20180466 Ver 2_GES Dixon Road Bank 5th Annual Report 2023_20231228

1
Dixon Road Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation
Bank
Chocowinity Creek Watershed
Fifth Annual Report
Tar- Pamlico Basin (HUC: 03020104) Chocowinity Creek Watershed
December 2023 Greene Environmental Services, LLC
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality,
Division of Water Resources
Project Number: 2018-0466 v2

Submitted to:
Katie Merritt, Nutrient Offset & Buffer Banking Coordinator
NC Department of Environmental Quality - Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Email: [e-mail] Phone: [phone]

Submitted by:
Greene Environmental Services, Jeff Becker and David Knowles
Ham Farms, 963 Hwy 258 S
Snow Hill, NC 28580
Phone: [phone], [e-mail];
[phone], ocesdk@gmail.c
2
Table of Contents

Section
Number Section Title Page
Number
1.0 Annual Report Synopsis, Bank Location and Purpose 3
1.1 Annual Report Synopsis 3
1.2 Bank Location 3
1.3 Bank Purpose 4
2.0 Bank Description 4
2.1 Project Area – Existing Conditions Prior to Bank
Establishment 5
3.0 Implementation of Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset
Restoration Planning 6
4.0 Bank Monitoring Results and Maintenance 9
5.0 Comparison of Planted Species in Monitoring Plots From the
Year 2 (2020) to the Year 3 (2021) Monitoring Effort 15
6.0 Overall Site Conditions at the Third Year (2021)
Monitoring Period
20
7.0 Long-term Management 20
8.0 Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Potential 21
Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity map for the Dixon Road Mitigation Bank.
Figure 2. Bank within HUC
Figure 3. Regional aerial image.
Figure 4. Dixon Road Bank tracts.
Figure 5. Conservation easement boundary survey.
Figure 6. Credit determination map.
Figure 6-A Credit determination map, excerpt of Tract 1
Figure 6-B Credit determination map, excerpt of Tract 2
Figure 7. USGS Hackney Quadrangle
Figure 7-A. USGS Hackney Quadrangle excerpt.
Figure 8. Soil map of Bank site
Figure 9. Monitoring plot locations.

Appendices
Appendix A: Plot Data Tables
Appendix B: Plot maps, species lists and photographs
Appendix C: Stem Height Data from 2022

3
1.0 Annual Report Synopsis, Bank Location and Purpose

Greene Environmental Services, LLC (GES) established a riparian buffer mitigation and nutrient
offset bank in Beaufort County, NC under the terms and conditions of the GES Dixon Road
Mitigation Banking Instrument (MBI). The bank, the Dixon Road Riparian Buffer and Nutrient
Offset Mitigation Bank (Bank) is located in the Tar – Pamlico River Basin, Pamlico Sub-Basin
(HUC: 03020104) (Figures 1 and 2). Streams within the Bank discharge via tributaries to
Chocowinity Creek, then to the Pamlico River Estuary at Chocowinity Bay (Figure 3).

1.1 Fifth Annual Report Synopsis

This document is the fifth of five annual reports submitted to NC-DWR as required by the MBI.
Based on a survey of fourteen monitoring plots conducted by GES in October 2023, ten of the
fourteen monitoring plots exhibited adequate stem densities (> 260 stems per acre) of planted
species to meet performance standards (See Section 4.0). The remaining four plots had projected
stem densities of 243 stems per acre, thus one stem (40 stems per acres) shy of the required
minimum in the 10m x 10m plots. Among all monitoring plots, ten of the thirteen species planted
in the Bank were represented. Among all plots the average species richness was 3.1 species and
ranged from six to one species per plot. Five plots met the diversity criterion of four of more
species per plot. Of those not meeting the criterion, four plots had three species, four had two
species and one had only one species of planted stems. The relative density of species in the
plots was highest for sycamore at 38 percent and swamp chestnut oak at 23 percent; the relative
density of all other species was 12 percent or less. Average stem height among all species in the
fourteen plots was 1.6 meters (5.2 feet). Average stem vigor among all 137 stems sampled in the
plots was qualitatively assessed as “good” (stem vigor of 3),

1.2 Bank Location

The Bank is located in western Beaufort County, NC (Figure 1). The street address is 883 Dixon
Road (SR 1138), Chocowinity, NC, 27817. The midpoint of the 16.70-acre Bank (Figure 4)
parcel is approximately 35.456896 x -77.076848; elevation ranges from approximately 27 feet to
35 feet above mean sea level. Access to the Bank parcel is via NC 33 south from Chocowinity
4
approximately 4 miles to Dixon Road then west on Dixon Road approximately 0.8 miles. The
parcel is on the south side of Dixon Road.

1.3 Bank Purpose
The regulatory purpose of the Bank is to provide riparian buffer and nutrient offset
credits for new and existing development in the 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin requiring riparian buffer and/or nutrient offset
mitigation in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 and the corresponding Dixon Road
Mitigation Banking Instrument (MBI). The Bank will also improve water quality within the
Tar-Pamlico River Basin by reducing nutrient and sediment inputs into the watershed. Land-
use within the vicinity of the Bank is primarily agricultural and silvicultural usage, and to a
lesser extent, low-density urban and rural development. Land use within the Bank parcel has
historically been row crop agriculture. There are two unnamed streams and two field ditches
on the parcel containing the Bank (Figures 4), each discharging to Chocowinity Creek or its
tributaries and then to the Pamlico River Estuary. Establishing a native riparian forested
community adjacent to all or portions of these waterways by planting saplings of native trees
species and allowing natural vegetative succession to proceed in perpetuity will reduce
nutrient and sediment loading into those waterways. The Bank has been established pursuant
to the Mitigation Banking Instrument (MBI) developed for the Bank and submitted to NC-
DWR. The Bank has been placed under permanent conservation easement to better ensure
long-term protection of the site (Figure 5).

2.0 Bank Description

The Dixon Road Bank consists of two tracts, each with acreage designated for riparian buffer
credits and nutrient offset credits (Figure 6). Tract 1 consists of Stream 1 with no tributary
streams or ditches present. Stream 1 flows off the Bank parcel toward the northwest to Joe
Branch and then to Chocowinity Creek. Tract 2 consists of Stream 2 with three tributary ditches
(Ditches 3, 4 and 5). Stream 2 flows in a generally northeastward direction off the property to
Chocowinity Creek. Ditch 3 flows from south to north into Stream 2 and Ditch 5 flows from
north to south into Stream 2. Ditch 4 likely has a bi-directional flow pattern with the western
5
portion of Ditch 4 flowing into Stream 2 but the eastern portion flowing east and then north
joining Stream 2 at the eastern boundary of the Bank property. The Ditch 4 offset is not included
in the Bank acreage calculation.

In Tract 1, riparian restoration activities designated for riparian buffer credits along Stream 1
extend from the top of the stream bank landward a maximum of 100 feet on each side of the
stream and paralleling the contour of the stream (Figures 6 and 6-A). The riparian restoration
activities from this 101-foot parallel line outward to a maximum of 200 feet have been
designated for nutrient offset credits. Similarly, in Tract 2, riparian restoration activities along
Stream 2 within 100 feet of the stream has been designated for riparian buffer credits and from
101 feet to a maximum of 200 feet (but not overlapping with Tract 1) has been designated for
nutrient offset credits (Figures 6 and 6-B).

The designation of acreage adjacent to Ditches 3 and 5 has been designated for nutrient offset
credit only, landward from the top of the ditch bank to a maximum of 200 feet but not
overlapping with Tract 1. Table 1 provides an estimate of the acreage and square footage of
mitigation credits for the Bank tracts.

Table 1. Areal coverage of the Bank tracts. (See Figure 6).

Bank Tract Riparian Buffer Square
Feet (Acres)
Nutrient Offset
Acres
Total Acreage
Tract 1 171,687.0 sq. ft. (3.94 ac.) 4.11 ac. 8.05 ac
Tract 2 103, 159.1sq. ft. (2.37 ac.) 6.28 ac. 8.65 ac
Totals 274,846.1 sq. ft. (6.31 ac.) 10.39 ac.* 16.70 ac
* Nutrient offset acreage has been adjusted to 10.01 acres as per guidance from NC-DWR.

2.1 Project Area – Existing Conditions Prior to Bank Establishment

The Bank is located in the central coastal plain of eastern North Carolina. The landscape in the
vicinity of the Bank is largely rural with the uplands in agricultural and silvicultural land uses
and limited rural housing development. The uplands are dissected with numerous creeks and
swamps; the largest being Chocowinity Creek and its associated swamps (Figures 7 and 7-A).
Prior to European settlement and subsequent conversion to agricultural and forestry production
6
the dominant plant communities were likely Mesic, Mixed Hardwood Forests (Coastal Plain
Subtype) and Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Blackwater Subtype) based on the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program natural communities classification system developed by
Schafale and Weakley (https://files.nc.gov/dncr-nhp/documents/files/Natural-Community-Classification-Third-
Approximation-1990.pdf). The earliest USGS topographic map indicating land use (agricultural and
forest) in the immediate vicinity of the Bank site was 1951; these conditions are essentially
unchanged for the past six decades.

3.0 Implementation of Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Restoration

In an effort to improve water quality in the Tar River and subsequently downstream in the
Pamlico River and Pamlico Sound estuaries, the NC Department of Environmental Quality
classified the entire Tar-Pamlico River Basin as Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) in the NC
DEQ 2010 Tar- Pamlico River Basinwide Plan (https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/planning/basin-planning/water-resource-plans/tar-pamlico-2010). As such, various nutrient
management strategies have been implemented to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus loading in
waters within the basin. One key strategy is to promote the establishment of vegetated riparian
areas along natural and man-made water conveyances (ditches, canals, streams) that are within
or adjacent to lands in agricultural production. Vegetated riparian areas reduce nutrient in
several ways. Permanent vegetated riparian areas remove lands from agricultural production
thus those lands do not receive direct application of fertilizer (chiefly nitrogen, phosphorus
and potassium) and reduce soil erosion thereby reducing the nutrients (principally
phosphorous) that are affixed to sediments. In addition, forested riparian areas separate
agricultural lands from waterways, and with deep-rooted trees and stable soils, intercept,
uptake and sequester nutrients found in groundwater and surfaces waters emanating from
those agricultural lands.
A goal of the Bank is to convert existing agricultural land adjacent to the streams and ditches
into a riparian restoration site. This entailed establishing and preserving, through
conservation easement, a 200-foot wide vegetated riparian zone adjacent to qualifying
streams and ditches in the Bank project area. The post-Bank construction vegetation in this
zone consists of planted native tree species and, through natural succession, colonizing
herbaceous, shrub and tree species.
7
The Bank was planted, manually, with a mix of bare-root saplings of “character tree” species
during March of 2019. A supplemental planting was conducted in March 2020, also with
mix of native species. The saplings were obtained from the North Carolina Forest Service,
Claridge Nursery in Goldsboro, NC. Soil conditions range from moderately well-drained
sandy and clay loams to poorly-drained silt loams, all with low permeability. On-site
conditions affecting the hydrologic properties of the soils included topographic variation
(slopes and flats), drainage ditches, stream channelization, and vegetative cover and land
use. The tree species selected for planting are adapted to these soil and topographic
conditions (Figure 8). Five sapling species were planted initially; these were: river birch
(Betula nigra), sugarberry (Celtis laevigata), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), black walnut
(Juglans nigra), and swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii). Supplemental planting
introduced box elder (Acer negrundo), mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa), silky
dogwood (Cornus amomum), American persimmon (Diospyros virginica), yellow poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), white oak (Quercus alba), cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda) and
Nuttall oak (Quercus texana); swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) was planted
supplementally as well as initially.
The target density of planted trees at the end of the required five-years of monitoring is 260
trees per acre, with no one species comprising more than 50 percent of the total planted trees,
in accordance with the MBI and 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n)(2)(B). To achieve this target
density, tree saplings were planted in rows approximately twelve feet apart and at intervals of
approximately eleven feet resulting in a projected yield of 335 saplings per acre. Planting at a
density of 335 saplings per acre allowed for a 22% sapling mortality. An estimated 5560
saplings were proposed for planting on the approximately 16.67-acre Bank (Table 2).
Supplemental planting was in areas where survival rates of the initially planted saplings was
low. There were 1425 saplings planted supplementally, thus a total of 7225 saplings were
planted, cumulatively, for an estimated planting density of 433 saplings per acre.
Sycamore was the most frequently planted species (26%); this species along with swamp
chestnut oak (22%) accounted for half of the species planted (Table 3). River birch, sugarberry
and black walnut accounted for 15%, 12% and 8%, respectively. None of the remaining eight
species accounted for more than 3% of the remaining planted saplings. Of note was the
presence of naturally colonizing saplings of American persimmon that survived site-
8
preparation disking in portions of the Bank site.

Table 2. Saplings planted at the Dixon Road Mitigation Bank.

Table 3. Relative density and stem densities of planted species at the Dixon Road Mitigation Bank.
Species Common Name Relative Density
Species (Percent)
Species Density Per
Acre
Acer negrundo Box elder >1 1
Betula nigra River birch 15 66
Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory 1 6
Celtis laevigata Sugarberry 12 54
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood 3 12
Diospyros virginica American persimmon 3 12
Juglans nigra Black walnut 8 36
Liriodendron tulipifera Yellow poplar 3 12
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 26 114
Quercus alba White oak 1 6
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 22 96
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark oak 1 6
Quercus texana Nuttall oak 3 12
Totals 100 433

Species Common Name Number Saplings
Planted in 16.7
acres
Initial Planting 2019
Betula nigra River birch 1100
Celtis laevigata Sugarberry 900
Juglans nigra Black walnut 600
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 1900
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 1300
Initial Planting (2019) Total Saplings 5800

Supplemental Planting 2020
Acer negrundo Box elder 25
Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory 100
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood 200
Diospyros virginica American persimmon 200
Liriodendron tulipifera Yellow poplar 200
Quercus alba White oak 100
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 300
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark oak 100
Quercus texana Nuttall oak 200
Supplemental Planting (2020) Total Saplings 1425
Total Saplings Planted in Bank 7225
9

4.0 Bank Monitoring Results and Maintenance

The Bank was monitored annually for five years. If the vegetative success criteria have met and
approved by NC DWR, this will be the final report. Reports include a vegetative plot summary
(stem counts, stem heights, and stems per acre estimates) monitored in accordance with the CVS-
EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation (CVS-EEP, v. 4.2). Plots measuring 100 m2 (10m x 10m)
(0.0247 acres) were established at the approximate locations identified on Figure 9. Table 4 lists
the approximate coordinates for the fourteen plots.

In October 2023, the fifth annual survey of the monitoring plots was conducted. Ten of the
fourteen monitoring plots exceeded the target density of 260 stems per acre. Plot stem
densities in the ten plots ranged from 364 stems per acre to 648 stems per acre. Four plots
did not meet the target density; all four had 243 stems per acre, thus one stem shy of the
required stem count of seven to meet the target. Stem density among all plots averaged 425
stems per acre (Table 5).

The most frequently encountered species in the monitoring plots were: sycamore, swamp
chestnut oak and river birch with relative densities of 38%, 23% and 12%, respectively
(Table 5). The calculated stems per acre for these species were 150 for sycamore, 93 for
swamp chestnut oak and 46 for river birch (Table 6). Relative densities of all other species
were less than 10%. White oak, persimmon and mockernut hickory were planted in the
Bank but did not occur in any monitoring plots. Naturally dispersed persimmon is abundant
in portions of the Bank but were not counted as planted stems. Among all plots, species
richness ranged from 1 to 6 species per plot (Table 5). Six plots met the met performance
standard of for diversity as stated in the MBI and 15A NCAC 02B .0295, such that the plots
should contain a minimum of four planted tree species with no one species comprising more
than 50 percent of the total stem count by the end of the five-year monitoring period; eight
plots did not meet this criterion (Appendix A). Five plots met the performance standard of
four or more species per plot; nine plots did not meet this criterion (Species Richness in
Table 5). GES will address this issue in Section 6.0 of this document.

10
Stem heights of all planted species were measured in each plot. The overall average stem
height for stems among the fourteen plots was 1.6 m + 1.2 m (Table 7). Sycamore had the
greatest average total height of 2.3 m + 1.2 m in height. River birch, swamp chestnut oak,
cherrybark oak and Nuttall’s oak all averaged one meter or more in height. All other species
averaged less than one meter in height.

A qualitative assessment of stem status was made for each stem in all plots. In summary, by
species among all plots, indicated that the status for river birch, sycamore, and three oak
species was good (Table 8). The status of all other species was fair to unlikely to survive. In
general, growth for the majority of the planted stems after five years was slow and damage
by deer grazing and rubs was not uncommon.

Appendix A provides stem heights, stem diameters and stem vigor for each individual stem
in all plots. A map of sapling locations was generated for each plot and is provided in
Appendix A. Photographs of each plot were taken from the same plot corner (northwest
corner) and are also provided in Appendix B. Appendix C provides total height data
collected at the end of the 2022 growing season for each stem in all 14 monitoring plots.
Signage was installed at prominent locations along access paths and tract boundaries to identify
the Bank tracts as protected, conservation areas. The signs will be maintained by Greene
Environmental Services, LLC for the duration of the five-year monitoring period. The signs list
prohibited activities within the Bank (e.g., mowing or cutting vegetation, excavation or
deposition of spoil material, vehicular traffic), as well as contact information for Greene
Environmental Services, LLC. Easement boundaries were posted with white, PVC posts to ensure
clear a distinction between the Parcel and adjacent properties. Boundary markers disturbed,
damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis.
11
Table 4. Approximate latitude and longitude of fourteen 0.0247-acre monitoring plots.

Plot Latitude Longitude
1
35.459422 -77.075180
2
35.458821 -77.074769
3
35.458889 -77.075370
4
35.458187 -77.075139
5
35.458334 -77.074666
6
35.457534 -77.075581
7
35.457230 -77.075821
8
35.457351 -77.076187
9
35.458096 -77.076848
10
35.458364 -77.075604
11
35.458937 -77.076525
12
35.458733 -77.076897
13
35.458075 -77.076512
14
35.457964 -77.076952

Table 5. Fifth Annual Plot Monitoring, 2023. Monitoring plots (D-1 through D-14) species stem counts and percent relative densities in fourteen
0.0247-acre plots. Dixon Road Mitigation Bank.

Species Common
Name D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 D-5 D-6 D-7 D-8 D-9 D-
10
D-
11
D-
12
D-
13
D-
14
Total
Stems
per
Species
Percent
Relative
Density
per
Species
Acer
negrundo
Box elder 7 3 10 7
Betula nigra River birch 3 4 3 6 16 12
Carya
tomentosa
Mockernut
hickory 0 0
Celtis
laevigata
Sugarberry 1 1 1
Cornus
amomum
Silky
dogwood 2 2 1
Diospyros
virginica
American
persimmon 0 0
Juglans nigra Black
walnut 1 1 1 3 2
Liriodendron
tulipifera
Yellow
poplar 1 1 1 3 2
Platanus
occidentalis
Sycamore 3 4 6 3 4 6 3 3 3 10 7 52 38
Quercus alba White oak 0 0
Quercus
michauxii
Swamp
chestnut
oak
7 5 2 1 2 7 5 3 32 23
Quercus
pagoda
Cherrybark
oak 2 3 1 2 1 1 10 7
Quercus
texana
Nuttall oak 1 2 1 4 1 8 6
Total Stems Per Plot 11 16 11 16 6 6 10 6 6 10 9 9 10 12 137

100
Stem Density Per Acre 445 648 445 648 243 243 405 243 243 405 364 364 405 486 396
Number of species per plot
(Species richness) 3 6 3 5 4 2 4 3 2 2 3 2 1 4 Avg. = 3.1 + 1.4

Table 6. Fifth Annual Plot Monitoring, 2023. Density per acre of planted sapling species in fourteen 0.0247-acre plots. Dixon Road Mitigation
Bank.

Species Common
Name D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 D-5 D-6 D-7 D-8 D-9 D-10 D-11 D-12 D-13 D-14
Stem
Densities
per Acre
by
Species
Acer
negrundo
Box elder 0 283 0 121 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
Betula nigra River birch 0 121 0 0 0 162 0 121 0 0 0 243 0 0 46
Carya
tomentosa
Mockernut
hickory 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celtis
laevigata
Sugarberry 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
Cornus
amomum
Silky
dogwood 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
Diospyros
virginica
American
persimmon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Juglans nigra Black
walnut 0 40 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 9
Liriodendron
tulipifera
Yellow
poplar 0 40 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 9
Platanus
occidentalis
Sycamore 0 121 162 243 121 0 162 0 243 121 121 121 405 283 150
Quercus alba White oak 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Quercus
michauxii
Swamp
chestnut
oak
283 0 202 81 0 0 40 81 0 283 202 0 0 121 93
Quercus
pagoda
Cherrybark
oak 81 0 0 121 40 81 40 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
Quercus
texana
Nuttall oak 0 40 81 40 0 0 162 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 23
Stem Densities Per Acre by
Plot 445 648 445 648 243 243 405 243 243 405 364 364 405 486 396

Table 7. Fifth Annual Plot Monitoring, 2023. Average stem heights (meters + Standard Deviation) of planted sapling species in fourteen 0.0247-
acre plots. Dixon Road Mitigation Bank.
Species Common
Name N
D-1
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-2
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-3
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-4
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-5
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-6
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-7
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-8
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-9
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-
10
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-
11
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-
12
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-
13
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
D-
14
Avg
(m)
+
Std.
Average
Stem
Height
by
Species
(m+Std
ft+Std)

Acer
negrundo
Box elder 10 0.5
0.1 0.4
0.2 0.4+0.1m
1.4+0.4ft
Betula nigra River birch 16 1.4
0.8 0.8
0.2 0.9
0.2 3.2
0.9 1.8+1.6m
6.0+5.2ft
Carya
tomentosa
Mockernut
hickory 0 0
Celtis
laevigata
Sugarberry 1 1.3
0.0 1.3+0.0m
4.3+0.0ft
Cornus
amomum
Silky
dogwood 2 0.3
0.0 0.3+0.0m
1.0+0.0ft
Diospyros
virginica
American
persimmon 0 0
Juglans
nigra
Black
walnut 3 0.5
0.0 0.8
0.0 0.7
0.0
0.7+0.2m
2.2+0.5ft
Liriodendron
tulipifera
Yellow
poplar 3 0.4
0.0 0.3
0.0 2.0
0.0 0.4+0.1m
1.2+0.2ft
Platanus
occidentalis
Sycamore 52 3.7
0.6
1.9
0.6
3.1
1.2
0.6
0.4 1.4
0.3 1.4
0.3
3.7
0.3
0.7
0.4
4.6
0.8
2.0
0.8
2.3
0.5
2.3+1.2m
7.4+4.0ft
Quercus alba White oak 0 0
Quercus
michauxii
Swamp
chestnut oak 32 1.5
0.8 1.0
0.5
0.9
0.2 1.6
0.0
0.5
0.3 1.9
07
0.7
0.4 1.2
0.2
1.3+0.7m
4.2+2.4ft
Quercus
pagoda
Cherrybark
oak 10 1.4
0.4 0.8
0.1
0.4
0.0
1.0
0.6
1.4
0.0
1.8
0.0 1.0+0.4m
3.2+1.3ft
Quercus
texana
Nuttall oak 8 0.9
0.4
1.7
0.0 1.6
0.6 1.1
0.0
1.4+0.5m
4.4+1.ft
Average Stem Height by Plot
(m+Std)

137 1.3
0.8
1.3
1.3
1.4
0.6
1.6
1.4
0.7
0.4
0.9
0.3
1.5
0.4
0.8
0.3
1.4
0.3
2.5
1.0
0.7
0.3
3.7
1.7
2.0
0.8
1.8
0.7
Species
1.6+1.2m
5.2+3.9ft
15
Table 8. Sapling vigor by species. Vigor was assessed qualitatively by visual inspection of stems;
vigor categories were: 4 = excellent, 3 = good, 2 = fair, and 1 = unlikely to survive one year. Dead
and missing stems are not reported. Dixon Road Bank, October 2023.

5.0 Comparison of Planted Species in Monitoring Plots From the Year 4 (2022) to the Year 5
(2023) Monitoring Effort
A chief difference found between the fourth year (2022) to fifth year (2023) monitoring effort was a
decrease in the number stems and density per acre of planted species in four monitoring plots (D-5,
D-6, D-8, and D-9); the greatest decline was in Plots D-5 and D-8 (Table 9). These four plots did
not meet the minimum required density of 260 stems per acres. The overall average stem density
among the 14 monitoring plots was 369 stems per acres, thus meeting the stem density criterion.
By species, the greatest stem density changes were declines in sugarberry and Nuttall oak; six other
species declined but only slightly (Table 10). Box elder increased, likely due to remedial planting;
swamp chestnut oak and cherrybark oak increased slightly most likely due to resprouting from the
previous year. Relative densities of the planted species changed little in 2023 because of a somewhat
uniform decline by all species.
Species Common Name Number of
Stems Counted
Among All 14
Plots (n)
Average Vigor Standard
Deviation
Acer negrundo Box elder 10 2 0
Betula nigra River birch 16 3 1
Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory 0 NA NA
Celtis laevigata Sugarberry 1 1 0
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood 2 1 0
Diospyros virginica American
persimmon 0 NA NA
Juglans nigra Black walnut 3 2 1
Liriodendron tulipifera Yellow poplar 3 1 1
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 52 3 1
Quercus alba White oak 0 NA NA
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 32 3 1
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark oak 10 3 1
Quercus texana Nuttall oak 8 3 1
All Species Combined 137 3 1
16
Among all thirteen species, stem heights increased an average of 0.2 m from 2021 to 2022. Stem
heights for nine species found in the monitoring plots increased or remained the same; all others did
not change in stem height (Table 10).

17

Table 9. Comparison of stem count and density per acre in monitoring plots from fourth year (2022)
to fifth year (2023) monitoring effort. Positive numbers indicate an increase, negative numbers
indicate a decrease.
Plot
2022
Stem
Count
per Plot
2023
Stem
Count
per Plot
Change
in Stem
Count
per Plot
2022
Stem Density
per Acre
2023
Stem Density
per Plot
Change in
Stem Density
per Acre
D-1 12 11 -1 486 445 -41
D-2 12 16 4 486 648 162
D-3 11 11 0 445 445 0
D-4 16 16 0 648 648 0
D-5 10 6 -4 403 243 -160
D-6 8 6 -2 324 243 -81
D-7 10 10 0 405 405 0
D-8 9 6 -3 364 243 -121
D-9 7 6 -1 283 243 -40
D-10 10 10 0 405 405 0
D-11 9 9 0 364 364 0
D-12 9 9 0 364 364 0
D-13 10 10 0 405 405 0
D-14 14 12 -2 567 486 -81
Average 10.5 9.9 -0.6 425 396 -29

18
Table 10. Comparison of stem densities per acre and relative density of planted species monitoring
plots from fourth year (2022) to fifth year (2023) monitoring effort. Positive numbers indicate an
increase, negative numbers indicate a decrease.
Species Common
Name
2022
Stem
Density
per
Acre
2023
Stem
Density
per
Acre
Change
in Stem
Density
per
Acre
2022
Percent
Relative
Density
2023
Percent
Relative
Density
Change
Percent
Relative
Density
Acer
negrundo
Box elder 14 29 15 3 7 4
Betula nigra River birch 49 46 -3 12 12 0
Carya
tomentosa
Mockernut
hickory 0 0 0 0 0 0
Celtis
laevigata
Sugarberry 17 3 -14 4 1 -3
Cornus
amomum
Silky
dogwood 12 6 -6 3 1 -2
Diospyros
virginica
American
persimmon 3 0 -3 1 0 -1
Juglans
nigra
Black
walnut 12 9 -3 3 2 -1
Liriodendron
tulipifera
Yellow
poplar 12 9 -3 3 2 -1
Platanus
occidentalis
Sycamore 156 150 -6 37 38 1
Quercus
alba
White oak 0 0 0 0 0 0
Quercus
michauxii
Swamp
chestnut
oak
89 93 4 20 23 3
Quercus
pagoda
Cherrybark
oak 24 29 5 7 7 0
Quercus
texana
Nuttall oak 35 23 -12 8 6 -2
All Species 425 396 -29 100 100 0

19
Table 11. Comparison of stem heights of planted species in monitoring plots from third year (2021)
to fourth year (2022) monitoring effort.
Species Common Name
2021
Average
Stem Height
(meters)
2022
Average
Stem Height
(meters)
Change in
Average
Stem Height
(meters)
Acer negrundo Box elder 0 0.4 0.4
Betula nigra River birch 1.2 1.5 0.3
Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory 0 0 0
Celtis laevigata Sugarberry 0.3 0.3 0
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood 0.4 0.3 -0.1
Diospyros virginica American persimmon 0 0 0
Juglans nigra Black walnut 0.5 0.4 -0.1
Liriodendron tulipifera Yellow poplar 0.6 0.5 -0.1
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 1.4 1.9 0.5
Quercus alba White oak 0 0 0
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 0.8 0.6 -0.2
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark oak 0.5 0.7 0.2
Quercus texana Nuttall oak 0.7 1.0 0.3
Average Stem Heights for All Species (m) 1.0m (3.3ft) 1.2m (3.9ft) 0.2m (0.7ft)

20

6.0 Overall Site Conditions at the Fifth Year (2023) Monitoring Period
In October 2023, the Bank site had been colonized by herbaceous and volunteer woody
vegetation (volunteer persimmon especially) with planted saplings and naturally colonizing tree
and shrub species interspersed. The dominant herbaceous species were goldenrod, mares-tail,
dogfennel and blackberry; shrubs included wax myrtle and groundsel. The tree saplings planted
in March 2019 and 2020 had yet to overtop or shade out the herbaceous vegetation. Prior to
planting, the site was disked leaving a rough textured microtopography which tended to retain
rainwater, these soil conditions were still present in 2023. GES established additional boundary
markers and signage.
Supplemental planting was conducted in 2020 with the purpose of increasing species richness and
density in underperforming portions of the Bank. While generally successful in terms of stem
density in the monitoring plots, species richness was inadequate in the majority of the monitoring
plots and did not meet performance goals. In Tract 1, portions of the tract, especially in areas
west of the stream have been heavily colonized by loblolly pines (Appendix A). In Tract 2, the
northwestern portion of the tract has been heavily colonized by sweetgum. GES will attempt to
alleviate this above-ground competition by manually chopping and sawing small to moderate
stems, and / or injecting herbicide into the stems using a bark injection (“hack and squirt”)
technique on the larger stems.
The soil conditions at the Bank site are not favorable for most planted stems. The dense clay soil
and poor soil fertility apparently inhibit adequate root development; this coupled with heavy
grazing and rubs by deer are likely the reasons for not meeting performance standards. GES will
seek further guidance from NC-DWR to help achieve Bank close-out approval.

7.0 Long-term Management
Greene Environmental Services has established a permanent conservation easement, approved by
DWR, for the Bank. The conservation easement is filed at the Beaufort County, NC Register of
Deeds, Deed Book: 1989, Pages 744-753 and dated May 17, 2019. Signage has been installed at
prominent locations along farm roads and paths to identify the Bank tracts as protected,
conservation areas. The signs will be maintained by Greene Environmental Services, LLC for the
21
duration of the five-year monitoring period. The signs list prohibited activities within the Bank
(e.g., mowing or cutting vegetation, excavation or deposition of spoil material, vehicular traffic,
etc.), as well as contact information for Greene Environmental Services, LLC. Easement
boundaries were identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the Bank and adjacent
properties. Boundaries were identified by posts, signs and flagging. Boundary markers that are
disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as-needed basis.

Greene Environmental Services, LLC is responsible for Bank maintenance and monitoring to
ensuring that the terms of a conservation easement are met for five years, beginning in 2019 and
ending in 2023, or until NC-DWR approves a final oversight closeout. GES (Bank Sponsor) will
transfer the conservation easement to a NC-DWR - approved land trust or similar land management
agency (Grantor). The Grantor will assume the responsibilities of maintaining the conservation
easement and the integrity of Bank boundaries using posts, bollards, and signage identifying the
Grantor as the responsible entity. The Grantor will conduct annual sight visits to inspect the Bank
parcel and maintain records to that effect.

8.0 Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Potential

The Bank is located in Tar-Pamlico River, Pamlico Sub-basin, HUC 03020104 (Figure 2).
Riparian buffer and nutrient offset mitigation credits are available for development activities
requiring mitigation in this HUC only unless otherwise determined by NC-DWR and/or other
NC Department of Environmental Quality agencies. The acreage of the Bank totals 16.70
acres. Of that total, 6.31 acres yields Tar- Pamlico riparian buffer credits. Nutrient offset
acreage has been adjusted as per guidance from NC-DWR to yield 10.01 acres of nitrogen and
phosphorus nutrient offset credits. Riparian buffer credits are yielded on a per square foot
basis, thus 275,040 square feet (6.31 acres) for the Bank (Table 12). Nitrogen (N) and
phosphorus (P) credits are yielded at a rate of 2,273.02 lbs-N/acre and 146.40 lbs-P/acre,
respectively. Thus, 10.01 acres of nutrient offset acreage yields 22,843.841 pounds of nitrogen
(N) credits and 1,471.32 pounds of phosphorus (P) credits (Table 12). The Bank Sponsor
(GES) maintains and keeps updated, three credit ledgers; one ledger will be for riparian buffer
credits, one ledger for nitrogen nutrient offset credits and one ledger for phosphorus nutrient
offset credits.
22

For this site, all riparian areas proposed in Table 12 for riparian restoration were determined by
NC-DWR to be in agriculture. Therefore, 16.70 acres of riparian restoration credits shown in
Table 12, can be used for either Tar-Pamlico riparian buffer credits or nutrient offset credits, but
not both. The Sponsor (GES) must submit a written request and receive written approval from
NC-DWR prior to any credit conversions or transfers to the buffer and nutrient offset credit
ledgers.

Figures and Appendices

Figure 1. Vicinity map for the Dixon Road Mitigation Bank.
Figure 2. Bank within HUC
Figure 3. Regional aerial image.
Figure 4. Dixon Road Bank tracts.
Figure 5. Conservation easement boundary survey.
Figure 6. Credit determination map.
Figure 6-A Credit determination map, excerpt of Tract 1
Figure 6-B Credit determination map, excerpt of Tract 2
Figure 7. USGS Hackney Quadrangle
Figure 7-A. USGS Hackney Quadrangle excerpt.
Figure 8. Soil map of Bank site
Figure 9. Monitoring plot locations.

Appendix A: Plot Data Tables
Appendix B: Plot maps, species lists and photographs
Appendix C: Individual Stem Data 2022

Table 12. Dixon Road Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Bank, Project Number: 2018-0466 v2
Project Area
N Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)
P Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)
Credit Type Location
Subject? (enter
NO if
ephemeral or
ditch 1)
Feature Type Mitigation Activity Min-Max Buffer
Width (ft)Feature Name Total Area (ft2)
Total (Creditable)
Area of Buffer
Mitigation (ft2)
Initial Credit
Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit
Ratio (x:1)
Convertible to
Riparian
Buffer?
Riparian Buffer
Credits
Convertible to
Nutrient Offset?
Delivered
Nutrient Offset:
N (lbs)
Delivered
Nutrient
Offset: P (lbs)
Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0-100 Stream 1 171,687 171,687 1 100%1.00000 Yes 171,687.000 Yes 8,958.857 577.020
Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0-100 Stream 2 103,353 103,353 1 100%1.00000 Yes 103,353.000 Yes 5,393.098 347.357
Nutrient Offset Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101-200 Stream 1 171,191 171,191 1 33%3.03030 No —Yes 8,932.975 575.353
Nutrient Offset Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101-200 Stream 2 266,587 266,587 1 33%3.03030 No —Yes 13,910.866 895.967
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
Totals (ft2):712,818 712,818 275,040.000 37,195.796 2,395.697
Total Buffer (ft2):275,040 275,040
Total Nutrient Offset (ft2):437,778 N/A
Total Ephemeral Area (ft2) for Credit:0 0
Total Eligible Ephemeral Area (ft2):68,760 0.0%Ephemeral Reaches as % TABM
Enter Preservation Credits Below Total Eligible for Preservation (ft2):91,680 0.0%Preservation as % TABM
Credit Type Location Subject?Feature Type Mitigation Activity Min-Max Buffer
Width (ft)Feature Name Total Area (sf)
Total (Creditable)
Area for Buffer
Mitigation (ft2)
Initial Credit
Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit
Ratio (x:1)
Riparian
Buffer Credits
Buffer —
—
—
—
—
Preservation Area Subtotals (ft2):0 0
Square Feet Credits
275,040 275,040.000
0 0.000
0 0.000
275,040 275,040.000
Square Feet Credits
Nitrogen:22,843.841
Phosphorus:1,471.320
Tar-Pamlico 03020104
19.16394
297.54099
Restoration:
Enhancement:
Mitigation Totals
437,778
TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM)
TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATION
Mitigation Totals
Nutrient Offset:
Preservation:
Total Riparian Buffer:
1. The Randleman Lake buffer rules allow some ditches to be classified as subject according to 15A NCAC 02B .0250 (5)(a).
last updated 08/03/2020

HUC:
03020104
Dixon Road Bank
Tar- Pamlico River Basin
Figure 1. Tar-Pamlico River Basin indicating the location of the Dixon Road Bank within HUC 03020104.
Tar-Pamlico River Basin in North
Carolina
Figure 2. Service Area Dixon Road Bank location within HUC 03020104.
Dixon
Road Bank

Figure 3. Regional aerial image depicting the location of the proposed Bank (red square).
Chocowinity Creek
Chocowinity Bay
Pamlico
River Estuary

Figure 4. Tracts 1 and 2 comprising the 16.70-acre Bank within a 22.49-acre property parcel (Beaufort
County GIS parcel # 46392). Riparian buffer credit zones (red shading) extend from the top of banks of
Stream 1 and 2 landward to 100 feet (red line). Nutrient offset credit zones (yellow shading) extent from
the top of banks along Ditches 3 and 5 to a maximum of 200 feet (black lines) and along Streams 1 and 2
from the riparian buffer zones landward to a maximum of 200 feet. Greene Environmental Services, LLC.

Tract 1
8.05 acres
Tract 2
8.65 acres

Parcel # 46392
22.49 acres
Ditch 5
Ditch 3
Stream 2
Stream 1
Ditch 4
Coordinates
35.458096 x -77.076848

Figure 5. Boundary survey depicting conservation easement boundaries (blue arrows) for Tracts 1 and 2.

Figure 6. Credit determination map depicting riparian buffer acreage (blue arrows) and nutrient offset
acreage (green arrows). (See Tables 1 and 8-A and 8-B), also see map excerpts in Figures 6-A and 6- B).

Figure 6-A. Tract 1 credit determination map excerpt depicting 1) riparian buffer acreage (blue arrows)
from the top of banks along Stream 1 landward to 100 feet, and 2) nutrient offset acreage (green arrows)
from the riparian buffer zone landward to a maximum of 200 feet. (See Tables 1 and 8-A and 8-B).

Stream 1

Figure 6-B. Tract 2 credit determination map excerpt depicting 1) riparian buffer acreage (blue arrows) from
the top of banks along Stream 2 landward to 100 feet, and 2) nutrient offset acreage (green arrows) from the
top of banks along Ditches 3 and 5 landward to a maximum of 200 feet and along Stream 2 from the riparian
buffer zone landward to a maximum of 200 feet. (See Tables 1 and 8-A and 8-B).
Stream 2
Ditch 3
Ditch 5
0 miles 0.25 0.5 1.0 1.5
Hackney, NC USGS 7.5’ Quadrangle 2013
Figure 7. Hackney, NC USGS 7.7’ Quadrangle 2013. The Dixon Road Bank is located
within the red square; an excerpt of the Bank location is in Figure 7-A.
Figure 7-A. USGS, Hackney, NC 7.5’ Quadrangle, excerpt. The proposed bank is within the red
polygon. Streams 1 and 2, and Ditches 3and 4 are depicted. Ditch 5 is not indicated on the USGS
Quadrangle. The blue line labelled as NA is not present as a waterway on the site based on field
observations.
3
4 1
2
NA
Figure 8. Mapped soil series at the proposed Dixon Road Mitigation Bank (red polygon); from the Beaufort County, NC, GIS /Land
Records website (http://co.beaufort.nc.us/departments/community-services/planning/gis-land-records). Mapped soil series are:
Craven clay loam (CsC2), Craven fine sandy loam (CrB), and Leaf silt loam (Le).
Figure 9. Approximate locations of fourteen, 0.0247-acre (10mx10m) monitoring plots at the Dixon Road Bank. Coordinates for the plot
locations are provided in Table 4.
1
2 3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Tract 1
Tract 2
Riparian
Buffer
Nutrient
Offset
N

Appendix A. Plot Tables

Individual stems data for all planted stems in each of the 14 plots at the Dixon Road Bank. Naturally
colonizing species are listed below the table.

Plot 1. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
9 Cornus amomum 1 0.3 1
10 C. amomum 2 1 0.3 1 1.0 81 18 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0
1
Quercus
michauxii 2 1.3 3
2 Q. michauxii 1 1.7 4
3 Q. michauxii 3 4
5 Q. michauxii 1 2.2 4
6 Q. michauxii 2 1.1 3
7 Q. michauxii 1 0.8 2
11 Q. michauxii 7 1 0.7 2 3.1 283 64 1.5 0.8 5.1 2.7
8 Quercus pagoda 1 1.6 3
12 Q. pagoda 2 2 1.1 3 3.0 81 18 1.4 0.4 4.4 1.2
Totals/Average 11 2.7 445 100 1.3 0.8 4.2 2.7

Naturally colonizing species and heights: 4 loblolly pine (heights: 1.0m to <3m); ~40 sweetgum (heights: >1m to 3m)

Plot 2. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
13 Acer negrundo 1 0.7 2
14 A. negrundo 1 0.5 2
15 A. negrundo 1 0.3 1
16 A. negrundo 1 0.4 2
17 A. negrundo 1 0.5 2
18 A. negrundo 1 0.5 2
19 A. negrundo 7 1 0.4 2 1.9 283 47 0.5 0.1 1.5 0.4
1 Betula nigra 1 2.2 4
5 B. nigra 2 1.3 3
6 B. nigra 3 1 0.6 1 2.7 121 20 1.4 0.8 4.5 2.6
11 Juglans nigra 1 1 0.5 2 3.5 40 7 0.5 0.0 1.6 0.0
12
Liriodendron
tulipifera 1 1 0.4 1 1.0 40 7 0.4 0.0 1.3 0.0
2
Platanus
occidentalis 4 4
4 P. occidentalis 4 4
10 P. occidentalis 3 3 4 121 20 3.7 0.6 12.0 1.9
Totals / Average 15 2.4 607 100 1.3 1.3 4.2 4.4

Naturally colonizing species and heights: 3 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0mto <1.5m.); 1 sweetgum (height: 1.5m)
Plot 3. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
3
Platanus
occidentalis 1 1.3 3
4 P. occidentalis 1 2.1 3
5 P. occidentalis 2.6 4
9 P. occidentalis 4 2.7 4 3.5 162 36 2.2 0.6 7.1 2.1
1
Quercus
michauxii 1 1.1 3
2 Q. michauxii 1 0.4 2
6 Q. michauxii 1 0.7 2
7 Q. michauxii 1 1.8 4
8 Q. michauxii 5 2 1.2 2 2.6 202 45 1.0 0.5 3.4 1.7
10 Quercus texana 1 0.8 2
11 Q. texana 2 2 0.9 2 2.0 81 18 0.9 0.1 2.8 0.2
Totals/ Average 11 2.8 445 100 1.4 0.6 4.7 2.1

Naturally colonizing species and heights: 4 loblolly pine (heights: >1m to <2m)); 6 sweetgum (heights: >1m to <3m)

Plot 4. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
9 Acer negrundo 1 0.2 1
14 A. negrundo 1 0.5 2
19 A. negrundo 3 1 0.4 2 1.7 121 19 0.4 0.2 1.2 0.5
16 Juglans nigra 1 1 0.8 2 2.0 40 6 0.8 0.0 2.6 0.0
2
Platanus
occidentalis 2.9 4
3 P. occidentalis 4.4 4
4 P. occidentalis 3.7 4
5 P. occidentalis 2 1.2 3
6 P. occidentalis 2 2.1 3
7 P. occidentalis 6 4.1 4 3.7 243 38 3.1 1.2 10.1 4.1
8
Quercus
michauxii 2 1 2
20 Q. michauxii 2 1 0.7 2 2.0 81 13 0.9 0.2 2.8 0.7
10 Quercus pagoda 1 0.9 3
11 Q. pagoda 1 0.7 2
21 Q. pagoda 3 1 0.8 2 1.1 121 19 0.8 0.1 2.6 0.3
12 Quercus texana 1 1 1.7 3 3.0 40 6 1.7 0.0 5.6 0.0
Totals / Average 16 2.7 648 100 1.6 1.4 5.4 4.6

Naturally colonizing species and heights: 1 loblolly pine (height: 1m)

Plot 5. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
1 Celtis laevigata 1 1 1.3 1 1 40 17 1.3 0.0 4.3 0.0
9
Liriodendron
tulipifera 1 1 0.3 1 1 40 17 0.3 0.0 4.3 0.0
4
Platanus
occidentalis 1 1 2
5 P. occidentalis 1 0.2 2
6 P. occidentalis 3 1 0.7 2 2 121 50 0.6 0.4 2.1 1.3
12 Quercus pagoda 1 1 0.4 1 1 40 17 0.4 0.0 4.3 0.0
Totals / Average 6 2 243 100 0.7 0.4 2.1 1.4
Naturally colonizing species and heights: 5 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <2.5m); 3 sweetgum (>1m to <1.5m)

Plot 6. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
1 Betula nigra 1 0.7 1
3 B. nigra 2 1 2
6 B. nigra 0.9 2
8 B. nigra 4 1 0.6 2 1.75 162 67 0.8 0.2 2.6 0.6
13 Quercus pagoda 1 1.4 3
15 Q. pagoda 2 1 0.6 2 2.5 81 33 1.0 0.6 3.3 1.9
Totals / Average 6 2 243 100 0.9 0.3 2.8 1.0
Naturally colonizing species and heights: 10 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <4.0m)
Plot 7. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
1
Platanus
occidentalis 1 1.2 2
3 P. occidentalis 1 1.7 3
4 P. occidentalis 1 1.5 2
11 P. occidentalis 4 1 1.1 2 2.3 162 44 1.4 0.3 4.5 0.9
5
Quercus
michauxii 1 1 1.6 3 3.0 40 11 1.6 0.0 5.2 0.0
14 Quercus pagoda 1 1 1.4 3 3.0 40 11 1.4 0.0 4.6 0.0
8 Quercus texana 2 2.3 4
12 Q. texana 1 1.5 3
13 Q. texana 1 1.6 3
15 Q. texana 4 1 0.9 3 3.3 162 44 1.6 0.6 5.2 1.9
Totals / Average 9 2.8 364 100 1.5 0.4 4.9 1.3

Naturally colonizing species and heights: 13 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <3.0m); 15 sweetgum (2.0m)
Plot 8. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
2 Betula nigra 1 1.2 2
3 B. nigra 1 0.8 2
6 B. nigra 3 1 0.8 2 2.0 121 50 0.9 0.2 3.1 0.8
12
Quercus
michauxii 1 0.7 2
14 Q. michauxii 2 1 0.3 1 1.5 81 33 0.5 0.3 1.6 0.9
13 Quercus pagoda 1 2 0.8 3 3.0 40 17 0.8 0.0 2.6 0.0
Total / Average 6 243 100 0.8 0.3 2.5 0.9
Naturally colonizing species and heights: 15 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <3.0m); 1 sweetgum (1.5m)

Plot 9. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
1
Platanus
occidentalis 1 1.2 2
2 P. occidentalis 1 1.1 2
5 P. occidentalis 1 1.6 3
6 P. occidentalis 1.8 3
7 P. occidentalis 1 1.5 3
8 P. occidentalis 6 1 1.2 3 243 100 1.4 0.3 4.6 0.9
Total / Average 6 2.7 243 100 1.4 0.3 4.6 0.9
Naturally colonizing species and heights: 30 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <4.0m); 3 sweetgum (>1m to <2.0m)

Plot 10. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
2
Platanus
occidentalis 3.6 4
8 P. occidentalis 4 4
9 P. occidentalis 3 3.4 4 4.0 121 30 3.7 0.3 12.0 1.0
1
Quercus
michauxii 2.9 4
3 Q. michauxii 2 2.2 4
4 Q. michauxii 1 1.4 3
5 Q. michauxii 1 1.9 4
6 Q. michauxii 2.2 4
7 Q. michauxii 1 2.3 4
10 Q. michauxii 7 2 0.7 3 3.7 283 70 1.9 0.7 6.4 2.3
Total / Average 10 3.8 405 100 2.5 1.0 8.1 3.4

Plot 11. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
10
Liriodendron
tulipifera 1 1 0.4 2 2.0 40 11 2.0 0.0 6.6 0.0
1
Platanus
occidentalis 1 1 2
2 P. occidentalis 1 0.9 2
7 P. occidentalis 3 1 0.3 2 2.0 121 33 0.7 0.4 2.4 1.2
3
Quercus
michauxii 1 0.3 1
5 Q. michauxii 1 1.1 3
6 Q. michauxii 1 0.4 2
8 Q. michauxii 1 1 2
11 Q. michauxii 5 1 0.5 2 2.0 202 56 0.7 0.4 2.2 1.2
Total / Average 9 2.0 364 100 0.7 0.3 2.2 1.1
Naturally colonizing species and heights: 20 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <4.0m); 5 sweetgum (>1m to <2.0m)

Plot 12. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
3 Betula nigra 5.2 4
5 B. nigra 1 0.9 3
6 B. nigra 1 0.9 3
7 B. nigra 3.6 4
8 B. nigra 5 4
9 B. nigra 6 3.5 4 3.7 243 67 3.2 1.9 10.4 6.2
1
Platanus
occidentalis 5 4
2 P. occidentalis 5.2 4
4 P. occidentalis 3 3.7 4 4.0 121 33 4.6 0.8 15.2 2.7
Total / Average 9 3.8 364 100 3.7 1.7 12.0 5.6
Naturally colonizing species and heights: 7 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <3.0m); 6 sweetgum (>1m to <4.0m); 1 persimmon (1.5m); 1
Bradford pear (1.5m)

Plot 13. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
1
Platanus
occidentalis 2.5 4
2 P. occidentalis 1 1.3 3
3 P. occidentalis 1 2 3
4 P. occidentalis 1 1 3
5 P. occidentalis 1 1.4 3
6 P. occidentalis 1 1.5 3
7 P. occidentalis 1 1.8 3
8 P. occidentalis 2 2.4 4
9 P. occidentalis 3.6 4
10 P. occidentalis 10 2.9 4 3.4 405 100 2.0 0.8 6.7 2.7
Total / Average 10 3.4 405 100 2.0 0.8 6.7 2.7
Naturally colonizing species and heights: 15 loblolly pine (heights: 1.0m to <3.0m); 12 persimmon (>1.0m to <3.0m)

Plot 14. Dixon Road Bank, 5th Annual Report, October 2023.
Stem
ID Species N
Dia. At
Dm. Ht
(cm)
Dia. At
Breast
Ht (cm)
Total
Stem
Ht (m)
Vigor
Avg
Vigor
by
Species
Stems
per
Acre by
Species
Species
Relative
Density
Avg Ht
by
Species
(m)
StD Ht
by
Species
(m)
Avg Ht
by
Species
(ft)
StD Ht
by
Species
(ft)
2 Juglans nigra 1 1 0.7 1 1 40 8 0.7 0.0 2.3 0.0
4
Platanus
occidentalis 1 2.4 4
5 P. occidentalis 1 2.1 3
6 P. occidentalis 2.5 4
7 P. occidentalis 1 1.9 3
8 P. occidentalis 1 1.6 3
9 P. occidentalis 2.7 4
10 P. occidentalis 7 2.9 4 4 283 58 2.3 0.5 7.5 1.5
12
Quercus
michauxii 1 1.2 3
13 Q. michauxii 1 1.3 3
16 Q. michauxii 3 1 1 3 3 121 25 25.0 0.2 82.0 0.5
11 Quercus texana 1 1 1.1 2 2 40 8 1.1 0.0 3.6 0.0
Total / Average 12 3 486 100 1.8 0.7 5.8 2.4

Naturally colonizing species and heights: 20 loblolly pine (heights: >1.0m to <4.0m); 10 sweetgum (>1m to <3.0m)

Appendix B
Plot Maps, Species List and Plot Photographs
for the Fifth Annual Monitoring Year (2023)
Dixon Road Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Bank
PLOT: DIX-1 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Swamp chestnut oak
2 Swamp chestnut oak
3 Swamp chestnut oak
4 Walnut DEAD
5 Swamp chestnut oak
6 Swamp chestnut oak
7 Swamp chestnut oak
8 Cherrybark oak
9 Silky dogwood
10 Silky dogwood
11 Swamp chestnut oak
12 Cherrybark oak
1 2
3 4
5
12
7 9

11
6

5
8

10
PLOT: DIX-2 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 River birch
2 Sycamore
3 Nuttall oak DEAD
4 Sycamore
5 River birch
6 River birch
7 Sugarberry DEAD
8 Sugarberry DEAD
9 Sugarberry DEAD
10 Sycamore
11 Black walnut
12 Yellow poplar DEAD
13 Box elder
14 Box elder
15 Box elder
16 Box elder
17 Box elder
18 Box elder
19 Box elder
1
2
3
4
5
6 7

9
10
11

12
8888
88
8
16
13 14
15
19
18
17
PLOT: DIX-3 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Swamp chestnut oak
2 Swamp chestnut oak
3 Sycamore
4 Sycamore
5 Sycamore
6 Swamp chestnut oak
7 Swamp chestnut oak
8 Swamp chestnut oak
9 Sycamore
10 Nuttall oak
11 Nuttall oak
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

11
PLOT: DIX-4 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Sugarberry
2 Sycamore
3 Sycamore
4 Sycamore
5 Sycamore
6 Sycamore
7 Sycamore
8 Swamp chestnut oak
9 Box elder
10 Cherrybark oak
11 Cherrybark oak
12 Nuttall oak
13 Yellow poplar
14 Box elder
15 Missing
16 Walnut
17 Missing
18 Missing
19 Box elder
20 Swamp chestnut oak
21 Cherrybark oak
1 2
3
4 5
6
7 8
9

11
12

13
10
21 19
16
20
14
PLOT: DIX-5 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Sugarberry
2 Sycamore DEAD
3 Sugarberry DEAD
4 Sycamore
5 Sycamore
6 Sycamore
7 Sugarberry
8 Sugarberry
9 Yellow poplar
10 Silky dogwood
DEAD
11 Yellow polar DEAD
12 Cherrybark oak
13 Cherrybark oak
DEAD
1
2
3
4
11 6
7

8
9

10
5
13
12
PLOT: DIX-6 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 River birch
2 River birch DEAD
3 River birch
4 Sugarberry DEAD
5 River birch DEAD
6 River birch
7 Sugarberry DEAD
8 River birch
9 River birch DEAD
10 Sugarberry DEAD
11 Sugarberry DEAD
12 Yellow poplar DEAD
13 Cherrybark oak
14 Persimmon DEAD
15 Cherrybark oak
1 2
3 4
5
6 7

15

10
9 11
12

14

13
8
PLOT: DIX-7 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Sycamore
2 Swamp chestnut oak DEAD
3 Sycamore
4 Sycamore
5 Swamp chestnut oak
6 Swamp chestnut oak DEAD
7 Sugarberry
8 Nuttall oak
9 Sugarberry DEAD
10 Sugarberry DEAD
11 Sycamore
12 Nuttall oak DEAD
13 Nuttall oak
14 Cherrybark oak
15 Nuttall oak
16 Missing
1
2
3
4 5
6 7

8

10
9
11
12
13
14

15
16
PLOT: DIX-8 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 River birch DEAD
2 River birch
3 River birch
4 River birch DEAD
5 River birch DEAD
6 River birch
7 Sugarberry DEAD
8 Sugarberry DEAD
9 Sugarberry DEAD
10 Silky dogwood DEAD
11 Swamp chestnut oak DEAD
12 Swamp chestnut oak DEAD
13 Cherrybark oak
14 Swamp chestnut oak
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

9

10

1
11 12
13
14
PLOT: DIX-9 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Sycamore
2 Sycamore
3 Black walnut DEAD
4 Black walnut DEAD
5 Sycamore
6 Sycamore
7 Sycamore
8 Sycamore
9 Sycamore DEAD
10 Black walnut DEAD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

9
10
PLOT: DIX-10 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Swamp chestnut oak
2 Sycamore
3 Swamp chestnut oak
4 Swamp chestnut oak
5 Swamp chestnut oak
6 Swamp chestnut oak
7 Swamp chestnut oak
8 Sycamore
9 Sycamore
10 Swamp chestnut oak
1 2
3 4
5 6
7

8

9

10
PLOT: DIX-11 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Sycamore
2 Sycamore
3 Swamp chestnut oak
4 Sycamore DEAD
5 Swamp chestnut oak
6 Swamp chestnut oak
7 Sycamore
8 Swamp chestnut oak
9 Yellow poplar DEAD
10 Yellow poplar
11 Swamp chestnut oak
1
2 3
4
5
6
7

8

10
9
11
PLOT: DIX-12 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Sycamore
2 Sycamore
3 River birch
4 Sycamore
5 River birch
6 River birch
7 River birch
8 River birch
9 River birch
10 Silky dogwood DEAD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

9

10
PLOT: DIX-13 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Sycamore
2 Sycamore
3 Sycamore
4 Sycamore
5 Sycamore
6 Sycamore
7 Sycamore
8 Sycamore
9 Sycamore
10 Sycamore
11 Nuttall oak DEAD
12 Nuttall oak DEAD
1 2

PLOT: DIX-14 October 2023

Plant ID
Number
Species
1 Black walnut DEAD
2 Black walnut
3 Black walnut DEAD
4 Sycamore
5 Sycamore
6 Sycamore
7 Sycamore
8 Sycamore
9 Sycamore
10 Sycamore
11 Nuttall oak
12 Cherrybark oak
13 Swamp chestnut oak
14 Nuttall oak DEAD
15 Nuttall oak DEAD
16 Swamp chestnut oak
1
2
3
4 5
6
7

9

8 10
12

11
16
13
Appendix C.
Individual stem data (total height) at the end of the 2022 growing season,
Dixon Road Bank.
Plot 1

Plot 2
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 River birch 1.2
2 Sycamore 3.5
3 Nuttall oak 1.1
4 Sycamore 4.0
5 River birch 1.1
6 River birch 2.3
7 Sugarberry - Dead
8 Sugarberry - Dead
9 Sugarberry - Dead
10 Sycamore 3.0
11 Black walnut 0.4
12 Yellow poplar - Dead
13 Box elder 0.4
14 Box elder 0.4
15 Box elder 0.3
16 Box elder 0.4

Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Swamp chestnut oak 0.6
2 Swamp chestnut oak 1.3
3 Swamp chestnut oak 2.5
4 Walnut - Dead
5 Swamp chestnut oak 1.2
6 Swamp chestnut oak 0.9
7 Swamp chestnut oak 0.7
8 Cherrybark oak 1.2
9 Silky dogwood 0.4
10 Silky dogwood 0.3
11 Swamp chestnut oak 0.4
12 Cherrybark oak 0.6
13 Persimmon 1.2

Plot 3
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Swamp chestnut oak 1.2
2 Swamp chestnut oak 0.3
3 Sycamore 1.0
4 Sycamore 2.0
5 Sycamore 2.2
6 Swamp chestnut oak 0.3
7 Swamp chestnut oak 1.2
8 Swamp chestnut oak 1.3
9 Sycamore 2.5
10 Nuttall oak 1.0
11 Nuttall oak 0.5

Plot 4
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Sugarberry 0.2
2 Sycamore 2.3
3 Sycamore 4.0
4 Sycamore 3.0
5 Sycamore 1.8
6 Sycamore 1.2
7 Sycamore - Dead
8 Swamp chestnut oak 1.0
9 Sycamore - Dead
10 Cherrybark oak 0.5
11 Cherrybark oak 0.6
12 Nuttall oak 1.1
13 Yellow poplar 0.7
14 Box elder 0.3
15 Swamp chestnut oak 0.3
16 Walnut 0.4
17 Sycamore 3.0
18 Sycamore 3.0

Plot 5
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Sugarberry DEAD - Dead
2 Sycamore 0.2
3 Sugarberry DEAD - Dead
4 Sycamore 1.0
5 Sycamore 0.4
6 Sycamore 0.5
7 Sugarberry 0.3
8 Sugarberry 0.3
9 Yellow poplar 0.3
10 Silky dogwood 0.1
11 Yellow polar DEAD - Dead
12 Cherrybark oak 0.3
13 Cherrybark oak 0.3

Plot 6
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 River birch 0.6
2 River birch DEAD - Dead
3 River birch 1.0
4 Sugarberry 0.3
5 River birch DEAD - Dead
6 River birch 0.6
7 Sugarberry 0.4
8 River birch 0.8
9 River birch DEAD - Dead
10 Sugarberry DEAD - Dead
11 Sugarberry DEAD - Dead
12 Yellow poplar - Dead
13 Cherrybark oak 1.0
14 Persimmon DEAD - Dead
15 Cherrybark oak 0.4

Plot 7
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Sycamore 1.1
2 Swamp chestnut oak DEAD - Dead
3 Sycamore 1.2
4 Sycamore 1.2
5 Swamp chestnut oak 1.0
6 Swamp chestnut oak - Dead
7 Sugarberry - Dead
8 Sugarberry 1.2
9 Sugarberry DEAD - Dead
10 Sugarberry DEAD - Dead
11 Sycamore 1.0
12 Nuttall oak DEAD - Dead
13 Nuttall oak 1.3
14 Cherrybark oak 1.3
15 Nuttall oak 1.0
16 Nuttall oak 1.2

Plot 8
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 River birch DEAD - Dead
2 River birch 0.8
3 River birch 1.2
4 River birch DEAD - Dead
5 River birch 0.6
6 River birch 1.0
7 Sugarberry 0.2
8 Sugarberry DEAD - Dead
9 Sugarberry 0.2
10 Silky dogwood 0.4
11 Swamp chestnut oak DEAD - Dead
12 Swamp chestnut oak DEAD - Dead
13 Cherrybark oak 0.8
14 Swamp chestnut oak 0.3

Plot 9
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Sycamore 1.2
2 Sycamore 1.2
3 Black walnut 0.2
4 Black walnut DEAD dead
5 Sycamore 1.3
6 Sycamore 1.8
7 Sycamore 1.3
8 Sycamore 1
9 Sycamore DEAD dead
10 Black walnut DEAD dead

Plot 10
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Swamp chestnut oak 2.2
2 Sycamore 3.4
3 Swamp chestnut oak 1.6
4 Swamp chestnut oak 1.1
5 Swamp chestnut oak 1.3
6 Swamp chestnut oak 2.1
7 Swamp chestnut oak 1.8
8 Sycamore 3.5
9 Sycamore 3
10 Swamp chestnut oak 0.4

Plot 11
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Sycamore 0.7
2 Sycamore 1
3 Swamp chestnut oak 0.2
4 Sycamore DEAD dead
5 Swamp chestnut oak 0.6
6 Swamp chestnut oak 0.4
7 Sycamore 0.4
8 Swamp chestnut oak 0.6
9 Yellow poplar 0.4
10 Yellow poplar 0.4

Plot 12
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Sycamore 4
2 Sycamore 5
3 River birch 4
4 Sycamore 2.5
5 River birch 1
6 River birch 0.5
7 River birch 2.5
8 River birch 4
9 River birch 3
10 Silky dogwood DEAD dead

Plot 13
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Sycamore 2.2
2 Sycamore 1.2
3 Sycamore 1.9
4 Sycamore 1
5 Sycamore 1.2
6 Sycamore 1.5
7 Sycamore 1.6
8 Sycamore 2.3
9 Sycamore 3.5
10 Sycamore 2.5
11 Nuttall oak DEAD dead
12 Nuttall oak DEAD dead

Plot 14
Plant ID Number Species Height (m) Status
1 Black walnut DEAD dead
2 Black walnut 0.4
3 Black walnut DEAD dead
4 Sycamore 1.2
5 Sycamore 1.2
6 Sycamore 2.3
7 Sycamore 1.4
8 Sycamore 1.1
9 Sycamore 2
10 Sycamore 2.2
11 Nuttall oak 1
12 Cherrybark oak 1.3
13 Swamp chestnut oak 1.1
14 Nuttall oak 1.2
15 Nuttall oak 1
16 Swamp chestnut oak 0.5