credits in the report and shown in Table 1 are based upon approved as -built numbers as approved
by the IRT on 11/1/2018.
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Executive Summary page iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 METHODS.......................................................................................................................................1
2.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................5
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 Table
Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A-5C. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Appendix C. Vegetation Data
Table 7. Planted Woody Vegetation
Table 8. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Appendix D. Stream Geomorphology Data
Tables lOa-10c. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Tables l la-1 lf. Monitoring Data -Dimensional Data Summary
Cross-section Plots
Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Appendix F. 2022 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Data
Results
Habitat Forms
Appendix G. 2022 Adaptive Management Plan
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Table of Contents page i

1.0 METHODS
Monitoring of restoration efforts will be performed for seven years, or until success criteria are fulfilled.
Monitoring is proposed for the stream channel and vegetation. In general, the restoration success criteria,
and required remediation actions, are based on the Stream Mitigation Guidelines (USACE et al. 2003).
Monitoring features are summarized in the following table and described below; monitoring features are
depicted on Figure 2 (Appendix B).
Monitoring Summary
Parameter Monitoring Feature I Quantity Frequency
Streams
Dimension
Cross -sections
7 riffles & 3 pools
annually
Substrate
Pebble counts
3 riffles
annually
Hydrology
Crest gauges
3
annually
Vegetation
Vegetation Plots
12
annually
Warranty Plots
10
MY1
Visual assessments
Entire Site
biannually
Exotic & nuisance species
Entire Site
annually
Project boundary
Entire Site
annually
Reference photographs
22
annually
Supplement I Monitoring
Biological
Macrobenthos
5 sites (Pre construction only)
3 sites (MY3, MY5, & MY7)
Fish
3 sites (Preconstruction only)
2 sites (MY4 & MY7)
Streams
The restored stream reaches are proposed to be monitored for geometric activity as follows.
• 7 permanent riffle cross -sections
• 3 permanent pool cross -sections
• 3 riffle pebble count samples for substrate analysis
• 3 stream crest gauges
The data will be presented in graphic and tabular format. Data to be presented will include 1) cross -
sectional area, 2) bankfull width, 3) average depth, 4) maximum depth, and 5) width -to -depth ratio.
Substrate analysis will be evaluated through pebble counts at three riffle cross -sections and data presented
as a D50 for stream classification and tracking purposes. The stream will subsequently be classified
according to stream geometry and substrate (Rosgen 1996). Significant changes in channel morphology
including bank -height -ratios and entrenchment ratios will be tracked and reported by comparing data to
asbuilt measurements in addition to each successive monitoring year. Annual photographs will include 22
fixed station photographs (12 vegetation plots and 10 cross -sections) (Appendix B). The Site contains three
stream crest gauges to assist with documentation of bankfull events. One bankfull event was documented
during monitoring year 5 (2022), making a total of six bankfull events have been documented over the
monitoring period to date (Table 12, Appendix E).
Year 5 cross-section data indicate little change from as -built conditions and that the stream is functioning
as designed, overall. Pool cross -sections (like cross-section 8) are typically not monitored for bank-height-
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Page 1
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

ratio because they are naturally sediment storage and transport areas within a stream. This is apparent in
review of the varying D.,,, and LBH values exhibited by cross-section 8 throughout the monitoring period.
Bank erosion has not been noted within or adjacent to cross-section 8, and overall, the reach appears stable.
Cross -sections 1 and 2 have been characterized by increased bank height ratio for the past several
monitoring years. These cross -sections are located within an Enhancement (Level II) reach of stream that
has scoured in previous years; however, the scour appears to have been minimized and the channel has
reformed natural top -of -bank indicators within the dimensional parameters of the channel. Cross -sections
1 and 2 have both remained relatively consistent and stable for the past 3 monitoring years. All site cross -
sections are meeting success criteria during year 5 (2022).
Two stream areas of concern were observed during monitoring year 5 (2022); both were documented during
previous monitoring years. Stream Area of Concern 91 is located along Mud Lick Creek R2 where
approximately 50 feet of the right bank and 20 feet of the left bank have eroded to the point of bank
sloughing. This area remains relatively unchanged from year 1 (2018); the establishment of dense
herbaceous vegetation and lack of high discharge events have allowed this area to continue to stabilize.
Stream Area of Concern #2 consists of scour and sloughing along an outer bend along Mud Lick Creek R3,
immediately downstream from cross-section 1. Material that had sloughed from the bank remains stable
and herbaceous vegetation is vigorous. Both stream areas of concern are located within enhancement II
stream reaches; all stream reaches generating restoration credit are stable throughout and functioning as
designed. Stream areas of concern are depicted on Figure 2 in Appendix B.
Vegetation
Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation health will monitor plant survival and species diversity.
After planting of the area was completed, 12 permanent vegetation plots were installed and monitored at
the Site; annual results are in Appendix C. Annual measurements of vegetation will consist of the
following.
• 10 plant warranty inspection plots (only MY I)
• 12 CVS vegetation plots
A photographic record of plant growth should be included in each annual monitoring report; baseline
photographs are included in Appendix B. During the first year, vegetation will receive a cursory, visual
evaluation on a periodic basis to ascertain the degree of overtopping of planted elements by nuisance
species. Subsequently, quantitative sampling of vegetation will be performed as outlined in the CVS-EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) in late fall/early winter of the first
monitoring year and annually toward the end of the growing for the remainder of the monitoring period
until vegetation success criteria are achieved.
Year 5 (2022) stem count measurements for twelve permanent CVS plots indicate the planted stem density
across the Site is 290 planted stems per acre. Nine of the twelve individual CVS plots met success criteria
based on planted stems alone; however, when including naturally recruited stems of American elm (Ulmus
americana), eastern redbud (Cercis canadensis), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and American
sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) the stem densities of plots 6 and 11 are above success criteria (Table 8,
Appendix Q. Plot 1 was two stems shy of success. Plot 1 experienced mortality of two stems between
MY3 and 4 and another between MY4 and 5; there are no natural recruits in this plot. Plot 11 is dominated
by dense herbaceous vegetation and extremely high numbers of sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
increasing competition with planted stems. Areas within the site remaining below success criteria are
primarily due to herbaceous competition with dense fescue (festuca spp.). There are several isolated areas
of dense sweetgum along North Branch R2 that are out -competing more desirable tree species. During
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Page 2
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

vegetation data collection an abundance of deer browse was documented in all permanent CVS plots.
Additionally, several populations of dense Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and tree of heaven (Ailanthus
altissima) were observed scattered throughout the Site. Although invasive treatments have been ongoing,
these areas are relatively unchanged from previous years. Invasive populations are depicted on Figure 2
(Appendix B).
Due to decreasing Site stem density and continued observation of deer browse and competition with
herbaceous species, DMS has implemented an adaptive management that includes supplementally planting
1- and 3-gallon containerized trees across 2.04 acres of the Site. Low stem density areas are depicted on
Figure 2 (Appendix B), and the adaptive management plan is detailed in Appendix G.
Proiect Boundaries & Visual Assessments
Locations of any fence damage, vegetation damage, boundary encroachments, etc. will be documented and
included on mapping.
Visual assessments will be performed along all streams on a bi-annual basis during the seven-year
monitoring period. Problem areas will be noted such as channel instability (i.e. lateral and/or vertical
instability, in -stream structure failure/instability and/or piping, headcuts), vegetated buffer health (i.e. low
stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species or encroachment), beaver activity, or livestock access.
Areas of concern will be mapped and photographed accompanied by a written description in the annual
report. Problem areas will be re-evaluated during each subsequent visual assessment.
During year 3 (2020) monitoring, onsite beaver activity was observed including a significant dam along
North Branch R3, a dam along Mud Lick Creek R2, and several smaller dams throughout the Site. In
response, on November 4, 2020, USDA trapped beaver and removed six dams. A small beaver dam was
observed during year 5 (2022) along North Branch R2, the stream was dry at the time of assessment, it was
unclear if there were active beaver populations still within the site. Beaver activity will continue to be
monitored and USDA will be notified on an as needed basis.
Supplementary Monitoring
Supplemental monitoring will include biological monitoring in the Spring as follows.
• 3 benthos sampling sites (MY3, MY5, & MY7)
• 2 fish sampling sites (MY4 & MY7)
Additional parameters are being monitored for analytical purposes and are not tied to mitigation success
and associated credit releases. The primary criteria for indication of improvement for the benthos and fish
will be an increase of at least one bioclassification between the pre -con assessment and the post -con
monitoring. Richness and EPT metrics will be analyzed as well. Based on values tabulated on Habitat
Assessment Field Data Sheets, benthic macroinvertebrate habitat appears to be improving at the Site.
Overall values for the data sheets have improved by 10 to 54 points since preconstruction. In addition, each
independent variable on the data sheets has shown improvement over the monitoring period, except for
channel modification. Biotic index (tolerance of a stream benthic community) has not shown significant
improvement with station MLC-2 shifting from a Fairly Poor to Very Poor designation, station MLC-3
shifting from Poor to Very Poor, and station NBR-5 remaining within the Poor range. A summary of
benthic results including Habitat Field Data Assessment Sheet scores and Biotic Index values from
laboratory analysis results (preconstruction to MY5) is presented below. Full MY5 benthic sampling results
and Habitat Field Data Assessment Sheets are located in Appendix F.
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Page 3
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Site
MLC-2
MLC-3
NBR-5
Habitat
Assessment
Precon
MY3
MY 5
Precon
MY3
MY5
Precon
MY3
MY5
Field Data
(2015)
(2020)
(2022)
(2015)
(2020)
(2022)
(2015)
(2020)
(2022)
Sheet Data
Channel
5
3
4
5
3
3
4
5
5
Modification
Instream
11
14
11
11
11
11
9
18
15
Habitat
Bottom
3
8
4
3
11
8
1
11
6
Substrate
Pool Variety
4
10
6
6
10
6
0
10
6
Riffle Habitats
7
14
7
7
10
7
0
16
16
Bank Stability
8
4
10
13
6
11
10
14
12
and Ve
Light
7
7
10
7
7
7
2
2
10
Penetration
Riparian Veg
2
10
10
1
10
10
12
10
10
Zone Width
Total Score
47
70
62
53
68
63
26
86
81
Biotic Index
6.01
8.05
8.25
6.64
6.68
7.70
6.90
5.90
7.70
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Page 4
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

2.0 REFERENCES
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) 2015. Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site Final
Mitigation Plan.
Rosgen D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, Colorado.
Tetra Tech, 2005. Upper Rocky River Local Watershed Plan Preliminary Findings Report. Prepared for
the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), Natural Resources
Conservation Service (MRCS), and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2003.
Stream Mitigation Guidelines. State of North Carolina.
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Page 5
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Appendix A.
Background Tables
Table 1. Project Mitigation Components
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Attributes Table
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

dF
dF
N
N
O
Q
O
V
i
fC
AA
AA
AA
N
Q
O
c}a
ao
+..
2
o
E
°
> Y
O
c_
E
N
N C
L
m
�
3 E
C a7
L
C
a) a)
E C
�
�
CO
L
U
C `O
� w
C C
0
O
Z
O O
O
E
O
W m
O
J O
>
M
O w
to
A -
N
E O
a7
a7 0
N
fA C
3 a)
Y
C
Y L
C U
Y
C
N
O
w
C
N
C
w
C
w
C
w
C Y
w
C
E
E
U
O
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
E
O
w
o
w
w
w U
w
U
N
w
C
`o
=
w
C
w
C
Y
w U
C J
ai
C
(D
C
LL
J O
C
C
C 'O
5
O
O U
a7
a7
a7 O
N
Z
a.N
a7
a
a
a 2'
a
c
o w
w O
U
N
N
O
CO
LO
O
(0M LO
N
CO
w
O
O
N_
7
CO
I-
M
O
O
7
COO
o
cco
V
c
o X
w O
LO
LO
_Lo.
U T _
N
N
d J
O
,u
O >
5 J
W
W
W
W
W
a)
r �
CO x
co
co
CO
((00
(IO
N
((00
co
N O
M
in
N
7
LO
(0
I-
Q Ll
c �
O
C 0
_w d
N
co
O
N
u)
co
O
M
(�O
O
7
N
(O
m
(0
V
I-
� W
N
(00
(f)
(O
c0
N
V
w
c
M
O
W
O
+
+
O
(n
O
(O
O
M
O
N
C
O
(0
N
O
N
(0
M
co
co
co
O
M
O
W
O
O
ON
+O
ON
CO0wN
O
O
(OO
M
co
M
w a)
C N
W L0
c0
M
N
(N
M
LO
O
lf)
M
LO
(N
c0
M
r-
� a)
� � d
c 0
O O
co
N
Y
caE)
QU
U.
OLL
co
Oiw°°0
a
z
z
z
w
w
2
2
2
c
(0 �
d N N
� � U
c
z
c
a)
�
a7
�
O
O
C U
(0 a7
d
�
�
c
�
�
N
U)
N
N
>
J
C
C
C
a
C
°
T
O
O
E
E
E
�
R
a7
a7
U
U
U
a7
N
L
fn
N
L
L
L
w
w
w
c�
a

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Mud Lick Creek (ID-93482)
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete: 5 years 3 months
Elapsed Time Since Planting Complete: 4 years 10 months
Number of Reporting Years: 5
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Project Institution
--
February 13, 2013
Mitigation Plan
--
December 2015
404 Permit Date
--
March 25, 2016
Final Design — Construction Plans
--
June 2015
Construction
--
August 25, 2017
Bare Root; Containerized; and B&B Plantings for
the Entire Project Site
February 2018
February 2018
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0 Monitoring
Baseline)
July 2018
September 2018
Monitoring Year 1 2018 Document
December 2018
December 2018
Monitoring Year 2 (2019) Document
September 2019
January 2020
Monitoring Year 3 (2020) Document
September/October
2020
January 2021
Monitoring Year 4 (2021) Document
October 2021
December 2021
Monitoring Year 5 (2022) Document
September 2022
January 2023
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Appendices

Table 3. Project Contact Table
Mud Lick Creek (ID-93482)
Designer
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (License No. F-0831)
312 West Millbrook Rd, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
Angela N. Allen, PE 919 851-9986
Construction Plans and Sediment and
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (License No. F-0831)
Erosion Control Plans
312 West Millbrook Rd, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
Angela N. Allen, PE 919 851-9986
Construction Contractor
North State Environmental, Inc.
2889 Lowery Street
Winston Salem, NC 27101
Michael Anderson 336 725-2010
Planting Contractor
North State Environmental, Inc.
2889 Lowery Street
Winston Salem, NC 27101
Stephen Joyce 336 725-2010
As -built Surveyors
Allied Associates, PA
4720 Kester Mill Road
Winston Salem, NC 27103
David Alley 336 765-2377
Baseline Data Collection
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis [phone]
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Appendices

Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Mud Lick Creek (ID-93482)
Project Information
Project name
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site
Project county
Chatham County, North Carolina
Project area (Acres)
11.2
Project coordinates lat/long)
35.8128°N, 79.4350°W
Planted Acres
9.6
Project Watershed Summary Information
Ph sio ra hic region
Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
Project river basin
Cape Fear River Basin
USGS hydrologic unit (8 digit/14-
digit)
03030003/03030003070010
NCDWR Sub -basin
03-06-12
Project drainage area mil
3.64
% Drainage area impervious
< 1%
CGIA land use classification
Developed, Forested/Scrubland, Agriculture/Managed Herb., Open Water
Reach
Summary Information
Parameters
Mud Lick
Creek—
R1
Mud Lick
Creek—
R2
Mud Lick
Creek—
R3
North
Branch —
R1
North
Branch —
R2
East
Branch
Restored length linear feet
551
660
733
856
265
576
Valley confinement
Slightly confined - unconfined
Drainage area (acres/mil)
1747/2.73
2170/3.39
2330/3.64
236.8/0.37
416/0.65
172.8/0.27
Perennial (P), Intermittent (I)
P
P
P
P
P
P
NCDWR water quality
classification
WS-III, CA
Stream Classification (existing)
E4
C4
E4
E4
134c
134c
Stream Classification (proposed)
E4
C4
E4
C4
C4
C4
Evolutionary trend (Simon &
Hu
IV/V
IV/V
IV/V
IV
IV
IV
FEMA classification
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
Reg latory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the US — Section 404
Yes
Yes
SAW-2014-00736
Waters of the US — Section 401
Yes
Yes
SAW-2014-00736
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
No Effect —
CE Document
Historic Preservation Act
No
NA
CE Document
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA/CAMA)
No
NA
NA
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
Yes
Chatham County Floodplain
Development Permit # 14-001
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
NA
NA
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A-5C. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Vegetation Plot Photographs
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Appendices

Site Location
•r,r f "' r'' 35.8128,-79.4350
- - t -
ti it
:dl
F ✓JY — �t
41
Silk Elope
421
i _�
c 1 Cvr t J M1 M1 f r
40
0 1 2 4 Siler.Cityf"
Miles -'
Directions from Silk Hope:
-Take Silk Hope -Liberty Road west for 4.1 miles
-Turn right on Siler City -Snow Camp Road; travel 0.2 mile
-The Site/farm entrance is located on the left/east side of the road
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
[phone]
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
SITE LOCATION
MUD LICK CREEK MITIGATION SITE
DMS PROJECT NUMBER 93482
Chatham County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
CLF
FIGURE
Date:
July 2018
Project:
12-004.22

m
\§
_
E
�
} �
�9>|
{)k
00
)
)
)
)
] ) |
/m >
\f>/
k
f k 0
o
0
0
0
0cn
LL
\f'a
0f
o
0
0
0
) §
]m >
M
m
0
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
f {
�
16
2]
0 w 0
o
0
0
0
'6
t
) E
o
0
0
0
zD
6.0-
e
e
e
e
e
®E
z
RzE
E]) $
e
e
e
e
e
3mJ)
o
®
=
2
0 \
+{
§ )i
:
)(
_
-
\
\\
_
}
w
�\
\ \\
\
\
mo
\\
\p
\
- 2
S.
§§
\
%)0
_
2
- _
;
/,
&
/\ coo
co/
/
/
/\
/\
®
-
-
>
-
0
�§
cn
£
6
$
G 2
j
§\
£kd
w
w§

m
\k
_
E
�
} �
�9>|
{)k
00
)
)
)
)
] ) |
/m >
\f>/
k
f k 0
o
0
0
0
0cn
LL
\f'a
0f
o
0
0
0
) §
]m >
M
m
0
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
f {
�
16
2]
0 0
o
0
0
0
'6
t
) E
o
0
0
0
zD
®|#
z
.0zE
E m $
n
n
n
n
n
z
o
®
=
2
0 \
+{
§ )i
:
)(
_
-
\
\\
_
}
w
�\
\ \\
\
\
mo
\\
\p
\
- 2
S.
§§
\
%)0
_
2
- _
;
/,
&
/\ coo
co/
/
/
/\
/\
®
-
-
>
-
cn
£
6
$
G 2
j
§\
£kd
w
w§

2
_
E
�
} �
�9>|
{)k
00
)
)
)
)
] ) |
/m >
\f>/
k
f k 0
o
0
0
0
0cn
LL
\f�)
0f
o
0
0
0
) §
]m >
M
m
0
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
f {
�
16
2]
0 0
o
0
0
0
'6
t
) E
o
0
0
0
zD
6.0-
LO
LO
LO
LO
U)
®E
z
RzE
E]) $
U)
U)
LO
LO
LO
3mJ)
®
=
2
+{
§ )ii2:
)(
_
-
\)
\\
�\
\ \\
\
\
\\
\\
\
�
\\CL
))
2
- _
/ [
Al
.0
&
co /
co/
/
U)co\
/
®
-
-
>
-
cn
£
6
$
G 2
j
}
§\
�
£kd
w
w§

$
q
R
f
&
\\
@
/
/
o
/
°
°
E\
a
o
0
\§
Ego
0)
cm)
z�
0
)
o
)
)
/
Si
z
{
)
)
_
§
]
°
°
E
§
£/
3
\
f
/
(
11
cu
\
r
\
)
y
0
)
cu
ƒ
z
k
i
�
m
J
J
0
0
0
\
(
0
2
§
#
3
16
15
�
m
2
0
)
#
a
w
w
w
»(2
+
om
_
LU
0
°
0
\§
°
E
z�
0
�f
{10
S�
r0
z
�
)E
E)
>
{
3
o
§
(
)
/
§
�
§
§
0
3
46
G
/LU
1
-
E
a
\
ui

Mud Lick Creek Stream Restoration Site
MY-05 Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken August 2022
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Mud Lick Creek Stream Restoration Site
MY-05 Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken August 2022
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Appendix C.
Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Planted Woody Vegetation
Table 8. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Table 7. Planted Woody Vegetation
Mud Lick Creek Restoration Proiect W93482)
Species
Quantity
Green Ash (Fraxinus enns lvanica)
300
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
400
Eastern Redbud (Cercis canadensis)
400
Cottonwood (Po ulus deltoides)
300
River birch (Betula ni ra)
300
Hackbe (Celtis occidentalis)
300
Black Gum (N ssa s lvatica)
300
American Elm (Ulmus americana)
300
Eastem Ho hornbeam (Ostr a vir inica)
300
Elderberry (Sambucus s )
300
Black Locust (Robinia suedoaccia)
300
Silky Dogwood (Cornus ammomum)
300
Witch Hazel (Hamamelis vir inica)
550
Buttonbush (Ce halanthus occidentalis)
300
Persimmon (Diospyros vir iniana)
300
Ironwood (Car inus caroliniana)
400
Swamp Tupelo (N ssa bi ora)
100
Swamp Chestnut oak uercus michauxiz
100
Water oak uercus ni ra
100
Tulip Poplar Liridendron tuli i era
300
TOTAL
5950
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Appendices

O
n m
m
o
�
o
io N
N
ao
d
o
M
J
O
c
a
ti�
ti
ti
m
lD N
�
^'
ao
o
�
10
O
N
~ O
m
ao
O
c
�
n
o
�
ry
a
n
w
4
—7F
ry
a
n
m
ao
m
J
O
a
ry
a
n-RT
m
o
o
�
a
m
9
A
O
o
N
ao
d
,-I
o
m
m
J
O
a
a
77 m
ti
�
N
N
O
F
W
m
m
m
M
4
N
N
m
m
~ O
N N
m
O
d'
a
R
J
W
m
N N
c
a
o
c
a
m
V
v
o
�
9
o
�
�
N
ao
d
o
0
O
C
a
m
N
^'
M
o
�
w
4
o
—
n
n
o
m m
w
ao
O
N
O
H
C
p
n
O
N m
00
M
J
O
d
ti
r
N M
W
N
N
O
H
N
rq
O
O
O
—
N
N
O
m
O
00
N
M
O
yJ
O
C
6
N
m M
N
�
N
N
F
H
u V u a
N
O
E d a y N
a
N y
H
H N
N H
H H
H H
N H
N N
H H
H H
H H
H H
H H
H H
H H
h H
H H
N N
V
L
O
00
0
VI
E
Z
°'
c°
v
-o °'
E
O Em
0
0
YE
u
3
3
Q
U
`
N
m
S
E
c
O
U Y
N
E°
V
E —`
u>°
p
O
p
o p
o u
°'
p
o 0
3 m
u v
N
v
n
n
E n
u p
°'
n o
w o
u
E
x'
O
v—
>
E._
m E
0 0
E
0
— E
E v
o—°
3
Q
0
3 0
E
Y a`,
>
3
E ._
o
0
E
oopsm
.m_v
N6E
v
Ego
O
i
"mC
uw_
0
OCNfl
Opc
o
'
m
Co..
E
zzOa
CJ
CJ CJ
> >
> >
o
v ° E
0
ti
> > c c
E E
vEE
W w

O
ti
O m
ti
�
m
ti
O
ti
�D rl
r m
n m
rl
N
m vt
ao
�
N
=ryi
m
O
0
O
r
N
d
O
O
m
O
O
a
p
^'
m
N
iom
m w
m
m
rlm
m
N w
ti
ti
ti
N�
L
d
~ O
O
a
ry
`^
�
N W
rl
m
m
vl ti�
W
I� N
vt N�
m
rl
lD N
rl
N N
vt
lD rl
�
f
O
N
=
ti
ti
O
~
O
~
N E
N
�
a
L
O
a
�
a
m
m
m
m
o
N
,-,
- N
a
O
rl
ti
ti
N�
c
¢
o
�
m
N
O
W
O
ti
N
I�
r ti
� ti
N N
ti
ti
ti
� N
ti
N N
ti N�
m
O
N r
N
N
>
=
L
d
ry
~ O
ryi
O
a
ry
`^
N m
o
r
N
n .-,
n
m
m
ry a
N
H
ti
N_
W
O
N
1 ti
N
ti
N
N N
O
O
v
r
m
cL
o
O
o
p
N
H
ti
N
ti
�
W
N
O
N
=
I�
m
N ti
r ti
ti
N rl
m
rl
N
N
W
O
~
O O
N m
>
N
d
O
0 0
O
c
a
N
N m
n ti
4
N
—
n
77 m i
N
ao
d
o
77 m
0
1
N
N
}
eel
O
H
O
c-I
m
rl
m 0
N
N
p
O
c0
G
O
N
N
~ O
ry
o
O.
v
C
O
c
N
�
O
H
O
O
—
W
O
7 77
ryi
�
m
�
O
C
a
m
N
d
V
F
H
u u¢
N y a
H
H N
N H
H H
H H
N H
N N
H H
H H
H H
H H
H H
H H
H H
h H
H H
N N
V
EN
L
C
C
E
`° °O
°
0
3
VI
Z
c°
`o
-0 °'
E
E o
m
Y
U
E
3
O
c
°
N
����
0
y
Y
O
E
mm
C S�
E
N
U
� N
�
o
0 0
o u
o 0
3 m
v
°
u c
-
Q o
v o
u
v
V
v
°i
" °'
u v
n
E n
°'
E v
0
v—
v
>
Y
E._
m E
° o
E
o
— E
E v
o
m 3
Q
°
3 0
E
Y a`,
>
3
E
._
Evi
o
w
"0
v
�
u
E o
m
'
m
6
E
O>
m
o>
—s
i
Em
6E
"C
m
E 0
N
>CUUUUO>A
O0
N
v
on
o-
oN
E E`
o o
s.
'
7
za
Ov
a a
c7 CJ
CJ CJ
>
o
v ° E
0
ti
> > c c
E E
vEE
W w
W W E E
0 0

Appendix D.
Stream Geomorphology Data
Tables lOa-10c. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Tables l la-11£ Monitoring Data -Dimensional Data Summary
Cross-section Plots
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Appendices

O
m m
m m
m
m m
m
L
a
k
_
G
G
L
r
G
y
S�OYY
�
9
ty
A
a
b�0 U
A
G
N
A
k
M
N
O
'may
/•
00
O b
o v,
r. r.
O
00 zt.
R
iYl
G
O
W
N
N
O
G
L
R
�i
5m
�000�
N�o
O
0
�
A
a
M
N
y7
N
O
�
m
G
pp
R
A
N
O
In
k
W
Qi
W
U
R
O
I -a
O
Q Q
h
W
24 O
24
3
a a
a
ro
°�'
a.
U>
w
o
CQ
CQ
E
R
°
aa�F•
p��
R
��
�a
w
ro
R
�
G
O
�
�
R
F•
O
9
�i
Pr
Pr
F
Q'

G
N N
N N
N
N N
N
s
L
q
s
G
NNR
bL
G
R
Z'
O
O
S
R
y�
L
N �
q
o
q
q
�
o
/•
iYl
G
O
W
N 0
(J
O
O
L
�
�i
O
O
s
`o
q
v,
L
�
N
R
V
N
bL
Y,
k
a
W
U
R
O
a
IflHil
�
W
d
.�
Hil
�
77777�+
wWWv
77777
w w�+
~ W
W "
yC�
N
Q�i
Q�i
ywN�' ,
�
ttl
O
a
t3
R
G
O
�
�
F•
R
O
9
q
a
a
F

G
N N
N N
N
N N
N
s
G
R
q
�
G
R
bL
G
G
C
O
R
�
O
R
v
O
O
�
p
vl
W O
m m
N
�
[n N
•�
N
0
q
h
q
O
Y
G
N
G
R
C.
O
0
s
G
q
�
L
k
R
R
G
N N
9
O
U
p
G
k
W
0.i
W
7
U
o
,W7
C4
.a
a
U
.�
•o
k,
o
G
��
o
p C
y
' '�
� o
0
R
p,
O
X b
R

\))
)/)
;!
1
11111111
MISSION
I
_

illlll■III
IIBIII
II
'os'oe.,00
IIIIIIIIII
IIIIII
!I
MINES
�os000.�'m
IIIIIIIIII
191BII■,II
IIIIII'
��
'°T o
x a
F �
IIIII
�I,BIIIII
III
III
mii
�ioe'amn
n�i
in
�i,00nn
n�i
mii
mii
in
�a�o�aon
n�i
in
�I,IIIIII
III
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
III
�1011llll
III
111
�I�IIIIII
III
III
�Iml9@@II
III
III
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
�l,111191
III
III
�9,111191
III
III
�I�IIIIII
III
III
�B�IIIIII
III
III
�I,IIIIII
III
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
111
�I�IIIIII
III
III
�I,II@I91
III
III
�8,199111
III
III

IIIIII■III
111119■,II
IIIIII■,II
111199■�00
IIIIIBI
�asoov.,'o
1911111
!I
IIIIIIIIII
111190■,BI
'°T o
x a
F �
IIIII
Illllilli
����
III
�i,nmmn
n�i
nni
nni
nni
ni
�om'a�n'
n�i
ni
�omoe�an
n�i
ni
�i,00nn
n�i
nni
nni
ni
�Ill�lll
���ooa�n
n�i
ni
�o,00nn
n�i
nni
nni
IIIII
ni
�0000nn
n�i
ni
�Bm119911
III
III
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
MIllIIIIII
III
III
�I,IIIIII
III
III
�I�IIIIII
III
III
�lmi01@II
III
III
�i,nmmim
n�i
nni
nni
nni
ni
Mi,vaaia'
nIIi
ni
�o,nnn
n�i
ni

g
¢
b
HIM
0
r
o
U
0
x
a
OW
���
o��
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

O
o
,1
1
1
1
M
,1
1
1
11
,1
1
II
1
1
11
,1
M
�
1
�
1
O
1
�1
1
�1
�
1
4
0
'1
'
1
O
-o
N
0
F� W
�i
3
0
0
U
N
0
w
� o
U Q
t
to
� O
U to
w � �
a �
M 00
in
0 0 W N W O V M I- W In N V N W LC) M V W
• O In LO O CO V r- r M M 'I-LO CO V O InLn N
00 00 00 I1 r CO CO LC) V M M M M M M M V Ln M r r
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
� W
O
sue.
Fti
66
OW
CID
�
o

��IIIIII�
i
U
J•
1
O
i.�
z
m
^O
O
M
�
�
�
N
�
Y
U
a
�
�
R
�
1
w
'
i
0
o
0
0�
oo
(;aafi uoeInnapg
M '
a�66
s I.Mx
Z s
e �A l S•
1 s
9 �
H
sue.
U Ca
�z
�o
w M N
a �
o _
•p �n � •--i o0 �n •--i O O� 00 O M o0 l� N o0 �n O�
%•> o0 00 00 l� �o �o �o �n �n �o �o �o l� o0 00 00 00
v, W
� � •.w N � �O M �O O o0 �O � M o0 00 l� O� O O�
f WOW
A L�
ri, �C
N
��^�NzzNN�zzz
in
•�
l
�
�
�
�
N
�
o
rii
y
^O
�
pa
0

4�
ol
R,
I lip
�
N
ISM
pi
Ca
�
U
G
O
�z
o CC
w
cNl w
NOW
a
N O M LC) M LC) LC) O 00 00 CO CO
•�
•�
(O LC) N 00 V 0 0 0 0 N LC) O r O
00 00 00 I� r CO CO r CO r r � 00 00
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
v�
W
sue.
�•
� L�
O O � � O M N � � \O � M Vl M
�
�y
W
��c�i�oNZ
�o
�
o
O
�
.
W
O
M
W
O
1
�
N
1
1
�
1
�
1
1
1
z
1
1
1
1
1
1'
�
1
1
�,
1
1
1
1
�
U
1
1
1
1
�
i
q
�
1
1
?
1
1
1
1�
1
1
a
1
1
�
1
1
�
C.
�
1
1
U
1
1
1
1
O
0
0
0
(;aafi
u0e1nn01g

a
0
=m
0
H
CID
�
Ca
ow
�o
oc
w
N
OW
a �
U o
•�
0
M Vl O " - - V- C, C, O M — - --i N 00 In \O
O E M O� O, �� N N �--i �--i �--i �n N l� O M M
v,
W
CC
�
••" O M �n O� �O �O N �O �O � O� O�
00 �n O M l- O l�
�°°��zzNN�zzz
�
o
0
�illlll�
0
�
U
I
�I
`
1
o
N
i.�
�
I
�
I
N
O
yC
�
I
U
U
I
O
�
I
I
U
I
I
0
(;aafi u0e1nnapg

U
OW
r~
CID
Ca
�
U
G
O
�z
U y
N w
.a o
CD
a �
(-4Lt700 0000 V NNM LO �000 COM
•�
•
00MM0001- V-01— 00 MM
00000
00 I� r r r CO CO CO CO Ln Ln to M
W W W W W W W W W W W W W
r r r 00 00
W W W W W
v�
W
O
sue.
O
i'+ 4 4 4 C, M CDoo �O
1� oo O oo O�
�
�y
W
�
o
W
0
M
O
'
N
�
O
�
,
N
w
�
M
0
a
'
�
w
�
U
�
�
o
�o v,
(;aa�
uoe�nnapg

00 �
� �o t` ^, o o •� •� o 0o Z •�
� o
rii y ^O ea pa
o
W
�
0
N
1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 N
� 1
� 1
� 1
� 1 1
� 1
w 1
� 1
1 II
1 1
� 1 1
1 1 0
� 1 1
� i 1
� 1
� 1 1
1 1
? 1 II
1 1
1 1
� 1 1
1 II
� 1 1
� 1 1
1 II
1 1
1 II
1 1
0
0 0�
�
0 0
(;aa� uoe�nnapg
�
0
N
1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 N
� 1
� 1
� 1
� 1 1
� 1
w 1
� 1
1 II
1 1
� 1 1
1 1 0
� 1 1
� i 1
� 1
� 1 1
1 1
? 1 II
1 1
1 1
� 1 1
1 II
� 1 1
� 1 1
1 II
1 1
1 II
1 1
0
0 0�
�
0 0
(;aa� uoe�nnapg

o�^�zzNN�zzz
�
o
rii
y
^O
�
pa
o
i I I I I I
I 1
1
0
�
�
1
1
FQ
1
1
�
�
W
�
I
I
1
1
1
1
O
1
1
1
O
O
I
I
1
U
1
a
�
1
�
�
1
�
1
�
1
1
�
1
�
�
�
�
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0 0 0
(;aa� uoe�nnapg

f
7
Y
��3i4. YM .7'Yi
s _
U Q
O �
� cO�
� W
w:ao N
a �
O V ISO r-O N
p N 00 LO O V O L1- r O O M
q 0 0 0 0
y 0 0 0 0 (Ti���� O O O
v� W
O
sue.
fU
oOO0000,�,�ONZ,�
M
O
rii
O
y
^O
�
pa
�
.
W
1
O
M
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
N
1
Frl
�+
'
1
h
�
W
�
�
'
O
N
�
1
1
�
0
�
1
�
1
v,
1
�
1
a
'
O
�
1
W
�
1
1
1
1
O
(;aa� uoe�nnapg

M
O
M
'dr S ?ay
f;•
d
�
■
•�
N
4'
OW
CID
CD
I•�
•�
O
Y
N�
W
Q
U
V
� �
o
w
w o N
(1aafi U011DA01a
a �
M 00
in
O0m V OCO 00O wo M ONI-00 O LnM
•�
•
00 00 CO M V O O W O Ln V V CO
00 I� O
M Ln O
I� r CO Ln V V M M M M M M M
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M V Ln
0 0 0
O r W O
0 0 0 0
v�
W
O
sue.
N N
�
�y
W
O
rii
y
^O
ea
pa
��illll��
o
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I1
1
1
1
II
1
1
1
II
1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
II
1
1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
�1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
�1
1
1

Appendix E.
Hydrology Data
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Appendices

Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Mud Tick Greek Restoration Site (DMS Proiect No. 93482)
Date of Data
Date of
Method
Photo (if
Collection
Occurrence
available)
December 6, 2018
October 16-17,
Observations throughout floodplain and crest gauge indicate
1, 2
2018
a bankfull event after 4.61 inches of rain fell over 48 hours.
Observation of wrack in floodplain along North Branch R2
May 8, 2019
February 24, 2019
and crest gauge data from all site crest gauges indicate a
3
bankfull event after 2.27 inches of rain fell over 48 hours.
Observation of wrack on Mud Lick Creek R2 floodplain
September 18, 2019
July 24, 2019
fences and crest gauge data from all site crest gauges indicate
4
a bankfull event after 3.02 inches of rain fell over 48 hours.
Observations of wrack throughout site along all stream
May 29, 2020
February 7, 2020
reaches, and crest gauge data from all site crest gauges
5, 6, 7
indicate a bankfull event after approximately 3.59 inches of
rain fell over 24-hour period.
Observations of wrack throughout site along all stream
November 16, 2020
November 12, 2020
reaches, and crest gauge data from all site crest gauges
8,9
indicate a bankfull event after approximately 4.60 inches of
rain fell over 48-hour period.
Observation of wrack in floodplain along North Branch R2
August 12, 2022
July 9, 2022
and crest gauge data from all site crest gauges indicate a
10
bankfull event after 2.80 inches of rain fell over 48 hours.
r
Photo-3
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final)
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)
Appendices

2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

a1 it
k tom.
't�:i• �k 1!"`. �'� >E}

2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

Appendix F.
2022 Benthic Macroinverteb rate Sampling Data
Results
Habitat Forms
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

AXIOM, MUD LICK CREEK, CHATHAM CO., NC, BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED 6/9/2022.
PAIID NO
55806
55808
55807
STATION
MLCR2 2
MLCR3 3
NBR5 5
DATE
6/9/2022
6/9/2022
6/9/2022
SPECIES
Tolerance
Value
Functional
Feeding Group
ANNELIDA
Hirudinea
P
Rhynchobdellida
Glossiphoniidae
P
Batrachobdella phalera
P
1
ARTHROPODA
Crustacea
Cladocera
Chydoridae
Alona sp.
2
Amphipoda
CG
Hyalellidae
Hyalella azteca
7.2
CG
1
2
Insecta
Ephemeroptera
Baefidae
CG
Callibaetis sp.
9.2
CG
1
Odonata
Aeshnidae
P
1
Coenagrionidae
P
3
Ischnura sp.
9.5
1
1
1
Corduliidae
Somatochlora sp.
8.9
P
3
4
Plecoptera
Perlidae
P
Perlesta sp.
2.9
P
4
Hemiptera
Corixidae
PI
2
1
Palmacorixa sp.
2
Megaloptera
Sialidae
P
Sialis sp.
7
P
5
5
3
Coleoptera
Dytiscidae
P
Neoporus sp.
5
1
Hydrophilidae
P
Tropisternus sp.
9.3
P
1
1
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
P
1
Chironomidae
Chronominae
1
Cryptochironomus sp.
6.4
P
1
Einfeldia sp.
CG
2
Kiefferulus dux
1
2
Microtendipes pedellus gp.
3.9
CG
1
Polypedilum illinoense gp.
8.7
SH
1
Procladius sp.
8.8
P
1
2
1
TOTAL NO. OF ORGANISMS
18
23
19
TOTAL NO. OF TAXA
9
12
12
EPTINDEX
0
2
0
BIOTIC INDEX ASSIGNED VALUES
8.25
6.68
7.70
PAI, Inc. Page 1 of 1 AxiomMucLickCrk 6 9 22c1

E
�
y
L
f�
to i y
� Y O
i
N
o 'o w
C,2 y
=
j C0 y .r
L.•
VJ 1'^ Y Y
co
u
� N
Cd tz
CC*� °
o
0
3 •—
U
Q
CC
cz
ed. O O
CO
L YU Y Cd
-0
r °
d
Q�
C
o b
0
FL
elN
cc
F
n0�
z
Cei
L n E40.
o
..-
.�n
O 3 Y
`L
..2
°
Doti
o o
LJ�
EsF�•o
Y
O
cd cd � y
a
3
❑ Y o
0
C Y �
E
y 0. Cd00 t)
a
v O
o
�. ty y
Q
Y
40. Y
N
i
O 0
r�
cn
J
b
al
L:.
�I
Do
r�
"Cl
x
E
'O
3
w
0
U
0 0
v72
m
0IQ 0
❑
N
C
a�
U
3
3 a
0
a
cd N
Y
N
I �
o
U 5
o 'b a�
o
m cd N O
cd E cad >
O icn'
a
z-2
❑ 40,
na
3 �
o c
0
�1
'OL,b
cad
Q •N � p
a �U
0. 0❑ ❑
ti
CY)

d
a,
l
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
a) y
L
Q
N
: O
o
vi C ,
bA
U rY
CIS 0
C
C
U C In T
IN�
c6
3 E L E
` V
o
cd C
Q.
0 3
o
O °
E
C o
t >
s C
�.• O (i., O
O U
-0 o
n N
o 3
U C 4 4
0
c� ¢, s0.
C
F
Q a`)
i
o
o �333c�>
�"7QCGULIW
d
C
C
0
U
E
E
Y
Q
■
O
0
d
j
0
V] v�N�l 1 N O O
C
CS..
�
:s
:E
O
. W
C
4.
.�G
C U
o
o
• U
; � bA ,ti
O
O
cC
twV
a) ,OT
"y
L
v CV o
U
bap
'
O O
y �
N
Y rn
c c
cd
o ;; o
U y U
cNC U
C4
c'N o 0
C U >
O N
U N 4❑
a)
V
E &
O� E C
�°QWUQW
0
C
U
w'�
r
\C
;
a
co
co

E
CC
O
0 oU. K
N OI oO n M
V �
O �
0v,,rrn
U It
N
n�
Cd
a
cn aKi R 0 V7
�/j Vi 0 ice..
G
kn N 47 N
A ate+ K
M N
K
O
0�
T
C)
0
3
0
z
b
cu
au
^o
b
'C
N
w
E
E
x
O
O
L
= "D N o0 e}
io O i 1-OOF0 —
O O O O
O O � � V)� � �
't A y V A�
7 V] V U1 y y > y 'n O CC fC CC CC
C� G C❑ K� C ❑ C K K K K
i N R u u 0a) i, (u 0 bA
f 7C ^0 'd 'd 'd �, 'C 'C O cYd cYG N
N d U N N N d N N w v1 to ti
1 4 N Kl 4 .-. N N M 4
On a c
r10
Cq U G1
0
o.
"O
-d
0 0
m
z Y
U �
O Y
N
0 R OU 0
2_�
bA
N �
U y
7 O
Y VI
o
y
y) Y
O
K �
� O
O 0
N O
Y C)
3 �°
� C
`� DA
O 0
E 0Q
ai n
E E O
0
to b
G]
o
N O N_
4. N N co
Ocn O O
R 4' O 0
U O Y
O C,3
Y + _�
00 fd 'L O
o, u c > °o.
L ( cd -0
a° o
O O
Cd
o m
cd
rn
c+)

ELp-
c
m
E
co
co
co
co
co
0
E
N
co
Z3
Q
.k
a
z
Q)
4
Q
F-'
v O
K
Cd
k
3
O
7,
m
X
G
b
E
0
0.1
❑
s
C
O
C
�
r.i
O
of
E of �,
W
2 0
E :w
R
>Q
o
3
X cd
Y
N O
b y 3 o
aoi:aE �
a�
d Cc M 3
N x ❑
N
m C O
N
In
ce
O
N N �'• : N
f : d%
clj In
CU
0 Y E
cc b U
Q 0 ca
3 w e
Q 0.1 U G
s
U
Y
O
i
by.K
ce
Or U
O K
O. O O
Q U
❑
O 'C rn
N C,3
^ N s
ce
y O
v� U
a�
>>
9 O p
ea
a� E K
� E � �,
on
O
0
m
m
L
zw a
�za
pa d
CO
�
E
>
OC
m
9
U
U IO
(/)I voo n N O
cd
N
T
[Yd m
o �
cq
one �C's
W U p
ce K
O In K
s cd w
0 CLclj
K O U
U",
o u K
GOA rw0, C. �.
3 •3 •3 •3 c
a
Y Y cn
¢C6cjdPi
0
It

E
Lp-
N O
cd N
U
_C 'O
y O
C
d�
o
G1 0 Q ze Y M N 7 M N .--� M N O Cd
O (� UD
N — M N— O a Q
0
O
°o a F"
�N
U Cd
�a _r_
O U U
c N
cj ^d
N N
Y
w Incz
`I m
N
ti N U U
L ,y
cUC � O
0 O O >
> E
� � U
O
N
OJ
33 E00cd
� o
n v n .D V o
>40- 3 ci„ E C o a o o oa o a
3333o33Z3 b
cu
y ❑p n N V q cd ci -o cd p ti 1d
cd
�N3333N� o
C c� N c ❑ 4-
a/ s C
> E
Cd
r; • ❑ � y � d Oq c° f�
> a) TEL C) ❑
v

Y
p
C
a�
E
O
ram+
t b
q
co
R y
co
rl
y
.� oco
y
b
Qi
w
to
ev
\
O
a
r p m
s
a
= co
��°'-0
c
O
i
O
0
o cd;l'yb
s
Y
o
a
a�i
Qo�.�o
�
1
,-•
a
a.
.�
bx
a
�
O Iz
I
o
Y
U
0
�v+
�❑
w M
•O
Q
F
E
_
Q
3
Cdd
w
Nro
'�
V
CD
�rE
0
OUZ
C
•�
CC
O
N
rA N
�'
ci
cp
O
w
O
a�
^o
o
o�
0
a
�_
��
qcb
Y
cd
Y
o
b�
d3Y
o
°
° o �;
1
°
o
on
on
i
El
e
7 ch pcd
w
W
'a
0. N .off
O
E��°
❑
l.,
d
❑
°'moo
�o>
C
U
❑
o .� •� a�
a
.d
Q-'
� y
a�
�❑
U L
x
Q �
.k
p.^b ,3
�
�,
Fo
C's
u a� o o
�►
t
p
i
�= Cd
3
o
T
on
O
N
id
a
pO
�'�
o
>
y y
° O
�•v
0.
v p
o
rm-
coC,3v
C
n Q
C
O
s,
Q40.
cCd 'v
d
bD Z'
•�'
� �
�
�
O 7.. O Cd Y
i
�+
`n
.=
Cd
� y
>v
�
3
C
3 as
C��• U
ca �❑
Qi
❑
ti
M

❑❑�❑❑
3 cq 'S
❑ C
❑
U
'y T3
O O
01)
❑ U dCd
b
° ❑
C cd
bA
Cd 00 U W
:- C U W A
.O 'n
U =
Cd
C, d)CL
4, N
L
'�
❑ iR.
p Y cl
cd .D o
p >
-a ❑ Z
`
y
CCdd U
W o
�;
O N
❑
?, A cq
N
0 3
U
�
0 0 cu 0
V1 Y r•• +U.•
p �'
3w»3rz>
>^°a
0 cd u
x
cd o
U
❑r�FCJ
91
W
o
x
i1
Y ❑
'O
N
O
: v
U
O
R7 p A
. •,F,
'C
C's
y
V O
M
O ? y
,b �
III
�
•N
to
ou
O
cd
N
�•^ N (�j y
id cd .N N C3. G
ooa�•y
Y d
b
1 '
❑
U
o UU••
G]
U r
ew =
p °c o
^O
0¢ai�gwb
o
_
�
U
C
41
b
U
u�-
y N
., sr
O �
i
co
co

E
L2
4
Q
N
N '
O N
N y
WO N �
O O +'
enO •�
R O
" O �
�cd
�- o
> a
as-cs
O
0
a,
N
-a
C
a
�
O
C) O
t� V
c�
s0,
M&
o E
N 0
b C's S
cd Y N p
�X c ❑
N
moo•= `3
a= O
_4
b
cd E. ly
N N
"
cd
o
cd : U
c 3 C3
w 0
b cisC rn y
CA
dCGUA r
L'
U
�
OI
O
0
V]
U
Q
�
W
i
by
a�
i
y
N
c, o A o
' O zgi
d N O S U m U >
N
0 a+ Ri V]
� otn� C; �
e� U O
O O y > O O p 0:5
�•pzw W � C��z� W
�WcV M�14--�Ncri�v': �
Q
Q�
0
a
L
O
�
O �
Vl
oo 1�V 1 N O
3
>,
O
U
A
O
O N cd
rn N
� ❑ sU. �i
d
40+ U d Q
c
t
fi W • � �
O � ❑ O
N vOi W
O c C
0
ooiow?aE�
3 3 3 •3 0
CZ C/) 80 on
d06(id W
0

E
L
O
O LI
ON U
V �1
o O
O �
C1
O �
N
O y
U 1. m
O �
N
O O O C% 00 [�
n CA
z
b
b
a�
b
b
N
w
a�
E
O
O
d
O
V]
,-r •--� DD M
7
0-
M M N • d
x
Y U
O ,ti
N C O 00
O O
cd cd w m
p V N A
y V A
V
C F F F F
Op F F
C F F F F
ai vpi cpi� vpi
Gy7 N N N N
d N U
W
W
A
y
FC
U
4
O
rn
co

LE
0
O
7
x
A
o
N O
M
cd
p
�
F
0
U
GC1 O
a'
N
M N M N O
a
F
6
U
'O
U
U
k
T
W
C8
0
_N
4,
¢
O
O
>
�
N
d
3
�
F
N
h
� � i••1
� � y Ly
o
x : :cd
ice+
U U N
M E N U
O
pi -0
�
oo CIA
—N
�
Eb c n o
0
o,
cl
C n D V O
Cd -6 U 'C
U Cd -6 ti 'C
^
O oO
a 3 3 3 3
.fl
w
b
,-
> fl
E
I
U
E d W
Q
Q
� ❑

Y
LL
N
.0
fp .0 CL'U C. •�+ '� CL
CQ a� O
(Ti iY N
�_ Y 3 :�
a c r Cr.
.S u c�
C
C CF: O O 2 b v
ITI
k *r a bA - O
a y Q o p p o k
4 rn O L 3+ U O N cc a ❑
Azz
as wZ a on y
y, N Y 41. y CA
td
cn
ii QI t vi o CO ❑ ❑ +.+ \ CCl
Cd
0 3 c a� pa ❑ occCd E y c
15
x U
O N C.' .D �y .�G �•^ C
Cd
N V+ Q
0f1 O
°� 3 ❑ cw ° aaa�
CD
W cC Y � ❑ .fl
V; O O U O w N
a)U rn 5 U U ' b11 �, .� C> -. O , bA
� "C y o OCL
++ Cn
COD G O 0 A
00 Ncd -o c0
oG oA o o
o o 0 i
A o .�� 3 a w >u 3 3 ca as❑❑❑
ti
M

E
L2
Cd
ti U
O. o
C
U y
LO
c>C
vi _N
C 0
O
'y
cu S],
O
0
O
J
o
7�
n u
°'
❑❑❑❑
0
V]
co
tn(:\M N O O
n b
O
lu >
y
0
N
3m
w
� ❑
¢
O
❑ �
ti
cd
O
+
C�
.O N
U l••�
ice,
N +�-+
'
�
O
W
F." 0
'
^1.
+�... C'I
C U 'O
0. U
❑
cOC
N !S
ed
❑ ° U a
� b �
Ca
; o
�
?� Y
o
y
o
0 _
V] r Z
cu
U fn
'o
O
�"
❑
a
�
Qo
C �
c>z,
N
N❑ ❑
S"U. g
sD.
Uto
y
y
c� ❑
n .K ti
t
: C
: C O
O
p
N
O
O vi O
y
� O
`
O ❑ O
�
v; C
N IF
UOl�,
Q.]❑ C
o
3 0�
cdo�0
o
a� ❑ u°AnY
d0
a°i�
ff❑
�,
�
�N
0.
J
+� °
w
,� ❑ O a
w
s� O 4. O
a`i
C4 v
3
}co' U m
U
s^ U
Z bA C
o o
�pc in \4-�
C
c
U'� o
m�
n
``
C G
O
C❑ bq �'
y
U '�
A N
O cC
0 3
C
°
X m❑
N 0 '°
U
O
U
U N
U
m z U
o a�i
°
Q al
U �1 W°
❑_
" y
�'
Grr�QGGUQ
W
Ui.
v,
L.
u cd ZJ O.
C
s,
C
b
d u
y O
W C�44
cCe
4�
m
cocc
s
> E
rcriC. y
❑ m u
3
a
04
oC�
u
A
00
C`')

W
�o rr o cd
m
,cn-r-m
.�,
Cd
w
Cd
Z
O
o i E
cd
3 cl
� � 3 o
b Cd
N
'C co
cd Y N O
a`di 0 E ❑
N r.
•3�py :w
�
E. ly
NCd
*� C
LO.
-d E
c Cd
N W
Cc
w 3 �p
b 0 m
QaoUA �
U
c
l� �O M O (— kn M N O
0 : r
H 00
lu
a o o ^ q o 0
N N N N •Y
O O f V co p
d N O N y U>
bL y^ 4.
0 y y `4 O ,,C
a o ° o
ca E I lu
"ozWa CZ.a
N cn 'ct rr N cn 4"
w
Qi
0
O :
iC � vNi
vUi
C 9 N ce
�.0 c'�w
W ,i,
a
cf) ¢ In
O y72 5
C431 A
to
0 CL C U b
U V O
O
bOAw Q.•�" �
3 3 3 3 0
V1 CA rA Z
QtY1Uf� W
0
It

R
o
ool00r-�otr,
V �
o y
O N O
U �-+ •-� �--�
O �
N
4
cl
O
3
0
z
11
'd
ai
G
'O
N
'O
O
N
P
a�
m
x
O
O
OOO
M
00 M M N .--� O
rn
M

E
c
a�
co
co
m
co
Go
Q
V
a3
0
Szs
G
I
Q
k
C
m
Q
Q
N
R
L
o
�t M N
It M N M N •--O
Y
0
LLO
C/J \ v� ; M N
d• M N M N
U
v/
U
W
b
w
b
o
L1I
J N
N
N
La
U
0 , c,
00
n V
a A V
�`/ ai Ctl
Y+�+Y
Of Zf
L
b b
E5 b b b
n= 16 V c
fl o d
ai ci c
N y Y ate"-. (U .SC
045 cd
Xi
O 0 'O O •5 ad
•Y�333.3��
a�
�
� •-� N M � �
N
i��
O
Q
am,
n

Appendix G.
2022 Adaptive Management Plan
2022 MY5 Annual Monitoring Report (Final) Appendices
Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site (DMS Project # 93482)

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
DATE: October 25, 2022
TO: IRT Members
FROM: DMS, Jeremiah Dow
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
MEMORANDUM
RE: Mud Lick Creek Project
Request for IRT Approval of Adaptive Management Plan for Supplemental Planting
Mud Lick Creek is a design -bid -build stream project that was instituted on 2/13/2013. Wildlands
Engineering, Inc. prepared the mitigation plan in 2015 and Axiom Environmental, Inc. was contracted to
perform project monitoring. In 2021 DMS contracted Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Baker) to manage
invasive and nuisance vegetation. Baker will also provide the supplemental planting services. The
project is currently in monitoring year 5. In MY4, four veg plots — 1, 6, 10, & 11— out of 12 plots did not
meet success criteria
On 6/4/2021, the IRT and DMS conducted a credit release site visit where areas of low density and/or
low vigor were identified. No additional management activities were prescribed at that time and the IRT
recommended continued monitoring of problematic areas with an understanding that supplemental
planting may be necessary. Baker was contracted to manage fescue in low vigor areas and thin sweet
gum on the eastern side of the project to reduce competition with existing planted stems. On August
30, 2022 DMS personnel visited the site to assess the invasive and nuisance vegetation management
efforts and low stem density/vigor areas. During that site visit it was determined that supplemental
planting would be necessary, and targeted planting areas were mapped with GPS.
Due to competition with dense herbaceous vegetation and sweet gum, and evidence of widespread
deer browse, it was decided that the site should be supplementally planted with 1 gallon and 3 gallon
containerized trees. Proposed planting list is attached, and all listed species are from the approved
Mitigation Plan.
2.04 acres are proposed for supplemental planting out of 9.6 total acres planted which accounts for 21%
of the total planted area.
D E WA-1 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
NORTH CAROLINA
oepam emmEnmronm�lQuslfty /� 919.707.8976

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
Supplemental planting will include the following:
Size
Species
Quantity
1 Gall.
Nyssa sylvatica (Black Gum)
25
1 Gall.
Ulmus americana (American Elm)
25
3 Gall.
Platanus occidentalis (Sycamore)
50
3 Gall.
Populus deltoides (E. Cottonwood)
50
3 Gall.
Betula nigra (River Birch)
50
3 Gall.
Sambucus canadensis (Elderberry)
50
1 Gall.
Cornus amomum (Silky Dogwood)
50
1 Gall.
Hamamelis virginiana (Witch Hazel)
50
1 Gall.
Diospyros virginiana (Persimmon)
50
3 Gall.
Quercus michauxii (Swamp Chestnut Oak)
50
3 Gall.
Liriodendron tulipifera (Tulip Poplar)
50
D E WA-1 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
NORTH CAROLINA
oepam emmEnmronm�lQuslfty /� 919.707.8976

From: Dow, Jeremiah J
To: Isenhour. Kimberly T CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Cc: Tuawell. Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Haywood. Casey M CIV USARMY CESAW (USA); Davis. Erin B;
Wilson, Travis W.; kathryn matthews(�bfws.aov; Allen. Melonie; Bowers, Todd; Crocker, Lindsay; Crumblev, Tyler
A CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Notice of IRT Adaptive Management Plan Review/ NCDMS Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site/
Chatham County/ SAW-2014-00736
Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 3:54:00 PM
Attachments: MudLickCreek IRT Ada otiveManaaementReauestMemo 2022.odf
Please see response to comments in red below.
Thank you,
Jeremiah
From: Isenhour, Kimberly T CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 1:27 PM
To: Dow, Jeremiah J <[e-mail]>
Cc: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US)<[e-mail]>; Haywood, Casey M
CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Davis, Erin B
<[e-mail]>; Wilson, Travis W. <[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]; Allen, Melonie <[e-mail]>; Bowers, Todd
<[e-mail]>; Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]>; Crumbley, Tyler A CIV
USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] RE: Notice of IRT Adaptive Management Plan Review/ NCDMS Mud Lick Creek
Mitigation Site/ Chatham County/ SAW-2014-00736
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to Report Spam.
Good afternoon,
The 15-day comment review period for the NCDMS Mud Lick Creek Mitigation Site Adaptive
Management Plan (SAW-2014-00736) closed on November 12, 2022. Per Section 332.8(o)(9) of the
2008 Mitigation Rule, this review followed the streamlined review process. NCDMS requested to
supplementally plant 2.04 acres of 9.6 total acres or 21% of the planted area this winter at Mud Lick
Creek. The MY4 report indicated 4 vegetation plots failed due to herbaceous competition and
sweetgum. Additionally, during the 6/4/2021 credit release site visit, the IRT noted several areas of
low stem densities and/or low vigor and many plots had evidence of deer browse. All comments
received during the review process are below.
1. Erin Davis, DWR: DWR concurs with all of EPA's comments below. Additionally, we request
green ash be removed from that supplemental planting list. Please either include an
additional species or adjust quantities of other species listed. Green Ash was removed from
the supplemental planting list and replaced with Black Gum and American Elm. An updated
version of the AMP memo is attached with the new planting list.
2. Todd Bowers, EPA: The need and approach for supplemental planting with mitigation

plan approved species is well demonstrated. The only issue I have is coming up with an
new monitoring scheme for the Mud Lick Creek site. I recommend an annual monitoring
plan that contains a couple more veg plots in the larger of the supplementally planted
areas to ensure the additional trees along with those established are progressing
toward success; at least to the third year criteria before final closeout. If interim success
is not met then additional monitoring (beyond MY7) and possibly another round of
planting and additional monitoring may be needed.
• Proposed species are approved.
• Recommend additional veg plots (2) to monitoring larger areas that received
supplemental planting. DMS will monitor random veg transects in the 2 larger
supplemental planting areas (large area south of VP4 and the area near VP3).
• Monitor new areas/veg plots for 3 years to include MY5, 6, and 7. The site is in
MY5 now and will not be planted until the start of MY6 but transects or veg plots
in the supplemental planting areas will be monitored in MY6 through project
closeout.
• Full closeout if performance standards in new veg plots meet third year
performance (>320 stems/acre) at MY7. Understood.
• If trend is not towards success at MY7, extend monitoring period and do not
close out until all areas/veg plots are meeting performance criteria. Understood.
3. Travis Wilson, WRC: WRC requests an additional year of vegetation monitoring. Understood,
please see response to USACE below.
4. Kim Isenhour, USACE:
a. Was the beaver dam removed, and did it affect the vegetation in plot 10? DIMS has
managed beaver with APHIS throughout this project and will continue to do so if
beaver are active. Currently the small dam is not affecting VP10. It is not clear that it is
an active dam.
b. What are the pink lines on the stream bank near veg plot 3? That was included in
error. It is the location of a stream problem area that was identified in MY1 and has
been shown on the CCPV since as an area to closely monitor.
c. Why is the area around plot 10 not being replanted? This is the area with extremely
dense Sweet Gum (102 stems in VP10 in MY4) that has since been thinned, but at the
time it was nearly impossible to assess an accurate stem density for the area. The
latest draft monitoring report for MY5 shows zero (0) Sweet Gum and sufficient planted
stems (323/acre) to meet success criteria. The plot has 607 stems/ acre counting
Green Ash and Sycamore volunteers.
d. Are soil amendments needed? It's difficult to know the source of the low stem density
without more information. Soil amendments are not proposed. Herbaceous
competition is the primary cause of low stem density.
e. It would have been helpful to include the reach names on the map and a soils map. For
future submittals, please follow the attached Adaptive Management Plan Guidance. In
the future we will closely follow the Adaptive Management Plan Guidance.
f. When deer browse has been an issue on past projects, such as Vile Creek, alternative
species were proposed that seemed to survive. Was this considered? The initial

planting list was very diverse, and although we didn't select species to address deer
browse, there are at least 2 species on the current list that are deer resistant (River
Birch & Tulip Poplar).
g. The Corps concurs that an additional year of vegetation monitoring should occur in
MY6, to include two additional plots. Prior to close-out, the Corps requests transect
data in several of the replanted areas to assess overall vegetation success. In MY6, we
will do veg monitoring in the 2 large areas as described above. In MY7 we propose to
monitor 3 areas (areas near VP1, VP2, & VP11) in addition to the 2 veg transects to be
monitored in MY6, for a total of 5 transects in MY7.
Please reach out with any questions.
Have a nice Thanksgiving,
Kim
Kim Isenhour
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1 919.946.5107