20080058 Ver 1_Mitigation Closeout Report_20150903

Unnamed Tributary to Crab Creek
DMS ID (IMS#): 857
Contract Number: 004495
USACE ACTION ID # SAW-2008-0173
DWQ 401# 08-0058

2015 CLOSEOUT REPORT: Stream and Wetland

Project Setting & Classifications
Meeting XY Coordinates:
36.552892, -80.964918
Project County Alleghany
General Location Sparta
Physiographic Region Mountain
Ecoregion New River Plateau
Project River Basin New River
USGS HUC for Project (14 digit) 05050001030020
NCDWQ Sub-Basin for Project 05-07-03
Thermal Regime Cold
Trout Waters Yes
Project Performers
Source Agency NCDMS
Provider Design bid build
Designer KCI Associates
Monitoring Firm Equinox
Environmental
Channel Remediation Carolina
Environmental
Plant Remediation Carolina
Environmental
Approved for transfer to stewardship Yes
Stewards NCDENR

Project Activities and Timeline

Milestone Month-Year
Project Instituted June 2006
Permitted April 2008
Construction Completed April 2010
As-Built Survey June 2010
Year 1 Monitoring October 2011
Year 2 Monitoring December 2011
Beaver Removal September 2012
Beaver Removal November 2012
Year 3 Monitoring January 2013
Supplemental Boundary Marking/Easement
Enforcement March 2013
Beaver Removal November 2013
Year 4 Monitoring January 2014
Year 5 Monitoring November 2014
Beaver Removal November 2014
Supplemental Planting April 2015
Closeout Submission August 2015

Page 2 of 37

Project Setting and Background Summary
The project is on an unnamed tributary to Crab Creek (a trout water) in the Little River Basin approximately 15 miles east
of the town of Sparta, and is located within the DMS Little River and Brush Creek Local Watershed Planning (LWP) area.
The project main channel is a second order stream with a 2.7 square mile mountainous drainage located on the New River
Plateau of the Blue Ridge. Forest and agriculture are the predominant land uses, which includes a mix of pasture for
livestock production (horse and cattle), row crop rotations (corn-small grain), vegetable crops (pumpkins and cabbage)
and Christmas trees. Most of the project stream channels were straightened and dredged and combined with significant
ditching effectively eliminated the seep-influenced riparian wetlands.
The Ut to Crab Creek project provided DMS with a unique opportunity to expand and improve habitat for the Southern
Appalachian bog turtle habitat. A faunal survey conducted in 2012 (MY03) by the NCWRC indicated successful
movement of the project site in this direction. A portion of the project known as the Ennice Meadow Bog (State Natural
Heritage Area (SNHA) Site ID 545) also serves as a site for rare bog/wetland plants and is a N.C. Natural Heritage
Program Area of Natural Significance. Wetland and buffer community improvements included plugging ditches, grading,
and replanting with native plant species. By improving riparian buffers and aquatic habitat and stabilizing actively
degrading channel reaches, the UT to Crab Creek project is addressing the two most significant LWP-identified problems
adversely affecting water quality in the watershed: degradation of riparian habitat and sedimentation.
Restoration of the project main channel included the replacement of a failing and undersized culvert with a large open
bottom arch culvert. This enabled channel bed continuity and allows for significantly improved aqua tic organism transport
between the lower portion of the project and the upstream reaches. Site hydrology and sediment transport have also been
positively influenced by this upgrade. Beaver activity is strong on the site and beaver management has been conducted
throughout the monitoring period.
Southern Appalachian bog wetland natural communities are characterized by a mosaic of patchy shrub assemblages and
meadows. Because of this, the wetland planting plan consisted of a low density shrub assemblage with various sedges and
rush species resulting in a herbaceous dominated system with woody density targets far lower than those of typical
mitigation. This warranted a sampling methodology in the form of large random circular plots (100 sq. meter plot size was
deemed too small given the lower woody density targets), which were counted during monitoring years two and five. In
these boggy areas, the woody stem density ranged from 61to 627 stems per acre (with a mean of 323 stems per acre) in
year 5 and is accompanied by a dense herbaceous layer. The bog features on the site possess the distribution of strata and
densities that meet or exceed those targeted in the planting plan.

Project Goals and Objectives (as stated in the mitigation plan):

The restoration goals for this project are as follows:

 Improve water quality for Crab Creek, which is categorized by NCDWQ as Class C, Trout Waters (Tr);
 Enhance and preserve riparian buffers to a headwater trout stream;
 Enhance aquatic and terrestrial habitat along an intact stream corridor;
 Improve wetland functions by connecting and expanding the following wetland communities: Swamp Forest-Bog
Complex, Southern Appalachian Bog, and Montane Alluvial Forest and;
 Improve and expand Southern Appalachian Bog wetland habitat for the Bog Turtle.

The objectives that must be accomplished to reach these goals are:

 Restore 4,026 linear feet of stable stream channel with the appropriate pattern, profile, and dimension to support a
gravel transport system;
 Re-establish the natural stream features (bed heterogeneity) to restore diverse aquatic habitat;
 Improve aquatic organism passage and habitat corridor continuity b y replacing an existing culvert;
 The conversion of existing croplands into Swamp Forest Bog-Complex Community and Southern Appalachian
Bog Community.

Page 3 of 37

Success Criteria (as indicated in the mitigation plan):

Note – Pertinent to wetland vegetation criteria, the Appalachian Bog community type outside of the immediate
stream floodplain was in keeping with the species distribution and structure identified in Schafale and Weakley
(third approximation) and species identified by NCNHP for this community t ype in the region. This included a
herbaceous dominated meadow bog with sporadic shrub species at densities lower than other typical mitigation
community types. Woody shrub densities based on the planting plan were less than 50 stems per acre. See
pages 22-23 of the approved restoration plan and planting plan sheets 15 -18 for reference.
Feature Success Criteria
Stream Stability
Dimension – Cross-section measurements should show little or no change from the as-
built cross-sections. If changes do occur, they will be evaluated to determine whether
they are minor adjustments associated with settling and increased stability or whether
they indicate movement toward an unstable condition.
Pattern – Measurements associated with the restored channel pattern shall be taken on
the section of the stream included in the longitudinal profiles. These will include belt
width, meander length, and radius of curvature. Subsequently, sinuosity, meander width
ratio, radius of curvature, and meander length/bankfull width ratio will be calculated.
Profile – Longitudinal profiles will be conducted on the entire length for both UT1 and
UTCC-US. Measurements will include slopes (average, pool, riffle) as well as
calculations of pool-to-pool spacing. Annual measurements should indicate stable
bedform features with little change from the as-built survey. The pools should maintain
their depth with lower water surface slopes, while the riffles should remain
shallower and steeper.
Stream Riparian Vegetation
Riparian vegetation must meet a minimum survival success rate of 320 stems/acre after
five years. If monitoring indicates that the specified survival rate is not being met,
appropriate corrective actions will be developed to include invasive species control, the
removal of dead/dying plants, and replanting.
Wetland Hydrology
Wetland hydrology will be considered established if well data from the site indicate that
groundwater is within 12 inches of the soil surface for 5% of the growing season during
normal weather conditions. The growing season was taken from Ashe County; the
elevation for Alleghany County was approximately 1,000 feet difference in elevation
than the project site. According to the NRCS, the growing season is considered to be the
period with a 50% probability that the daily minimum temperature is higher than 28 °
F. The growing season for Ashe County extends from May 2 to October 5 for a total of
157 days (USDA,NRCS 1985). Based on this growing season, success will be achieved
at the project site if the water table is within 12 inches of the soil surface for 8
consecutive days or more during the growing season.
Wetland Vegetation
Survival of planted species must be 320 stems/acre at the end of five years of
monitoring. Non-target species must not constitute more than 20% of the woody
vegetation based on permanent monitoring plots. Management actions such as
controlling invasive species, removing dead/dying plants and replanting will be
undertaken as necessary. The bog features on the site possess the distribution of strata
and densities that meet or exceed those targeted in the planting plan. Large random
circular plots were counted during monitoring years two and five. In these boggy areas,
the woody stem density ranged from 61to 627 stems per acre (with a mean of 323 stems
per acre) in year 5 and is accompanied by a dense herbaceous layer.

Page 4 of 37

NOTE - Creditable stream footage or wetland acreage intersected by power utilities were reduced by 50%. The stream length in the culverted crossing on UTCC Lower was completely removed from creditable footage.
Project
Component
or Reach ID
Existing Feet/Acres
Proposed
Design
Stationing
Restored
Feet/Acres
Creditable
Feet/Acres
As Built
Stationing Restoration Level Approach Mitigation
Ratio
Mitigation
Credits
Mitigation
Plan Credits Comment
100+00 - 101+70 100+00 - 101+71
102+82 - 104+28 103+00 - 104+35
1,621 105+22 - 110+62 105+34 - 112+29 1,621
113+12 - 116+30 113+51 - 116+88
119+60 - 123+93 120+26 - 124+65
101+70 - 102+82 101+71 - 103+00
104+28 - 105+22 104+35 - 105+34
110+62 - 113+12 112+29 - 113+51
116+30 - 119+60 116+88 - 118+34
Ut Crab Creek -
Upstream
(UTCC-US)
2,086 lf 10+00 - 34+05 2,485 2,423 10+00 - 34+85 R P2 1 2,423 2,405
Stream channel stabilized with in-
stream structures, including step pools
and riffle grade control.
Ut Crab Creek -
Downstream 2,172 lf ns 2,172 2,067 34+85 - 56+57 P 5 413 434 Adjusted for utility impacts
Stream Total 6,665 6,928 6,761 4,810 4,694
Project
Component
or Reach ID
Existing Community
Type
Existing
Feet/Acres
Planned
Restoration
Level
Mitigation Ratio Mitigation
Plan Credits Designed Community Type Restored
Feet/Acres
Restoration
Level
Mitigation
Ratio
As Built
Mitigation
Credits
Creditable Acreage
Final
Mitigation
Credits
Wetland 7 Cropland 0.9 Restoration 1 0.9 Hillside Seepage Bog 0.8 Restoration 1 0.8 0.8 0.8
Wetland 7 Montane Alluvial Forest 3.0 Enhancement 2 1.5 Montane Alluvial Forest 3.1 Enhancement 2 1.6 2.9 1.4
Wetland 8 Cropland 0.2 Creation 3 0.1 S. Appalachian Bog 0.2 Creation 3 0.1 0.08 0.0
Wetland 4 Cropland 0.1 Enhancement 2 0.1 S. Appalachian Bog 0.0 na 1 0.0 na na
Wetland 9 S. Appalachian Bog 2.2 Preservation 5 0.4 S. Appalachian Bog 2.2 Preservation 5 0.4 2.2 0.4
Wetland 3 Cropland 3.0 Restoration 1 3.0 S. Appalachian Bog 3.2 1 3.2
Wetland 4 Cropland 2.7 Restoration 1 2.7 S. Appalachian Bog 2.7 1 2.7
Wetland 8 Cropland 0.3 Restoration 1 0.3 S. Appalachian Bog 0.3 1 0.3
Wetland 1 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 0.5 Preservation 5 0.1 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 0.5 5 0.1
Wetland 5 Cropland 0.1 Restoration 1 0.1 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 0.1 5 0.0
Wetland 5 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 0.6 Enhancement 2 0.3 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 0.6 5 0.1
Wetland 6 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 2.0 Preservation 5 0.4 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 2.0 5 0.4
Wetland 2 Cropland 1.0 Restoration 1 1.0 Swamp Forest Bog Complex 1.0 Restoration 1 1.0 0.0 0.0
Total 16.60 10.86 16.70 10.70 21.0 13.15
Restoration 9.3
1.1
Unnamed
Tributary 1 (Ut1)
R P31,775 1,775 1 1,775
233786
Project Asset Table
Streams
Stream channel stabilized with in-
stream structures, including step pools
and riffle grade control.
E EII496496 2.5 198 Included revegetation and stream bank
stabilization.
Wetlands
9.3
5.7Preservation

Page 5 of 37

Mitigation Unit Totals
Stream Mitigation
Units (SMU)
Riparian Wetland
Units (WMU)
Non-Riparian
Wetland Units
(WMU)
Total Wetland
Units (WMU)
4,810 13.15 0 13.15
1 020 Unnamed Tributary to Crab Creek
Mitigation Assets and Reaches

IAk,
All
'64

CRT,
�AYWN CO
EGAkNY CIO
CRT,
0 Soo 1 c 0 0 20 C
�F,,t
A
ZLI� ILIA
j I
AA
T.—VIRGINIA
, e I't NORICILITICARIDLETNA", — -- — --
Unnamed Tributary to Crab Creek
Topographic Features
TRAIL
C.AYqhtI)25l2 ALL .tA,
EaLxTrnantBoun&r,,
=Watashed Boun&LTy Ups�= ofPmjed Area
�"STIII C, 11
Unnamed Tributary to Crab Creek
Topographic Features
TRAIL
C.AYqhtI)25l2 ALL .tA,
EaLxTrnantBoun&r,,
=Watashed Boun&LTy Ups�= ofPmjed Area

N
Unnamed Tributary to Crab Creek
Solis

MR 10 19 I.I.P11 IMPIRM
I

UTJ
u pst�m

Page 14 of 37

Cross Sections

2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Unnamed Tributary 1 -Upper
Cross-Section 1 -Riffle
Station 106 + 83.73
As-built 6/2/2010 MY1 3/1/2011 MY2 10/17/2011 MY3 5/2/2012 MY4 5/1/2013 MY5 4/16/2014 Bkf
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Unnamed Triburary 1 -Upper
Cross-Section 2 -Pool
Station 107 + 77.18
As-built 6/2/2010 MY1 3/1/2011 MY2 10/17/2011 MY3 5/2/2012 MY4 5/1/2013 MY5 4/16/2014 Bkf
2594
2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Unnamed Tributary 1 -Upper
Cross-Section 3 -Riffle
Station 109 + 65.00
As-built 6/3/2010 MY1 3/1/2011 MY2 10/17/2011 MY3 5/2/2011 MY4 5/1/2013 MY5 4/16/2014 Bkf
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Unnamed Tributary 1 -Lower
Cross-Section 4 -Pool
Station 123 + 11.85
As-built 6/3/2010 MY1 3/2/2011 MY2 10/17/2011 MY3 5/2/2012 MY4 5/1/2013 MY5 4/16/2014 Bkf

Page 15 of 37

Cross Sections

2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60 0+65
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Unnamed Tributary 1 -Lower
Cross-Section 5 -Riffle
Station 123 + 54.60
As-built 6/3/2010 MY1 3/2/2011 MY2 10/17/2011 MY3 5/2/2012 MY4 5/1/2013 MY5 4/16/2014 Bkf
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT Crab Creek -Upstream
Cross-Section 6 -Riffle
Station 11 + 47.00
As-built 6/3/2010 MY1 3/2/2011 MY2 10/17/2011 MY3 5/2/2012 MY4 5/1/2013 MY5 4/16/2014 Bkf
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT Crab Creek -Upstream
Cross-Section 7 -Pool
Station 12 + 02.03
As-built 6/3/2010 MY1 3/2/2011 MY2 10/17/2011 MY3 5/2/2012 MY4 5/1/2013 MY5 4/16/2014 Bkf
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80 0+85
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT Crab Creek -Upstream
Cross-Section 8 -Riffle
Station 17 + 49.02
As-built 6/3/2010 MY1 3/2/2011 MY2 10/18/2011 MY3 5/3/2012 MY4 5/2/2013 MY5 4/17/2014 Bkf

Page 16 of 37

Cross Sections

2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80 0+85 0+90
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT Crab Creek -Upstream
Cross-Section 9 -Pool
Station 32 + 30.85
As-built 6/4/2010 MY1 3/3/2011 MY2 10/18/2011 MY3 5/3/2012 MY4 5/2/2013 MY5 4/17/2014 Bkf
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT Crab Creek -Upstream
Cross-Section 10 -Riffle
Station 33 + 08.78
As-built 6/4/2010 MY1 3/3/2011 MY2 10/18/2011 MY3 5/3/2012 MY4 5/2/2013 MY5 4/17/2014 Bkf

Page 17 of 37

UT to Crab Creek Restoration Site Longitudinal Profile; MY0-MY5

2590
2592
2594
2596
2598
2600
2602
2604
2606
2608
2610
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT to Crab Creek -Upper
Longitudinal Profile
Stationing 105+63 -110+63
TW-As-Built 6/2/2010 TW-MY1 3/1/2011 TW-MY2-10/17/2011 TW-MY3-5/2/2012 TW-MY4-5/1/13 TW MY5 4/16/14 Bkf WS Structures-MY0
XS1 -R
XS2 -P
Average Bankfull Slope
XS3 -R

Page 18 of 37

UT to Crab Creek Restoration Site Longitudinal Profile; MY0-MY5

2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT to Crab Creek-Lower
Longitudinal Profile
Stationing 120+36 -124+33
TW-As-Built 6/3/2010 TW-MY1 3/2/2011 TW-MY2 10/17/2011 TW-MY3-5/2/2012 TW-MY4-5/1/2013 TW MY5 4/13/14 Bkf WS Structures-MY0
XS4 -P
XS5 -R
Average Bankfull Slope

Page 19 of 37

UT to Crab Creek Restoration Site Longitudinal Profile; MY0-MY5

2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
UT to Crab Creek-Upstream
Longitudinal Profile
Stationing 10+02 -34+57
TW-As-Built 6/4/2011 TW-MY1 3/3/2011 TW-MY2-10/18/2011 TW-MY3-5/3/2012 TW-MY4-5/2/2013 TW MY5 4/17/14 Bkf WS Structures-MY0
XS6 -R
XS7 -P
Average Bankfull Slope
XS8 -R
XS9 -P XS10 -R

Page 20 of 37

Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used 2,605 2,605 2,605 2,605 2,605 2,605 2,603 2,603 2,603 2,603 2,603 2,603 2,598 2,598 2,598 2,598 2,598 2,598
Bankfull Width (ft)15.7 15.9 15.3 16.0 17.3 18.4 18.4 18.0 17.6 18.0 17.9 17.9 14.8 14.7 14.9 15.0 15.0 15.3
Floodprone Width (ft)>100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.7671 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.618 1.6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2.4 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.0831 2.9 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.698 2.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)20.3 18.5 19.3 19.5 20.0 20.1 34.3 33.4 32.2 32.4 31.651 29.8 24.0 23.8 23.8 24.4 24.25 23.9
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 12.2 13.8 12.1 13.1 14.9 16.9 9.9 9.7 9.6 10.0 10.136 10.8 9.2 9.1 9.4 9.2 9.262 9.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio >6.4 >6.3 >6.5 >6.3 >5.8 >5.4 >5.4 >5.5 >5.7 >5.5 >5.6 >5.6 >6.7 >6.8 >6.7 >6.7 >6.7 >6.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0649 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.096 1.1
Cross Sectional Area between End Pins (ft 2)20.3 19.0 19.4 19.6 20.0 20.1 34.3 33.6 32.2 32.4 32 29.8 24.3 24.1 24.2 24.6 24 23.9
d50 (mm)N/A 17 4.6 6.6 19 8.8 N/A 11 1.7 6.4 4.9 9.1 N/A 23 12 19 26 12
Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary
(Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Sections)
UT1-Upper (500 feet)
N/A - Item does not apply.
Cross-Section 1
Riffle
Cross-Section 2
Pool
Cross-Section 3
Riffle
Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571
Bankfull Width (ft)16.7 14.3 14.7 14.7 14.4 14.2 11.5 12.2 12.3 11.8 11.7 12.3
Floodprone Width (ft)>100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100 >100
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1.1 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.42 1.3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2.6 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.72 2.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)18.8 18.0 16.7 16.7 17.3 15.4 17.6 17.5 17.3 16.8 16.5 15.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 14.8 11.4 12.9 13.0 12.0 13.2 7.5 8.5 8.8 8.3 8.25 9.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio >6.0 >7.0 >6.8 >6.8 >6.9 >7.0 >8.7 >8.2 >8.1 >8.5 >8.6 >8.1
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.02 1.0
Cross Sectional Area between End Pins (ft 2)18.9 18.0 16.7 16.7 17.3 15.4 21.1 21.5 21.6 21.1 16.5 15.8
d50 (mm)N/A 8.4 4 2 0.4 4.9 N/A 0.91 2 1.3 0.06 14
N/A - Item does not apply.
Cross-Section 4
Pool
Cross-Section 5
Riffle
Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary
UT1-Lower (397 feet)
(Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Sections)

Page 21 of 37

Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,571 2,566 2,566 2,566 2,566 2,566 2,566 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,554 2,544
Bankfull Width (ft)25.0 24.7 27.2 25.1 24.3 23.7 27.7 27.8 27.8 27.6 27.4 27.6 28.7 27.9 28.0 27.9 27.5 27.7 23.5 23.8 23.0 23.1 23.7 22.9 26.5 27.2 26.4 27.8 27.3 26.4
Floodprone Width (ft)>200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200 >200
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1.7 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.38 1.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2.6 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.5 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.46 3.2 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.43 2.5 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.8 2.75 2.7 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.56 2.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)42.4 41.9 41.3 41.0 40.0 37.6 47.3 47.1 45.1 43.9 40.9 38.1 42.1 39.5 38.4 37.6 35.9 34.5 40.7 40.9 36.1 36.8 35.6 32.2 37.0 37.2 35.9 37.5 37.5 36.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 14.7 14.6 17.9 15.3 14.8 14.9 16.3 16.4 17.1 17.4 18.3 20.0 19.5 19.7 20.4 20.7 21.1 22.3 13.5 13.9 14.6 14.5 15.8 16.3 19.0 19.9 19.4 20.6 19.8 19.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio >8.0 >8.1 >7.4 >8.0 >8.2 >8.4 >7.2 >7.2 >7.2 >7.2 >7.3 >7.2 >7.0 >7.2 >7.1 >7.2 >7.3 >7.2 >8.5 >8.4 >8.7 >8.7 >8.4 >8.7 >7.5 >7.3 >7.6 >7.2 >7.3 >7.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 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 1.05 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.04 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.04 1.0
Cross Sectional Area between End Pins (ft 2)42.4 41.9 41.3 41.0 40.0 37.6 47.3 47.3 45.1 43.9 40.9 38.1 43.2 40.1 38.5 37.6 35.9 34.5 41.5 41.2 36.1 36.8 35.6 32.2 38.6 39.9 37.1 39.7 37.5 36.6
d50 (mm)N/A 51 48 46 38 30 N/A 32 6 8.7 1.3 0.06 N/A 33 26 33 33 64 N/A 8.8 27 33 31 20 NA 24 15 25 30 32
N/A - Item does not apply.
Cross-Section 6
Riffle
Cross-Section 7
Pool
Cross-Section 8
Riffle
Cross-Section 9
Pool
Cross-Section 10
Riffle
Monitoring Data - Dimensional Moprhology Summary
(Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Sections)
UTCC-US (2,455 feet)

Page 22 of 37

USGS Gauge Data for the New River; 2008-2015

Wetland Gauge Attainment Data

Gauge ID
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing
Season (Percentage)
Year 1
(2010)
Year 2
(2011)
Year 3
(2012)
Year 4
(2013)
Year 5
(2014)
UTC-1 No/6
3.8 Percent
No/6
3.8 Percent
No/4
2.5 Percent
Yes/9
5.7 Percent
No/3
1.9 Percent
UTC-2 Yes/70
44.6 Percent
Yes/30
19.1 Percent
Yes/39
24.8 Percent
Yes/148
94.3 Percent
Yes/45
28.7 Percent
UTC-3 Yes/35
22.3 Percent
Yes/33
21.0 Percent
Yes/143
91.1 Percent
Yes/74
47.1 Percent
Yes/157
100.0
Percent
UTC-4 Yes/52
33.1 Percent
Yes/61
38.9 Percent
Yes/55
35.0 Percent
Yes/157
100.0
Percent
Yes/45
28.7 Percent
UTC-5 Yes/157
100.0 Percent
Yes/155
98.7 Percent
Yes/157
100.0 Percent
Yes/157
100.0
Percent
Yes/157
100.0
Percent
UTC-6 Yes/22
14.0 Percent
Yes/38
24.2 Percent
Yes/45
28.7 Percent
Yes/132
84.1 Percent
Yes/31
19.7 Percent
UTC-7 Yes/15
9.6 Percent
Yes/8
5.1 Percent
No/6
3.8 Percent
Yes/68
43.3 Percent
Yes/10
6.4 Percent
UTC-8 Yes/37
23.6 Percent
Yes/58
36.9 Percent
Yes/48
30.6 Percent
Yes/45
28.7 Percent
Yes/ 34
21.7 Percent
Growing season = 157 days

Date of Data
Collection
Date of
Occurrence Method
4/2010 4/2010 Wrack lines
2/2/2011 12/2/2010 Crest gauge & wrack lines
4/10/2013 2/26/2013 Crest gauge & wrack lines
10/30/2013 Unknown Wrack lines
11/5/2014 Unknown Wrack lines
Verification of Bankfull Events

Page 23 of 37

Ut to Crab Creek Stem Densities - Years 1-5 by Plot (stems/Acre)
Plot Number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Year 1 324 688 445 162 121 283 324 445 607
Year 2 121 607 445 162 121 243 324 445 486
Year 3 121 607 445 162 121 243 283 283 405
Year 4 121 607 364 162 121 202 283 243 364
Year 5 121 567 364 162 121 202 283 121 243

Salix nigra Black Willow N/A N/A
Salix sericia Silky Willow N/A N/A
Cornus amomum Sily Dogwood N/A N/A
Esambucus cnandensis Elderberry N/A N/A
Lindera benzoin Spicebush 20%214
Alnus serrulata Hazel Alder 20%214
Nyssa sylvatica 1 Black Gum 20%214
Ilex verticillata Common Winterberry 20%214
Viburnum nudum Possumhaw 20%214
Alnus serrulata Hazel Alder 20%337
Lindera benzoin Spicebush 20%337
Aronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry 20%337
Ilex verticillata Common Winterberry 20%337
Rosa palustrus Swamp Rose 20%337
Aronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry 5%170
Rosa palustrus Swamp Rose 5%170
Schoenoplectus pungens 1 Green Bullrush 15%508
Carex lupulina 1 Hop Sedge 15%508
Carex lurida 1 Lurid Sedge 15%508
Carex vulpinoidea Fox Sedge 15%508
Lobelia cardinalis 1 Cardinal Flower 15%508
Juncus effusus Soft Rush 15%508
Alnus serrulata Hazel Alder 25%164
Lindera benzoin Spicebush 25%164
Betula nigra River Birch 25%164
Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam 25%164
N/A -Information not Available
1 Substituted from original planting plan
Planted Stems at the UT-Crab Restoration Site
Swamp Forest Bog Floodplain Planting Area (2.45 Acres)
Southern Appalachian Bog Floodplain Planting Area (3.86 Acres)
Southern Appalachian Bog Planting Area (7.77 Acres)
Montane Alluvial Forest Planting Area (3.9 Acres)
Scientific Name Common Name Percent Planted by Species Total Number of Stems
Stream Zone Planting Area (1.88 Acres)

Page 24 of 37

MY5 and Annual Average Planted and Total Stem Counts for the UT to Crab Creek Restoration Site

PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T
Acer rubrum Red maple Tree
Alnus serrulata Hazel alder Shrub 1 4 7 7 8 8 2 2 2 35 4 22 1 18 3 3 4 4
Aronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 1 1 6 6
Aronia prunifolia -
Betula lenta var. lenta Sweet birch Tree
Betula nigra River birch Tree 2 2
Carpinus caroliniana var. virginiana Ironwood Tree
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood Shrub 5 4
Ilex verticillata Common winterberry Shrub 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1
Lindera benzoin var. benzoin Northern spicebush Shrub 1 1
Nyssa sylvatica Blackgum Tree 4 4
Physocarpus opulifolius var. opulifoliusCommon ninebark Shrub 2
Prunus serotina Black cherry Tree
Robinia pseudoacacia Black locust Tree
Rosa palustris Swamp rose Shrub 13
Salix nigra Black willow Tree 2
Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry Shrub 5
Unknown Shrub or Tree
Viburnum nudum Possumhaw Shrub 2 2
3 6 14 14 9 11 4 22 3 42 5 23 7 24 3 8 6 6
2 2 3 3 2 3 3 5 2 4 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2
121 243 567 567 364 445 162 890 121 1700 202 931 283 971 121 324 243 243
0.02
Current Plot Data (MY5 2014)
Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot)
Plot 6
1
0.02
Plot 7
1
0.02
Plot 1
1
0.02
Scientific Name Common Name
Species
Type
Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4 Plot 5 Plot 8 Plot 9
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T PnoLS T
Acer rubrum red maple Tree 4 3
Alnus serrulata hazel alder Shrub 32 103 35 119 35 133 32 89 21 50 11 11
Aronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6
Aronia prunifolia 1
Betula lenta var. lenta sweet birch Tree 1 1 9 9 9 9 15 15
Betula nigra river birch Tree 2 2 5 5 5 5
Carpinus caroliniana var. virginiana Tree 4 8 15 15 25 25
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 9 31 43 2 1
Ilex verticillata common winterberry Shrub 6 6 6 6 6 6 11 11 12 12 7 7
Lindera benzoin var. benzoin northern spicebush Shrub 1 1 1 1 4 5 7 7 11 11 23 23
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree 4 4 5 5 5 5
Physocarpus opulifolius var. opulifoliuscommon ninebark Shrub 2
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree 1
Robinia pseudoacacia black locust Tree 1
Rosa palustris swamp rose Shrub 13 10 9
Salix nigra black willow Tree 2 3 1
Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry Shrub 5 4 7 2 2
Unknown Shrub or Tree 5 5
Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8
54 156 61 190 66 232 73 143 84 117 100 100
7 12 7 10 8 14 7 12 7 10 8 8
243 701 274 854 297 1043 328 643 378 526 450 450
9 9 9 9
0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22
MY4 (2013)MY3 (2012)MY2 (2011)MY1 (2010)MY0 (2010)
Annual Means
Planted and Total Stem Counts (Annual Means)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
MY5 (2014)
9
0.22
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type
Stem count
size (ares)9
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%

Page 25 of 37

DMS Conclusions and Recommendations

Streams - Morphological measurements indicate that the project dimension and profile have
remained stable with little change in the cross sections. The bed features have maintained their
as-built distribution and diversity. Trends of profile degradation or aggradation are absent.
Riffle substrate distributions are being maintained on the project main stem in the range of
coarse to very coarse gravel. A total of five bank full events have been documented at the
project site with more unrecorded events very likely. Improved instream aquatic habitat is
evidenced by the presence of spawning mountain redbelly dace (Phoxinus oreas), observed
during the summer of 2014
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z3CwDPh6io&feature=youtu.be). Redbelly dace are
considered an indicator of good water quality due to their sensitivity to pollutants, including
sediment, and the need for stable habitat.
Vegetation - The monitored vegetation plots revealed that the planted vegetation is growing well
Mean density of planted streamside vegetation is 243 stems per acre (with a range of 121 to 566).
The inclusion of natural recruits results in a mean of approximately 700 stems per acre (with a
range of 243 to 1700).
Wetlands - Groundwater monitoring results across the site indicate that, with the exception of
the area around UTC-1, groundwater hydrology is meeting success criteria.
Sphagnum moss (Sphagnum sp.), a bog indicator plant species, is being observed in the wetland
restoration areas along the main stem. Sphagnum moss is a sensitive species that serves as a key
component in the Southern Appalachian Bog system. In June 2012 (MY03) a team of biologists
led by the NCWRC conducted a survey for bog turtles and herpetofauna and found toads, frogs,
turtles and snakes in the wetland restoration areas. While individual bog turtles were not found
during the survey, suitable bog turtle habitat (deep, wet soils and burrowing opportunities) was
noted.
Summary - Overall the streams, wetlands, and the site's vegetation condition are indicative of
project success. The stream is functioning as designed and has not developed any significant
problems. The project has provided a great deal of floodplain ecological improvement compared
to pre-construction conditions, and is providing a healthy and functional buffer to its waters
amidst ongoing intensive agricultural activities.
The Ut to Crab Creek mitigation site has met its success criteria and the DMS recommends the
project for closure with the requested 4, 810 SMUs and 13.15 WMUs.
Contingencies

None.

Page 26 of 37

Pre-Construction Photos

Main culvert farm crossing

UTCC- LDS; Downstream of crossing

Wetland 2 – Looking East along Hwy 18

UT1- LUS from confluence with UTCC

UTCC – LDS from upstream limit of
project

UTCC- LDS Upstream of crossing .

Page 27 of 37

MY0 (Baseline) Photos

Main culvert farm crossing

UT1 – LUS near Station 111+00

UT1 – Looking upstream near Station
121+75

UTCC – LDS near Station 20+75

Wetland 2 – Looking west towards crossing

UTCC – LDS from crossing

Page 28 of 37

MY5 Photos

Main culvert farm crossing

UT1 – LUS near Station 111+00

UT1 – Looking upstream near Station
121+75

UTCC – LDS near Station 20+75

Wetland 2 – Looking west towards crossing

UTCC – LDS from crossing

APPENDIX A - Watershed Planning Summary

857 - UT to Crab Creek

Watershed Characteristics Overview
The UT to Crab Creek project is located in northeastern Alleghany County, approximately 10
miles northeast of the Town of Sparta (along Highway NC-18) in the New River Basin (CU
05050001). It is located within HUC 05050001030020 (Little River and tributaries), which is
listed as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the 2009 New River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) plan. This TLW is located within the Little River and Brush Creek Local Watershed
Plan (LWP) area. It is 77 square miles in area, comprising a predominantly rural landscape of
private forest lands and small to medium-sized cattle and tree farms. The Little River TLW also
includes the urban/suburban area around the Town of Sparta. Based on information in the 2009
RBRP document, the TLW is characterized by 41% agriculture, 52% forest cover, eight percent
developed area, 27 animal farms, and 41% degraded (non-forested) riparian buffer area. The
watershed includes 59 natural heritage element occurrences (NHEOs), NC Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC) designated priority aquatic habitat and several areas identified as
Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHAs) by the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP).
Within the Crab Creek subwatershed alone (in which the subject project is located), there are
three meadow bog sites designated as SNHAs due to rare plant species and bog turtle habitat.

Links to Watershed Goals and Objectives
The table below summarizes major watershed stressors identified by the Little River and Brush
Creek LWP effort, recommended management strategies to address the stressors, and how the
UT Crab Creek project contributes to meeting these goals/strategies. [Note: the list of major
stressors comes from the LWP Summary of Findings & Recommendations, which focused on the
Bledsoe Creek subwatersheds (focus area selected by the LWP stakeholder team). These
subwatersheds are much more urban/developed than the UT Crab Creek project catchment. Only
those stressors pertinent to the UT Crab Creek subwatershed are included in the table below.

Stressors and Issues Management Strategies UT Crab Creek Project
Unstable stream banks; degraded
aquatic habitat (Trout waters)
Stream restoration/enhancement
projects; livestock exclusion fencing
Restored approximately 4,200 linear feet of stream
channel; replaced farm road culvert with
bottomless arch culvert to improve aquatic habitat
Degraded (non-forested) riparian
buffers
Buffer restoration/enhancement projects Restored /enhanced over 4,200 l.f. of riparian
buffer; preserved over 2,000 l.f. of headwater
stream buffer
Cattle grazing; livestock access to
streams
Fencing and alternate water; agricultural
BMPs
Restored stream channel and riparian buffer on a
historically grazed site (horses; cattle)
Excessive sediment and nutrient
inputs (and associated aquatic
habitat and water quality impacts)
Stream restoration/enhancement;
livestock fencing; agricultural BMPs
Restored/enhanced over 4,200 l.f. of stream
channel and buffer
Degraded wetlands, including bog
turtle habitat
Buffer preservation and restoration;
wetland restoration/enhancement and
preservation
Restored 10.1 acres and preserved 7.9 acres of
riparian/non-riverine wetland (swamp forest-bog
complex and Southern Appalachian bog);
preserved over 2,000 l.f. of headwater stream
channel and riparian corridor

APPENDIX A - Watershed Planning Summary

Watershed Context Summary
In addition to the UT to Crab Creek project, there are currently three other DMS mitigation
projects within this TLW: Glade Creek (#854), an approximately 2,800-ft stream restoration and
780-ft stream preservation project currently in monitoring year 5; Glade Creek II (#92343),
totaling 2,450 feet of stream restoration/enhancement and 0.8 acres of non-riverine wetland
preservation, currently in construction; and Sparta Bog (#349), a 12-acre bog preservation site
that is in long-term management. All projects are located on tributaries of the Little River
upstream of Crab Creek’s confluence with the Little River. There are also five NC Clean Water
Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) projects that have been implemented within the TLW,
including stormwater BMPs in the Town of Sparta and buffer restoration on a tributary to upper
Little River. Per data provided by the NC Division of Soil & Water Conservation as of March
2015, there are no documented agricultural BMP projects associated with stream or riparian
restoration and enhancement in the 14-digit HU.

APPENDIX B – Land Ownership and Protection
The site protection instrument for this mitigation project includes the following document(s), available
at the specified County Register of Deeds office, and linked to the property portfolio below:

Project
Name
County Grantor Property
Rights
Deed/ Page Plat/ Page Total Area
(ac)
UT to Crab
Creek
Alleghany Jones K.
Andrews
(Willow
Investments
LLC)

Conservation
Easement

DB 305, P
165
MBK 9 PG
440
47.76

Long-term stewardship of this property is managed by the NC DENR Stewardship Program.
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, sw isstopo, and the GIS User C ommunity
Legend
NC_SPO_D BO _Infra structure
NC_SPO_D BO _IMS_ID_Conservation _Easements
Transfe r Illustration: Ut to Crab Cre ek IM S # 857
.
500 0 500 1,0 00250Feet
30 ft Contested Farming
30 ft Overh ead Ser vice
30 ft Crossing
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, sw isstopo, and the GIS User C ommunity
Legend
NC_SPO_D BO _Infra structure
NC_SPO_D BO _IMS_ID_Conservation _Easements
Transfe r Illustration: Ut to Crab Cre ek IM S # 857
.
300 0 300150Feet
30 ft Crossin g
30 ft Overhead Service
30 ft Overh ead Service
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, sw isstopo, and the GIS User C ommunity
Legend
NC_SPO_D BO _Infra structure
NC_SPO_D BO _IMS_ID_Conservation _Easements
Transfe r Illustration: Ut to Crab Cre ek IM S # 857
.
300 0 300150Feet
30 ft Con teste d Farm ing
30 ft Overh ead Service
30 ft Overhead Service
APPENDIX C – Jurisdictional Determinations and Permits

Page 29 of 35

APPENDIX C – Jurisdictional Determinations and Permits

Page 30 of 35

APPENDIX C – Jurisdictional Determinations and Permits

Page 31 of 35

APPENDIX C – Jurisdictional Determinations and Permits

Page 32 of 35

APPENDIX C – Jurisdictional Determinations and Permits

Page 33 of 35

APPENDIX C – Jurisdictional Determinations and Permits

Page 34 of 35

Mitigation Project UT to Crab Creek
DMS IMS ID 857
River Basin NEW
Cataloging Unit 05050001
Applied Credit Ratios:1:1 1.5:1 2.5:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1
St
r
e
a
m

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
St
r
e
a
m

En
h
a
n
c
m
e
n
t

I
St
r
e
a
m

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t

I
I
St
r
e
a
m

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Beginning Balance (feet and acres)4,198.00 496.00 2,067.00 10.100 0.08 2.90 7.84
Beginning Balance (mitigation credits)4,198.00 198.40 413.40 10.100 0.03 1.450 1.568
NCDOT Pre-DMS Debits (feet and acres):
DMS Debits (feet and acres):
DWR Permits USACE Action IDs Impact Project Name
2005-20464 / 2005-
20465 SR 1109A - Division 11 0.0189
2005-20463 SR 1335 - Division 11 20.00 0.006
2005-20466 / 2005-
20467 SR 1352 - Division 11 50.00 0.038
2007-00460-295 SR 1351 - Division 11 0.032
2007-00324-203 SR 1332 - Division 11 66.00
2007-00668-205 SR 1331 - Division 11 20.00 0.100
2007-04173
NCDOT TIP B-3803 - Bridge 70
on SR 1366, Ashe Co 19.00
2008-00969-205 SR 1522A - Division 11 89.00
2008-00940-205 SR 1658 - Division 11 51.00
2008-01229-205 SR 1613A - Division 11 72.00
2008-01888-205 SR 1169B - Division 11 67.00
2008-1381 2008-02892-295
NCDOT TIP U-4020 - US 421
Improvements, Watauga Co 167.00
2005-20799 / 2005-
20800 / 2005-
20801
NCDOT TIP B-4007 - Bridge 38
on NC 18, Alleghany Co 0.010
2009-0379 2009-00966
NCDOT TIP R-2100B - NC 16
Improvements, Ashe Co 732.00
2009-0367 2009-00935-235
NCDOT TIP B-1037 - Bridge 39
on US 221, Ashe Co 185.00 925.00
2011-00490 SR 1634 - Division 11 15.00
2010-0752 2002-31262
NCDOT TIP R-2237C - US 321
Improvements, Watauga and
Caldwell Co 657.00 0.060 0.30
1997-0616 1997-07161
NCDOT TIP R-0529BA / BB / BD -
US 421 Widening, Watauga Co 1,861.10 496.00
2011-0950 2012-00281
NCDOT TIP B-4406 - Bridge 9 on
US 221, Alleghany Co 0.060
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 07/14/2015
Mitigation Project UT to Crab Creek
DMS IMS ID 857
River Basin NEW
Cataloging Unit 05050001
Applied Credit Ratios:1:1 1.5:1 2.5:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1
St
r
e
a
m

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
St
r
e
a
m

En
h
a
n
c
m
e
n
t

I
St
r
e
a
m

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t

I
I
St
r
e
a
m

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
2011-0464 2001-20061
NCDOT TIP U-3812 - NC 88
Widening, Ashe Co 1,142.00 0.190 0.95
2009-01160-205 SR 1300 - Division 11 0.120
2013-01021 SR 1308 - Bridge - Division 11 42.00
2013-01058 SR 1310 - Bridge 189 - Division 11 78.00
2013-0777 2012-01963
NCDOT TIP R-3101 - US 21
Improvements, Alleghany Co 0.380 1.90
Statewide ILF Credit Purchase 0.180
Remaining Balance (feet and acres)6.90 0.00 0.00 8.9053 0.08 2.90 4.69
Remaining Balance (mitigation credits)6.90 0.00 0.00 8.9050 0.03 1.45 0.938
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 07/14/2015
Mitigation Project UT to Crab Creek (Purchase)
DMS IMS ID 857
River Basin NEW
Cataloging Unit 05050001
The beginning balance represents the amount purchased and not the total mitigation credits available on the site.
1:1 1.5:1 2.5:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1
St
r
e
a
m

R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
St
r
e
a
m

E
n
h
a
n
c
m
e
n
t

I
St
r
e
a
m

E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t

I
I
St
r
e
a
m

P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

C
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

C
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

C
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Beginning Balance (square feet)0.18
Beginning Balance (mitigation credits)0.18
NCDOT Pre-DMS Debits (feet and acres):
DMS Debits (feet and acres):
DWR Permits USACE Action IDs Impact Project Name
2012-00176 University Nissan 0.18
Remaining Balance (feet and acres)0.000
Remaining Balance (mitigation credits)0.000
Comment: This ledger shows the debits for the amount of mitigation that the Statewide ILF Program purchased from the NCDOT ILF Program.
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 07/14/2015