The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20190675 Ver 1_SwampGrape_100115_MY2_2023_20240129FINAL MY2 (2023) MONITORING REPORT SWAMP GRAPE STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE Robeson County, North Carolina Lumber River Basin Cataloging Unit 03040204 DMS Project No. 100115 Full Delivery Contract No. 7869 DMS RFP No. 16-007705 USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00904 DWR Project No. 2019-0675 Data Collection: January - November 2023 Submission: January 2024 Prepared for: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES 1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652 Restoration Systems, LLC 1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 Raleigh, North Carolina Ph: (919) 755-9490 Fx: (919) 755-9492 1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492 Response to Monitoring Year 2 (2023) DMS Comments Swamp Grape Mitigation Site Lumber River Basin – CU# 03040204 – Robeson County DMS Project ID No. 100115, Contract # 7869 DMS Comments Received (Black Text) & RS Responses (Blue Text) Report & Field Visit: 1. During site visit a newly created beaver dam was observed on UT-1, on the downstream stream enhancement II reach, upstream of the conservation easement boundary. Overall, the site looked great. The location of the beaver dam was added to the report, CCPV, and digital submittal. Digital Deliverables: 1. Please note for all future submissions, all vegetation data presented in the report are required to be submitted in digital format, for fixed and temporary/mobile plots. Understood, Table 8 in the document and digital submittal has been updated to include temporary plots. Swamp Grape Year 2, 2023 Monitoring Summary General Notes • A small area of encroachment was observed during year 2 (2023) along UT-2. Restoration Systems replanted this area with 3-gallon upland containerized species from an approved Site Mitigation plan during the 2023/2024 dormant season. RS also installed additional fence posts along this boundary line with signage (Site Photo Log, Appendix A). • Minimal evidence of nuisance animal activity (beaver) was observed. One beaver dam was observed on UT-1 at the northern easement boundary. Beavers and the dam will be removed. Streams • All streams are functioning as designed. Upstream on UT2 has experienced some sediment deposition in pools during year 2. Cross sections of this area were measured several times throughout the year, and sediment appears to be moving its way through the reach. • All engineered structures were stable and functioning within design parameters; no stream areas of concern were documented. • Four bankfull events were documented during MY2 (2023), making 7 total bankfull events during the 2 monitoring years (Table 11, Appendix D). Vegetation • Measurements of the 23 vegetation plots resulted in an average of 458 planted stems/acre. All individual plots met success criteria except plots 2, 19, and 23 (Tables 7-8, Appendix B). Plots 2, 19, and 23 averaged 243, 243, and 283 stems per acre, respectively. • Three random vegetation transects (50m x 5m) were conducted in year 2 (2023). None of the transects met the success criteria of 320 stems per acre (Table 7B, Appendix B). • Three random herbaceous vegetation plots (5-meter by 2-meter) were sampled in year 2 (2023). All three plots met the success criteria of at least 3 different herbaceous species per plot (Table 7C, Appendix B). • Invasive vegetation treatments have been effective in reducing populations and currently areas of invasive vegetation are below the mapping threshold. These areas will continue to be monitored and treated as needed. Wetlands • Twelve of sixteen groundwater gauges met success criteria for the year 2 (2023) monitoring period. Insufficient and inconsistent rainfall between mid-February and late-March likely caused groundwater levels in the vicinity of gauges 1, 2, 3, and 6 to drop below 12 inches for a few short periods during this time (Appendix D). Site Maintenance Report (2023) Invasive Species Work Maintenance work 05/22-23/2023: Cattail, Chinese Privet 06/26-27/2023: Chinaberry, Chinese Privet 10/11/2023: Cattail, Chinaberry, Chinese Privet 07/04/2023: Repaired Fence 09/19/2023: Beaver Dam Removal 12/12/2023: Easement Encroachment area (3- gallon container planting, additional easement marking) FINAL MY2 (2023) MONITORING REPORT SWAMP GRAPE STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE Robeson County, North Carolina Lumber River Basin Cataloging Unit 03040204 DMS Project No. 100115 Full Delivery Contract No. 7869 DMS RFP No. 16-007705 USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00904 DWR Project No. 2019-0675 Data Collection: January - October 2023 Submission: January 2024 Prepared for: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES 1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652 Prepared by: And Restoration Systems, LLC Axiom Environmental, Inc. 1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 218 Snow Avenue Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Contact: Worth Creech Contact: Grant Lewis 919-755-9490 (phone) 919-215-1693 (phone) 919-755-9492 (fax) MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Table of Contents Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Background, Components, and Structure ........................................................................ 1 1.2 Success Criteria ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.0 METHODS .............................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Monitoring .................................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 9 APPENDICES Appendix A. Visual Assessment Data Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View Table 4A-D. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Vegetation Plot Photographs Site Photo Log Appendix B. Vegetation Plot Data Table 6. Planted Bare-Root Woody Vegetation Table 7A. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities Table 7B. Temporary Vegetation Plots Data Table 7C. Herbaceous Vegetation Plots Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool Appendix C. Stream Geomorphology Data Cross-Sections with Annual Overlays Table 9A-D. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables Table 10A-C. Cross-Section Morphology Monitoring Summary Appendix D. Hydrologic Data Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events Stream Crest Gauge Graphs Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data Groundwater Gauge Graphs Figure D1. 30/70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall Soil Temperature Graph Appendix E. Project Timeline and Contact Info Table 13. Project Timeline Table 14. Project Contacts Appendix F. Project Notes Aggradation Memo to DMS June 7, 2023 IRT Site Visit Notes July 14, 2023 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 1 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY Restoration Systems, LLC (RS) has established the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (Site). The Site is on two contiguous parcels used primarily for row crop production with small pockets of livestock pasture in the Atlantic Southern Loam Plains portion of the Southeastern Plains ecoregion of North Carolina. Located in the Lumber River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03040204, the Site is in the Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03040204048010 and North Carolina Division of Water Resources [NCDWR] subbasin number 03-07-55. The Site is not located in a Local Watershed Plan (LWP), Regional Watershed Plan (RWP), or Targeted Resource Area (TRA). Site watersheds range from approximately 0.41 of a square mile (263 acres) on UT2 to 1.53 square miles (977 acres) at the Site’s outfall. 1.1 Project Background, Components, and Structure Located approximately 4 miles northwest of Rowland and 2.5 miles southwest of Alfordsville along the southwest edge of Robeson County, the Site encompasses 24.68 acres. Mitigation work within the Site included 1) stream restoration, 2) stream enhancement (Level I), 3) stream enhancement (Level II), 4) wetland reestablishment, 5) wetland rehabilitation, 6) wetland enhancement, 7) wetland creation, and 7) vegetation planting. The Site is expected to provide 3,228.333 warm water stream credits and 12.705 riparian wetland credits by closeout (Table 1, Page 2). A conservation easement was granted to the State of North Carolina and recorded at the Robeson County Register of Deeds on February 23, 2021. Before construction, land use at the Site was characterized by breached agriculture ponds, failed/eroded agricultural crossings, row crops, livestock pasture, and disturbed forest. Site design was completed in June 2021; construction started on July 12, 2021, and ended with a final walkthrough on September 23, 2021. The Site was planted on January 18, 2022. Completed project activities, reporting history, completion dates, and project contacts are summarized in Tables 13-14 (Appendix E). Space Purposefully Left Blank Original Mitigation Original Original Original Plan As-Built Mitigation Restoration Mitigation Project Segment Ft/Ac Ft/Ac Category Level Ratio (X:1)Credits Comments Stream UT 1 Reach 1 297 296 Warm EI 2.00000 148.500 UT 1 Reach 2 1215 1211 Warm R 1.00000 1,215.000 UT 1 Reach 3 546 544 Warm EI 2.00000 273.000 UT 1 Reach 4 235 235 Warm EII 3.00000 78.333 UT 1 Reach 5 230 230 Warm R 1.00000 230.000 UT 1 Reach 6 165 166 Warm EI 2.00000 82.500 UT 1 Reach 7 206 207 Warm R 1.00000 206.000 UT 1 Reach 8 87 88 Warm EI 2.00000 43.500 UT 2 Reach 1 684 681 Warm R 1.00000 684.000 UT 2 Reach 2 266 265 Warm EI 2.00000 133.000 UT 3 Reach 1 133 132 Warm EI 2.00000 66.500 UT 3 Reach 2 68 66 Warm R 1.00000 68.000 Total:3,228.333 Wetland Wetland Reestablish 4.470 4.47 R REE 1.00000 4.470 Wetland Rehabilitation 2.671 2.671 R RH 1.50000 1.781 Wetland Enhancement 12.244 12.244 R E 2.00000 6.122 Wetland Creation 0.997 0.997 R C 3:100 0.332 Total:12.705 Project Credits Riparian Non-Rip Coastal Warm Cool Cold Wetland Wetland Marsh Restoration 2,403.000 Re-establishment 4.470 Rehabilitation 1.781 Enhancement 6.122 Enhancement I 747.000 Enhancement II 78.333 Creation 0.332 Preservation 0.000 Totals 3,228.333 12.705 Total Stream Credit 3,228.333 Total Wetland Credit 12.705 Wetland Mitigation Category Restoration Level CM Coastal Marsh HQP High Quality Preservation R Riparian P Preservation NR Non-Riparian E Wetland Enhancement - Veg and Hydro EII Stream Enhancement II EI Stream Enhancement I C Wetland Creation RH Wetland Rehabilitation - Veg and Hydro REE Wetland Re-establishment Veg and Hydro R Restoration Table 1. Swamp Grape Mitigation Site (ID-100115) Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits Restoration Level Stream MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 3 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Table 2. Summary: Goals, Performance, and Results Goals Objectives Success Criteria (1) HYDROLOGY • Minimize downstream flooding to the maximum extent possible. • Connect streams to functioning wetland systems. • Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank flows and restore jurisdictional wetlands • Plant woody riparian buffer • Remove livestock • Remove a ditch/drain tile network that contributes surface waters directly to the channel • Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement • BHR not to exceed 1.2 • Document four overbank events in separate monitoring years • Livestock excluded from the easement • Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria • Attain Vegetation Success Criteria • Conservation Easement recorded • Increase stream stability within the Site so that channels are neither aggrading nor degrading. • Construct channels with the proper pattern, dimension, and longitudinal profile • Remove livestock from the Site • Construct stable channels that do not contribute sediment to downstream receiving waters. • Plant woody riparian buffer • Cross-section measurements indicate a stable channel with appropriate substrate • Visual documentation of stable channels and structures • BHR not to exceed 1.2 • < 10% change in BHR in any given year • Livestock excluded from the easement • Attain Vegetation Success Criteria (1) WATER QUALITY • Remove direct nutrient and pollutant inputs from the Site and reduce contributions to downstream waters. • Remove livestock and reduce agricultural land/inputs • Plant woody riparian buffer • Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams • Remove a ditch/drain tile network that contributes surface waters directly to the channel • Restore overbank flooding by constructing channels at historic floodplain elevation. • Livestock excluded from the easement • Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria • Attain Vegetation Success Criteria (1) HABITAT • Improve instream and stream-side habitat. • Construct stable channels with woody debris available as instream habitat • Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade • Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank flows • Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement • Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams • Stabilize stream banks • Install in-stream structures • Cross-section measurement indicates a stable channel with appropriate substrate • Visual documentation of stable channels and in-stream structures. • Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria • Attain Vegetation Success Criteria • Conservation Easement recorded MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 4 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 1.2 Success Criteria Monitoring and success criteria for stream restoration should relate to project goals and objectives identified from onsite NC SAM and NC WAM data collection. From a mitigation perspective, several goals and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated by restoration activities without direct measurement. Other goals and objectives will be considered successful upon achieving success criteria. The following summarizes Site success criteria. Project Success Criteria Streams • All streams must maintain an Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05-05. • Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured cross-section. • BHR at any measured riffle cross-section should not change by more than 10% from baseline condition during any given monitoring period. • The stream project shall remain stable, and all other performance standards shall be met through four separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1-7. Wetland Hydrology • Saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum, 12 percent of the growing season, during average climatic conditions. Vegetation • Within planted portions of the Site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at year 3; a minimum of 260 stems per acre must be present at year 5, and a minimum of 210 stems per acre must be present at year 7. • Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5 and 10 feet at year 7 in each plot. • Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved planting list for the Site; natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on a case-by-case basis. • Herbaceous vegetation plots must have a minimum of three species present. 2.0 METHODS Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc. Annual monitoring reports of the data collected will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December 31 of each monitoring year data is collected. The monitoring schedule is summarized in the following table. Monitoring Schedule Resource Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Streams X X X X X Wetlands X X X X X X X Vegetation X X X X X Visual Assessment X X X X X X X Report Submittal X X X X X X X 2.1 Monitoring The monitoring parameters are summarized in the following table. MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 5 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Monitoring Summary Stream Parameters Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported Stream Profile Full longitudinal survey As-built (unless otherwise required) All restored stream channels Graphic and tabular data. Stream Dimension Cross-sections Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 Total of 16 cross- sections on restored channels Graphic and tabular data. Channel Stability Visual Assessments Yearly All restored stream channels Areas of concern will be depicted on a plan view figure with a written assessment and photograph of the area included in the report. Additional Cross-sections Yearly Only if instability is documented during monitoring Graphic and tabular data. Stream Hydrology NA NA NA NA Bankfull Events Continuous monitoring surface water gauges (pressure transducers) and/or trail camera Continuous recording through monitoring period 3 surface water gauges on UT 1 and UT 2 Surface water data for each monitoring period Visual/Physical Evidence Continuous through monitoring period N.A. Visual evidence, photo documentation, and/or rain data. Wetland Parameters Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported Wetland Restoration Groundwater gauges As-built, Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 throughout the year with the growing season defined as March 1-November 6 16 gauges spread throughout restored wetlands Soil temperature at the beginning of each monitoring period to verify the start of the growing season, groundwater and rain data for each monitoring period. Graphic and tabular data. Vegetation Parameters Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported Vegetation establishment and vigor Permanent vegetation plots 0.0247 acre (100 square meters) in size; CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) As-built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 23 plots spread across the Site (2 plots in cypress gum swamp and 21 plots in C.P. small stream swamp) Species, height, planted vs. volunteer, stems/acre, areas of concern Annual random vegetation plots, 0.0247 acre (100 square meters) in size As-built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 As needed to determine vegetation density in a questionable area Species and height Annual random herbaceous vegetation plots, 0.00247 acre (5 meters by 2 meters) in size Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 3 plots located in herbaceous dominated vegetation areas Number of species in plot Note: All vegetation plots and stream cross sections have fixed photo point locations. In addition, fixed photo points will be installed at two culverts entering the Site. Note: Vegetation data should be collected between July 1 and leaf drop. In addition, vegetation data will not be collected until 180 days after Site planting. MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 6 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Stream Summary All streams are functioning as designed. Upstream on UT2 has experienced some sediment deposition in pools during year 2. Cross sections of this area were measured several times throughout the year, and sediment appears to be moving its way through the reach. However, the reach will be closely monitored during subsequent years. Wetland Summary Summary of Monitoring Period/Hydrology Success Criteria by Year Year Soil Temperatures/Date Bud Burst Documented Monitoring Period Used for Determining Success 12 Percent of the Monitoring Period 2022 (Year 1) March 1, 2022 March 1-November 6 (251 days) 30 days 2023 (Year 2) March 1, 2023* March 1-November 6 (251 days) 30 days *Based on bud burst and a soil temperature of 58.1°F documented on March 1. Soil temperature did not fall below 49.44°F after March 1. Twelve of sixteen groundwater gauges met success criteria for the year 2 (2023) monitoring period. Insufficient and inconsistent rainfall between mid-February and late-March likely caused groundwater levels in the vicinity of gauges 1, 2, 3, and 6 to drop below 12 inches for a few short periods during this time (Figure D1 and Groundwater Gauge Graphs, Appendix D). It is expected that with normal to above- average rainfall during this time, all gauges would have met the 12% hydroperiod. Vegetation Summary During quantitative vegetation sampling, 23 sample plots (10-meter by 10-meter) were installed within the Site as per guidelines established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008). Year 2 (2023) vegetation measurements occurred on September 14, 2023. Measurements of all 23 plots resulted in an average of 458 stems/acre, excluding livestakes. Additionally, 20 of the 23 individual plots met the year 3 stem density requirement (Tables 7-8, Appendix B). Table 8 (Appendix B) indicates that plots 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 15, 20, and 21 each exceeded 50% dominant species composition during year 2, and plots 2, 6, 10, 15, 16, 20, 21, and 22 each had less than 4 different species counted during year 2. Although these criteria are not explicitly tied to vegetation success, they will be monitored closely during subsequent monitoring years. It is expected that vegetation within these areas will continue to diversify as natural recruitment increases throughout the monitoring period. Three temporary plots were counted, resulting in an average of 243 average stems per acre across the 3 plots. Additionally, none of the temporary plots met year 3 stem density requirement. These areas will be further assessed to determine if a replanting effort is needed (Table 7B, Appendix B). Three random herbaceous vegetation plots (5-meter by 2-meter) were also sampled in year 2 (2023). All 3 plots met the success criteria of at least 3 different herbaceous species per plot (Table 7C, Appendix B). One small area of easement encroachment was observed during year 2 (2023) along UT-2. RS replanted this area with 3-gallon upland containerized species from the approved Site Mitigation plan during the 2023/2024 dormant season. Additional fence post corners were installed along this boundary line with signage (Site Photo Log, Appendix A). MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 7 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Table 3. Project Attribute Table Swamp Grape Mitigation Site Project Information Project Name Swamp Grape Mitigation Site Project County Robeson County, North Carolina Project Area (acres) 24.7 Project Coordinates (latitude & latitude) 34.5639, -79.3490 Planted Area (acres) 22.5 Project Watershed Summary Information Physiographic Province Atlantic Southern Loam Plains Project River Basin Lumber USGS HUC for Project (14-digit) 03040204048010 NCDWR Sub-basin for Project 03-07-55 Project Drainage Area (acres) 977.0 Percentage of Project Drainage Area that is Impervious <2% CGIA Land Use Classification Managed Herbaceous Cover & Hardwood Swamps Reach Summary Information Parameters UT 1 Upstream UT 1 Downstream UT 2 UT 3 Length of reach (linear feet) 1293 1673 826 149 Valley Classification & Confinement Wide and flat alluvial valley Drainage Area (acres) 192 977 263 392 NCDWR Stream ID Score -- -- -- -- Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Perennial Perennial Perennial Perennial NCDWR Water Quality Classification C, Sw Existing Morphological Description (Rosgen 1996) F 5 Eg 5 Cg 5 Eg 5 Proposed Stream Classification (Rosgen 1996) Ce 5 Ce 5 Ce 5 Ce 5 Existing Evolutionary Stage (Simon and Hupp 1986) III/IV V V III/IV Underlying Mapped Soils Bibb Soils Drainage Class Poorly drained Hydric Soil Status Hydric Valley Slope 0.0062 0.0036 0.0042 0.0125 FEMA Classification NA Zone AE NA NA Native Vegetation Community Cypress-Gum Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) and Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) Watershed Land Use/Land Cover (Site) 15% agriculture land, 84% disturbed swamp forest, <1% low density residential/impervious surface Watershed Land Use/Land Cover (McRae and Jordan Cr Reference Channel) McRae - 40% agriculture, 35% forest, 5% low density residential/impervious surface Jordan Cr - 70% agriculture, 28% forest, 2% low density residential/impervious surface Percent Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation <5% MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 8 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Table 3. Project Attribute Table (continued) Swamp Grape Mitigation Site Wetland Summary Information Parameters Wetlands Wetland acreage 5.32 acre drained/impacted & 15.07 acre degraded Wetland Type Riparian riverine Mapped Soil Series Bibb Drainage Class Poorly drained Hydric Soil Status Hydric Source of Hydrology Groundwater, stream overbank Hydrologic Impairment Impoundment, incised streams, compacted soils, livestock, ditches Native Vegetation Community Cypress-Gum Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) and Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) % Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation <5% Restoration Method Hydrologic, vegetative, livestock Enhancement Method Vegetative, livestock Regulatory Considerations Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation Waters of the United States-Section 401 Yes Yes Section 401 Certification Waters of the United States-Section 404 Yes Yes Section 404 Permit Endangered Species Act Yes Yes CE Document (Mitigation Plan, App E) Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes CE Document (Mitigation Plan, App E) Coastal Zone Management Act No -- NA FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes Yes DMS FEMA Checklist (Mitigation Plan, App F) Essential Fisheries Habitat No -- NA Space Purposefully Left Blank MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Page 9 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 3.0 REFERENCES Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation. Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2008. Lumber River Basin Restoration Priorities (online). Available: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Lumber_River_Basin/Lu mber_RBRP_2008_FINAL.pdf (January 9, 2018) North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1. North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1. Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado Simon A, Hupp CR. 1986. Geomorphic and Vegetative Recovery Processes Along Modified Tennessee Streams: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Disturbed Fluvial Systems. Forest Hydrology and Watershed Management. IAHS-AISH Publ.167. MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Appendix A Visual Assessment Data Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View Tables 4A-D. Stream Visual Stability Assessment Table 5. Visual Vegetation Assessment Vegetation Plot Photographs Site Photo Log ") ") ") ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ #* #* #* ") T1 T 3 T2 H1 H2 H3 3 2 9 6 8 4 7 5 1 11 17 14 13 12 15 21 20 19 10 22 16 18 23 9 8 7 5 4 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 3 2 1 Rain Gauge UT-2 UT-1 Up UT-1 Down NCCGIA, NC 911 Board FIGURE Drawn by: Date: Scale: Project No.: KRJ JAN 2024 1:2700 20-003 Title: Project: Prepared for: Robeson County, NC SWAMP GRAPEMITIGATION SITE CURRENTCONDITIONSPLAN VIEW 1 ³ 0 500 1,000250Feet Legend Conservation Easement = 24.7 acres Parcel Boundaries Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement (Level I) Stream Enhancement (Level II) Stream Generating No Credit Wetland Restablishment Wetland Rehabilitation Wetland Enhancement Wetland Creation Vegetation Plots Meeting MY3 Stem Density Requirement Vegetation Plots Not Meeting MY3 Stem Density Requirement ^_Vegetation Plot Origins MY2 (2023) Temporary Vegetation Plots Not Meeting MY3 Stem Density Requirement ")MY2 (2023) Herbaceous Plot Locations (5m x 2m) Cross Sections Groundwater Gauges Meeting Success Criteria Groundwater Gauges Not Meeting Success Criteria ")Rain Gauge/Soil Probe #*Stream Crest Gauges 2023 Encroachment Area (~0.20 acres) Beaver Dam (Observed January 2024) UT-2 UT-3 UT-1 UT-1 XS 1 XS 2 XS4XS3 X S 5 X S 6 X S 7 X S 8 X S 9 XS10 X S 1 1 XS12 XS13 XS14 KitchenSt Note: Basemap is drone imagery from October 2021 on top of 2021 aerial orthoimagery from NC OneMap X S 1 5 X S 1 6 Table 4A. Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 1 Upstream Assessed Stream Length 1849 Assessed Bank Length 3698 Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 28 28 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document) 28 28 100% Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Survey Date: November 20, 2023 % Stable, Performing as Intended Totals Table 4B. Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 1 Downstream Assessed Stream Length 1157 Assessed Bank Length 2314 Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 5 5 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document) 5 5 100% Totals Survey Date: November 20, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Table 4C. Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 2 Assessed Stream Length 1070 Assessed Bank Length 2140 Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 6 6 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document) 6 6 100% % Stable, Performing as Intended Totals Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Survey Date: November 20, 2023 Table 4D. Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 3 Assessed Stream Length 199 Assessed Bank Length 398 Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 3 3 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document) 3 3 100% % Stable, Performing as Intended Totals Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Amount of Unstable Footage Survey Date: November 20, 2023 Table 5. Visual Vegetation Assessment Planted acreage 22.5 Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.0.10 acres 0.00 0.0% Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria.0.10acres 0.00 0.0% 0.00 0.0% Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard.0.10 acres 0.00 0.0% 0.00 0.0% Easement Acreage 24.7 Invasive Areas of Concern Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term or community structure for existing communities. Species included in summation above should be identified in report summary. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0% Easement Encroachment Areas Encroachment may be point,line,or polygon.Encroachment to be mapped consists of any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement.Common encroachments are mowing,cattle access, vehicular access.Encroachment has no threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area. none Survey Date: November 20, 2023 % of Planted Acreage 0.20 acres of enchroachment near the right bank of UT2 and left bank of UT1 Cumulative Total Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold Combined Acreage % of Easement Acreage Total Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold Combined Acreage Swamp Grape Site MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs Swamp Grape Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data MY2 Monitoring Report – December 2023 Plot 7 Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4 Plot 5 Plot 6 Plot 8 Swamp Grape Site MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs Swamp Grape Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data MY2 Monitoring Report – December 2023 Plot 15 Plot 9 Plot 10 Plot 11 Plot 12 Plot 13 Plot 14 Plot 16 Swamp Grape Site MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs Swamp Grape Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data MY2 Monitoring Report – December 2023 Plot 23 Plot 17 Plot 18 Plot 19 Plot 20 Plot 21 Plot 22 Temporary Plot 1 Swamp Grape Site MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs Swamp Grape Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data MY2 Monitoring Report – December 2023 Temporary Plot 2 Temporary Plot 3 Herb Plot 1 Herb Plot 2 Herb Plot 3 Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log Photo 1: UT1 Photo 2: Wetland development at groundwater gauge 15 MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 3: Culvert on UT 1 upstream of easement boundary Photo 4: UT 2 Upstream Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 5: Crossing on UT 2 (upstream from easement boundary) downstream end, facing upstream Photo 6: Crossing on UT 2 (upstream from easement boundary) Upstream end, facing downstream Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 7: UT 1 Channel Photo 8: Stream flow on UT 1 Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 9: Herbaceous wetland vegetation Photo 10: Wetland Vegetation Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 11: Bud burst of Celtis occidentalis Photo taken 2/28/23 MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 12: Bud burst of Quercus sp. Photo taken 2/28/2023 Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log Photo 13: Emergent wetland vegetation and bud burst of Salix nigra Photo taken 2/28/23 Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 14: Easement marking and supplemental planting Photo taken 12/12/23 Photo 15: Easement marking and supplemental planting Photo taken 12/12/23 Swamp Grape MY-02 (2023) Photo Log MY2 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Photo 16: Easement marking and supplemental planting Photo taken 12/12/23 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Appendix B Vegetation Data Table 6. Planted Bare-Root Woody Vegetation Table 7A. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities Table 7B. Temporary Vegetation Plots Data Table 7C. Herbaceous Vegetation Plots Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Table 6. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Species Total Acres 22.5 Alnus serrulata 750 Betula nigra 1,000 Carya aquatica 800 Carya ovata 800 Cephalanthus occidentalis 800 Nyssa aquatica 500 Nyssa sylvatica 700 Quercus nigra 2,200 Quercus phellos 2,200 Quercus shumardii 2,000 Taxodium ascendens 1,000 Taxodium distichum 3,000 Ulmus americana 2,000 TOTALS 17,750 Average Stems/Acre 789 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Table 7A. Planted Vegetation Totals Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Plot # Planted Stems/Acre Success Criteria Met? 1 648 Yes 2 243 No 3 486 Yes 4 526 Yes 5 567 Yes 6 445 Yes 7 445 Yes 8 486 Yes 9 364 Yes 10 405 Yes 11 526 Yes 12 648 Yes 13 648 Yes 14 526 Yes 15 607 Yes 16 324 Yes 17 445 Yes 18 486 Yes 19 243 No 20 364 Yes 21 445 Yes 22 364 Yes 23 283 No Average Planted Stems/Acre 458 Yes MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina January 2024 Table 7B. Temporary Vegetation Plots Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Species 50m x 2m Temporary Plots T-1 T-2 T-3 Cephalanthus occidentalis 1 0 1 Liriodendron tulipifera 6 4 3 Quercus nigra 0 0 1 Salix nigra 0 2 0 Total Stems 7 6 5 Total Stems/Acre 283 243 202 Average Stems/Acre: 243 Table 7C. Herbaceous Vegetation Plots Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Plot # Species Count Success Criteria Met? Taxa Identified H1 6 Yes Carex sp. Cladium mariscus Eclipta prostrata Galium tinctorium Penthorum sedoides Juncus effusus H2 5 Yes Carex sp. Eupatorium capillifolium Juncus effusus Rubus sp. Scirpus cyperinus H3 4 Yes Juncus effusus Ludwigia alternifolia Scirpus cyperinus Carex sp. Average 5 Yes Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool 22.5 2022‐01‐18 NA NA 2023‐09‐14 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 4 4 11 1122 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 11 Carya sp. Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub OBL 4 4 1122 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU Nyssa sp.22 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 1 1 Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 3 3 3322 44 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 2 2 6611 2222 Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree FAC 11111122 Quercus sp.114422 22662244 Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL Salix sp. Taxodium sp.1177 33 66 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1 1 331133 Sum Performance Standard 16 16 6 6 12 12 13 13 14 14 11 11 11 11 12 12 16 6 121314111112 648 243 486 526 567 445 445 486 73548344 25 67 58 46 21 55 55 33 22223233 00000000 16 6 121314111112 648 243 486 526 567 445 445 486 73548344 25 67 58 46 21 55 55 33 22223233 00000000 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Stems/Acre Species Count Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives % Invasives Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 FIndicator Status Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Date of Current Survey Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Tree/S hrub Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (continued) 22.5 2022‐01‐18 NA NA 2023‐09‐14 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 1 1 4 4 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 44 Carya sp. Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub OBL 1 1 1111 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU Nyssa sp.1177 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 223311 3333 Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 3 3 1 1 5 5 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 2255 44 Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree FAC 2211 Quercus sp.1111 11 Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL Salix sp.11 Taxodium sp.557777666611 33 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 3333 Sum Performance Standard 9 9 10 10 13 13 16 16 16 16 13 13 15 15 8 8 9 101316161315 8 364 405 526 648 648 526 607 324 42565633 56 70 54 38 38 31 47 50 33322222 00000000 9 101316161315 8 364 405 526 648 648 526 607 324 42565633 56 70 54 38 38 31 47 50 33322222 00000000 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) Tree/S hrub Indicator Status % Invasives Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Veg Plot 15 F Veg Plot 16 FVeg Plot 10 F Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 F Veg Plot 13 F Veg Plot 14 FVeg Plot 9 F Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (continued) 22.5 2022‐01‐18 NA NA 2023‐09‐14 0.0247 Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Total Total Total Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 1 1 3 3 Carya sp.11 22 Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub OBL 11 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 643 Nyssa sp. Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 2 2 2 2 Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 1 1 1 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 114411 3322 Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree FAC 1 1 5 5 Quercus sp.1111 1133 11 Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 2 Salix sp. Taxodium sp.22552233773322 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 3322 Sum Performance Standard 11 11 12 12 669911119977765 11 12 6 9 11 9 7765 445 486 243 364 445 364 283 283 243 202 7443334223 27 42 33 56 64 33 29 86 67 60 2222222222 0000000000 11 12 6 9 11 9 7765 445 486 243 364 445 364 283 283 243 202 7443334223 27 42 33 56 64 33 29 86 67 60 2222222222 0000000000 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Tree/S hrub Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Veg Plot 20 F Veg Plot 21 F Veg Plot 22 F Veg Plot 23 FIndicator Status Veg Plot 17 F Veg Plot 18 F Veg Plot 19 F MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Appendix C Stream Geomorphology Data Cross-Sections with Annual Overlays Table 9A-D. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables Table 10A-C. Cross-Section Morphology Monitoring Summary Station Elevation 0.4 110.0 109.25 2.7 109.7 0.97 4.2 109.4 107.67 4.8 109.4 109.20 5.8 109.0 1.53 6.9 108.6 13.2 8.1 108.2 8.9 107.9 10.1 108.1 11.7 107.9 12.4 108.0 14.1 108.0 14.8 108.1 E/C 5 15.9 109.0 17.5 109.4 18.4 109.8 21.4 109.8 22.3 110.0 Stream Type LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS -1, Pool 107 109 110 111 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 1, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation -0.2 110.1 110.07 2.4 110.0 0.95 4.6 110.0 108.13 5.7 109.6 109.97 6.9 109.3 1.84 8.0 109.1 11.3 9.3 109.1 10.5 109.1 11.5 109.0 12.1 108.5 12.6 108.8 13.6 108.1 14.0 108.5 E/C 5 14.4 109.3 15.0 108.9 16.2 109.4 16.2 109.4 17.4 109.5 19.5 110.0 21.8 110.2 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS -2, Riffle Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 107 109 110 111 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 2, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation 0.1 110.4 110.69 2.8 110.3 0.79 5.3 110.2 108.55 6.6 109.9 110.24 7.6 109.7 1.69 8.9 109.3 11.8 10.1 108.9 11.1 108.7 11.8 108.6 12.5 108.6 13.2 108.7 14.1 108.9 15.4 109.5 E/C 5 17.0 109.8 18.7 110.3 20.7 110.5 20.7 110.5 23.2 110.7 24.9 110.7 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS -3, Pool Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 107 109 110 111 112 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 3, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation 0.0 111.0 110.54 4.1 110.8 0.89 8.3 110.7 109.12 10.7 110.3 110.38 12.6 110.0 1.27 13.7 109.9 9.5 14.6 109.5 15.8 109.5 16.8 109.3 17.6 109.4 18.8 109.6 19.8 109.7 21.6 109.8 E/C 5 23.3 110.1 24.9 110.6 26.7 110.6 28.3 110.6 31.6 110.7 33.0 110.5 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS -4, Pool Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 109 110 111 112 0 10 20 30 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 4, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation -0.2 113.8 113.63 2.9 113.7 1.01 5.2 113.6 112.89 7.1 113.3 113.64 8.0 113.3 0.74 8.9 113.0 3.5 9.4 113.2 10.0 112.9 10.6 112.9 11.3 113.1 12.0 113.3 12.7 113.4 14.0 113.4 E/C 5 15.3 113.7 17.1 113.8 19.3 113.7 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS - 5, Riffle Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 112 113 114 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 5, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 07/18/22 MY-02 3/28/20 Station Elevation -0.2 113.8 113.74 2.9 113.7 0.94 5.2 113.6 111.76 7.1 113.3 113.61 8.0 113.3 1.85 8.9 113.0 11.5 9.4 113.2 10.0 112.9 10.6 112.9 11.3 113.1 12.0 113.3 12.7 113.4 14.0 113.4 E/C 5 15.3 113.7 17.1 113.8 19.3 113.7 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS - 6, Pool Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 111 112 113 114 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 6, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation -0.9 120.2 120.25 1.4 120.2 1.09 3.8 120.3 119.47 5.6 120.1 120.32 6.3 119.8 0.85 7.0 119.7 2.8 7.9 119.7 8.8 119.5 10.3 120.3 11.5 120.5 13.6 120.8 15.7 120.8 E/C 5 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS - 7, Riffle Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 119 120 122 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 7, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation -0.1 120.4 120.69 2.4 120.6 1.01 4.6 120.7 119.38 6.6 120.5 120.71 7.3 120.0 1.33 8.3 119.7 6.6 9.1 119.4 9.9 119.4 10.7 119.8 11.8 119.6 13.0 120.2 14.2 120.7 15.8 120.8 E/C 5 17.5 120.9 19.0 120.7 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS - 8, Pool Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 119 120 121 122 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 8, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation -0.1 112.5 112.75 2.8 112.4 0.93 4.7 112.3 111.82 6.2 112.1 112.68 7.4 112.0 1.00 8.2 112.0 4.6 9.0 112.0 9.6 111.9 10.3 111.8 10.8 111.9 11.5 112.0 12.2 112.2 13.3 112.4 E/C 5 14.1 112.7 15.0 112.7 15.6 112.5 17.7 112.6 20.5 112.7 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT3, XS - 9, Riffle Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 111 112 113 114 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 3, XS - 9, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation -0.3 112.9 113.35 2.5 112.8 0.69 4.8 113.1 111.82 5.8 112.7 112.87 6.7 112.9 1.06 8.4 112.9 6.4 9.3 112.6 9.8 112.3 10.3 112.2 10.9 112.3 12.3 112.3 13.9 112.1 15.1 112.1 E/C 5 16.1 111.8 16.9 111.9 17.7 112.2 18.4 112.8 19.1 112.9 20.4 112.8 22.9 113.0 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT3, XS - 10, Pool Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 111 112 113 114 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 3, XS - 10, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 Station Elevation -0.4 114.5 113.80 2.8 114.3 0.88 5.7 114.1 112.01 8.3 113.9 113.58 9.2 113.8 1.57 9.6 113.6 8.9 10.0 113.0 10.9 112.4 11.8 112.2 12.6 112.2 13.4 112.0 14.6 112.2 16.0 112.6 E/C 5 17.1 113.1 18.1 113.6 20.4 113.7 23.7 113.7 26.9 113.8 30.0 113.7 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT2, XS - 11, Pool Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 111 112 113 114 115 0 10 20 30 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 11, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation 1.0 114.3 114.24 3.7 114.1 1.03 5.4 114.2 113.40 7.9 114.1 114.26 10.3 113.9 0.86 12.2 113.8 6.5 13.8 113.6 14.5 113.4 15.0 113.3 15.3 113.4 15.8 113.5 16.8 113.7 17.6 113.8 E/C 5 18.3 114.1 20.2 114.1 22.2 114.3 24.6 114.2 27.3 114.0 29.8 113.8 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT2, XS - 12, Riffle Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 113 114 115 0 10 20 30 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 12, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 Station Elevation 0 114.803 115.10 2.7210693 114.946 1.105.1895542 114.776 114.34 7.0357666 115.099 115.18 8.423572 115.139 0.839.9086478 115.267 4.2 10.83857 115.332 11.850907 115.178 12.438166 114.921 12.84272 114.534 14.012188 114.429 14.761161 114.408 15.711867 114.343 E/C 5 16.212275 114.391 16.867666 114.921 17.550487 115.004 18.167741 114.879 19.665272 115.068 21.966662 115.126 24.233551 115.164 26.524733 115.121 30.039262 115.185 LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT2, XS - 13, Riffle 114 115 116 0 10 20 30 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 13, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation 0.0 115.3 115.52 2.0 115.3 1.04 4.1 115.3 114.73 5.6 115.0 115.59 7.3 115.1 1.78 8.8 115.2 10.8 11.0 115.2 11.8 115.1 12.5 115.0 13.0 114.7 13.5 114.7 14.0 114.8 14.7 114.9 E/C 5 15.5 115.0 16.4 115.0 17.2 115.3 18.0 115.6 18.8 115.5 19.9 115.6 22.7 115.4 24.4 114.94 26.3 115.2 28.7 115.2 30.3 115.1 31.5 115.2 LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT2, XS - 14, Pool 113 114 115 116 0 10 20 30 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 14, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 Station Elevation 0.0 116.7 116.85 2.3 116.9 0.96 5.3 116.7 116.03 7.3 116.6 116.82 8.0 116.2 0.79 8.6 116.1 3.5 9.5 116.3 10.4 116.0 11.7 116.5 14.0 116.8 16.2 116.8 18.9 116.8 E/C 5 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS - 15, Riffle Feature Riffle Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: Note: As-Built cross section data changed to match actual field conditions LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type 115 116 117 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 15, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 3/11/2022 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Station Elevation 0.0 116.8 116.82 2.3 116.8 0.90 4.8 116.7 115.42 5.0 116.7 116.68 5.9 116.4 1.26 5.9 116.4 8.0 7.2 115.7 8.6 115.5 9.6 115.4 10.5 115.4 12.0 115.8 13.5 116.2 14.7 116.4 E/C 5 16.5 116.7 18.8 116.7 21.1 116.8 Site Swamp Grape Site Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040204 XS ID UT1, XS - 16, Pool Feature Pool Date:3/28/2023 Field Crew:Adams, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Hieght Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 115 116 118 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 1, XS - 16, Pool Bankfull MY-00 3/11/2022 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)5.2 13.2 17.6 8 6.8 7.9 8.8 11.8 3 Floodprone Width (ft)8 20 50 8 50 150 100 100 3 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.2 0.3 0.8 8 0.5 0.6 0.2 0.4 3 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.4 0.7 1.5 8 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.9 3 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.9 3.9 3.9 8 3.9 3.9 2.9 3.9 3 Width/Depth Ratio 6.5 44 88 8 12 16 19.8 48.0 3 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1.5 9.3 8 7.3 19 8.4 11.3 3 Bank Height Ratio 1.5 2.8 6.6 8 1 1.3 1 1 3 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)10.2 12.2 20.3 7 12.4 14.4 17.9 19.4 2 Floodprone Width (ft)50 150 150 7 100 200 100 100 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.6 1.1 2.4 7 0.9 1 0.6 0.7 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.1 1.8 2.4 7 1.2 1.6 1.2 1.3 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)12.9 12.9 12.9 7 12.9 12.9 11.9 12.8 2 Width/Depth Ratio 7.8 11.1 33.8 7 12 16 25.1 31.5 2 Entrenchment Ratio 2.8 12.3 14.7 7 8 13.9 5.2 5.6 2 Bank Height Ratio 1 1.3 1.8 7 1 1.3 1 1 2 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other 0.0036 0.0054 0.00474 12.1 12.1 1.3 1.15 1.15 Table 9B. Baseline Stream Data Summary Swamp Grape - UT 1 (Downstream) Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design Monitoring Baseline (MY0) Eg 5 Ce 5 Ce 5 12.1 Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple) Monitoring Baseline (MY0)Design Table 9A. Baseline Stream Data Summary Swamp Grape - UT 1 (Upstream) 1.15 0.0062 0.0031 0.0024 1.01 1.15 3.53.5 3.5 Ce 5F 5 Ce 5 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)6.9 7.5 7.9 7.7 8.9 8.8 16.7 2 Floodprone Width (ft)50 75 75 100 200 100.0 100.0 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.6 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.2 1.4 1.7 0.7 1 0.7 0.9 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 3.5 6.0 2 Width/Depth Ratio 9.9 12.5 13.2 12 16 22.2 46.5 2 Entrenchment Ratio 6.7 9.5 10.9 13 22.6 6.0 11.4 2 Bank Height Ratio 1.1 1.3 1.4 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 2 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)6.8 7.8 8.8 8.9 10.3 15.8 15.8 1 Floodprone Width (ft)27 31 35 100 200 100.0 100.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.7 0.9 1 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.4 1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.2 1.3 1.4 0.8 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 5.9 5.9 1 Width/Depth Ratio 6.8 9.7 12.6 12 16 42.0 42.0 1 Entrenchment Ratio 3.1 4.1 5.1 11.2 19.5 6.3 6.3 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.4 1.6 1.8 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other Monitoring Baseline (MY0)DesignPre-Existing Condition (applicaple) Swamp Grape - UT 3 0.0125 0.0039 0.0032 6.1 6.1 6.1 1.17 1.15 1.15 Eg 5 Ce 5 Ce 5 Table 9D. Baseline Stream Data Summary 0.0042 0.0035 0.0029 4.5 4.5 4.5 1.02 1.15 1.15 Cg 5 Ce 5 Ce 5 Table 9C. Baseline Stream Data Summary Swamp Grape - UT 2 Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design Monitoring Baseline (MY0) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 109.50 109.49 109.25 110.09 110.14 110.07 110.37 110.36 110.69 110.50 110.54 110.63 113.72 113.78 113.63 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.03 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 0.92 0.79 1.00 1.01 0.98 1.00 1.06 1.01 Thalweg Elevation 107.77 107.92 107.67 108.75 108.60 108.13 108.60 108.41 108.55 109.30 109.12 109.30 113.01 112.99 112.89 LTOB2 Elevation 109.50 109.54 109.20 110.09 110.10 109.97 `110.37 110.21 110.24 110.50 110.55 110.60 113.72 113.83 113.64 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.73 1.62 1.53 1.34 1.50 1.84 1.77 1.80 1.69 1.20 1.43 1.30 0.70 0.84 0.74 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)13.9 14.65 13.24 12.8 12.15 11.28 17.8 15.09 11.78 11.9 12.09 11.38 3.4 3.92 3.52 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 114.21 113.94 113.74 120.40 120.35 120.25 120.44 120.46 120.69 116.68 116.64 116.85 116.80 116.83 116.82 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 0.77 0.94 1.00 1.17 1.09 1.00 0.96 1.01 1.00 1.07 0.96 1.00 0.97 0.90 Thalweg Elevation 113.00 111.90 111.76 119.79 119.67 119.47 119.11 119.22 119.38 115.79 115.92 116.03 115.47 115.41 115.42 LTOB2 Elevation 114.21 113.47 113.61 120.40 120.46 120.32 120.44 120.42 120.71 116.68 116.69 116.82 116.80 116.79 116.68 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.22 1.57 1.85 0.60 0.79 0.85 1.33 1.20 1.33 0.89 0.76 0.79 1.34 1.38 1.26 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.2 9.15 11.53 2.9 3.07 2.77 6.5 6.03 6.56 3.9 4.43 3.54 9.6 8.99 8.01 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Table 10A. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Swamp Grape/ DMS:100115) UT 1 UT 1 - Cross Section 1 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 2 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 3 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 4 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 5 (Riffle) UT 1 - Cross Section 16 (Pool) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. UT 1 - Cross Section 6 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 7 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 8 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 15 (Riffle) The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 113.81 113.83 113.80 114.20 114.27 114.24 114.95 114.98 115.10 115.20 115.27 115.52 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.02 0.88 1.00 0.87 1.03 1.00 1.09 1.10 1.00 0.92 1.04 Thalweg Elevation 112.08 112.06 112.01 113.28 113.22 113.40 114.27 114.33 114.34 113.78 113.79 114.73 LTOB2 Elevation 113.81 113.87 113.58 114.2 114.14 114.26 `114.95 115.04 115.18 115.20 115.15 115.59 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.73 1.80 1.57 0.92 0.92 0.86 0.68 0.71 0.83 1.42 1.36 1.78 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)10.8 11.12 8.89 6.0 4.62 6.49 3.5 3.91 4.18 9.19 7.83 10.76 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Table 10B. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Swamp Grape/ DMS:100115) UT 2 UT 2 - Cross Section 11 (Pool)UT 2 - Cross Section 12 (Riffle)UT 2 - Cross Section 13 (Riffle)UT 2 - Cross Section 14 (Pool) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 112.69 112.65 112.75 112.84 112.78 113.35 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 0.97 0.93 1.00 1.01 0.69 Thalweg Elevation 111.54 111.60 111.82 111.30 111.30 111.82 LTOB2 Elevation 112.69 112.62 112.68 112.84 112.80 112.87 ` LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.15 1.02 1.00 1.54 1.49 1.06 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)5.9 5.25 4.63 11.4 11.69 6.44 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Table 10C. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Swamp Grape/ DMS:100115) UT 3 UT 3 - Cross Section 9 (Riffle)UT 3 - Cross Section 10 (Pool) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Appendix D Hydrologic Data Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events Stream Crest Gauge Graphs Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data Groundwater Gauge Graphs Figure D1. 30/70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall Soil Temperature Graph MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events Date of Data Collection Date of Occurrence Method Photo (if available) July 18, 2022 July 10, 2022 Crest gauges documented a bankfull event on UT2 after 4.95” of rain was recorded between July 8-10, 2022 at an onsite rain gauge. UT2 crested at 2.44 ft, and wrack lines were observed along UT1 and UT2. 1 August 19-20, 2022 August 19, 2022 Crest gauges documented a bankfull event on UT1 and UT2 after 2.73” of rain was recorded at an onsite rain gauge. UT1 and UT2 crested at 2.92 ft and 2.63 ft, respectively. -- November 17, 2022 September 30, 2022 Crest gauges documented a bankfull event on UT1 and UT2 after 1.04” of rain was recorded between July 8-10, 2022 at an onsite rain gauge. UT1 and UT2 crested at 2.42 ft and 2.48 ft, respectively. Additionally, wrack lines were observed along UT1 and UT2. 2-3 February 28, 2023 January 25, 2023 Crest gauges documented a bankfull event on UT1 and UT2 after 1.75” of rain was recorded the day before at an onsite rain gauge. UT1 and UT2 crested at 1.60’ and 1.77’, respectively. 4 May 19, 2023 April 9, 2023 Crest gauges and trail cameras documented a bankfull event on UT1 and UT2 after 2.30” of rain was recorded over two days at an onsite rain gauge. UT1 and UT2 crested at 2.00’ and 1.52’, respectively. 5 August 3, 2023 June 21, 2023 Crest gauges documented a bankfull event on UT1 and UT2 after 5.90” of rain was recorded the day before at an onsite rain gauge. UT1 and UT2 crested at 3.99’ and 2.81’, respectively. -- November 20, 2023 August 31, 2023 Crest gauges trail cameras documented a bankfull event on UT1 and UT2 after 3.29” of rain was recorded over two days at an onsite rain gauge. UT1 and UT2 crested at 3.17’ and 1.96’, respectively. Wrack lines were observed along UT1. 6-7 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Photo 1: Wrack line along UT1 resulting from a bankfull event. Photo 2: Wrack lines along UT1 resulting from a bankfull event. MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Photo 3: Wrack line along UT2 resulting from a bankfull event. Photo 4: Overbank event occurring on UT1 (NOTE: Date malfunction on photo footer, but it was confirmed based on the metadata of the file) MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Photo 5: Overbank event occurring on UT2 Photo 6: Overbank event occurring on UT2 (NOTE: Date malfunction on photo footer, but it was confirmed based on the metadata of the file) MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Photo 7: Wrack lines along UT1 resulting from a bankfull event. 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Su r f a c e Wa t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Crest Gauge UT1 Upstream Year 2 (2023 Data) 6/21/23 2.36 ft Gauge malfunctioned with corrupt data between 1/19/23 and 3/29/23. It was replaced on 3/30/23. 4/8/23 2.00 ft 8/31/2023 1.98 ft 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Su r f a c e Wa t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Crest Gauge UT2 Year 2 (2023 Data) 4/8/23 1.52 ft 6/21/2023 2.81 ft 1/25/23 1.77 ft 8/31/2023 1.96 ft 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 46 50 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Su r f a c e Wa t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Crest Gauge UT1 Downstream Year 2 (2023 Data) 6/21/2023 3.99 ft 1/25/2023 1.60 ft Gauge malfunctioned on 2/28/23 resulting in data loss. It was replaced on 5/18/23. 8/31/2023 3.17 ft MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data Gauge Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage) Year 1 (2022) Year 2 (2023) Year 3 (2024) Year 4 (2025) Year 5 (2026) Year 6 (2027) Year 7 (2028) 1 No 8 days (3.2%) No 6 Days (2.4%) 2 No 14 days (5.6%) No 12 Days (4.8%) 3 No 12 days (4.8%) No 11 Days (4.4%) 4 No 17 days (6.8%) Yes 73 Days (30.4%) 5 No 12 days (4.8%) Yes 51 Days (20%) 6 No 3 days (1.2%) No 4 Days (1.6%) 7 Yes 82 days (32.7%) Yes 95 Days (32.7%) 8 Yes 80 days (31.9%) Yes 85 Days (33.9%) 9 Yes 61 days (24.3%) Yes 73 Days (29%) 10 Yes 83 days (33.1%) Yes 86 Days (34.2%) 11 Yes 52 Days (20.7%) Yes 65 Days (25.9%) 12 Yes 70 Days (27.9%) Yes 101 Days (40.2%) 13 Yes 83 Days (33.1%) Yes 108 Days (43.0%) 14 Yes 128 Days (51.0%) Yes 251 Days (100%) 15 Yes 58 Days (23.1%) Yes 74 Days (29.5%) 16 Yes 34 Days (13.5%) Yes 69 Days (27.5%) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 1 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 6 Days 2.4% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 2 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 12 Days 4.8% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 3 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 11 Days 4.4% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 4 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 73 Days 29.1% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 5 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 51 Days 20.3% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 6 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 4 Days 1.6% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 7 Year 2 (2023 Data) Start Growing Season March 1 End Growing Season November 695 Days 37.8% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 8 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 85 Days 33.9% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 9 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 73 Days 29.1% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 10 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6Start Growing Season March 1 86 Days 34.3% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 11 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 65 Days 25.9% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 12 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 101 Days 40.2% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 13 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 108 Days 43.0% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 14 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 251 Days 100% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 15 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 74 Days 29.5% 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t s (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r Le v e l (i n ) Swamp Grape Groundwater Gauge 16 Year 2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November 6 Start Growing Season March 1 69 Days 27.5% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ra i n f a l l Am o u n t in In c h e s Figure D1: Swamp Grape 30‐70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall 30‐70th percentile data from WETS Station: Lumberton, NC 2022 2023 2024 2026 2028 30th Percentile 70th Percentile 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Te m p e r a t u r e (D e g r e e s Fa h r e n h e i t ) Swamp Grape Year 2 (2023) Soil Temperature Data March 1: 58.1oF March 16: 49.44oF MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Appendix E Project Timeline and Contact Info Table 13. Project Timeline Table 14. Project Contacts Table 13. Project Timeline Data Collection Task Completion or Activity or Deliverable Complete Deliverable Submission Project Instituted NA Apr‐19 Mitigation Plan Approved NA Feb‐21 Construction (Grading) Completed NA 23‐Sep‐21 Planting Completed NA 18‐Jan‐22 As‐built Survey Completed NA Sep‐21 MY0 Baseline Report Jan‐22 Feb‐22 MY1 Monitoring Report Nov‐22 Dec‐22 MY2 Monitoring Report Nov‐23 Dec‐23 MY3‐MY7 Monitoring Reports On Schedule On Schedule Table 14. Project Contacts Provider Restoration Systems, LLC 1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 Raleigh, NC 27604 Mitigation Provider POC Worth Creech 919‐755‐9490 Designer Axiom Environmental, Inc. 218 Snow Ave Raleigh, NC 27603 Primary project design POC Grant Lewis 919‐215‐1693 Construction Contractor Land Mechanics Designs, Inc. 126 Circle G Lane Willow Spring, NC 27592 Charles Hill 919‐639‐6132 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site/100115 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100115) Appendices Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Robeson County, North Carolina December 2023 Appendix F Project Notes Aggradation Memo to DMS June 7, 2023 IRT Site Visit Notes July 14, 2023 Restoration Systems, LLC 1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 Raleigh, North Carolina Ph: (919) 755-9490 Fx: (919) 755-9492 1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492 Wednesday, June 7, 2023 Jeremiah Dow Eastern Regional Supervisor, Division of Mitigation Services North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Sent Electronically: jeremiah.dow@ncdenr.gov Subject: Observations of Aggregation During MY2 (2023) / Upper Half of UT2 Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site, DMS Project No. 100115 Lumber River Basin 03040204, Robeson County Full Delivery Contract No. 7869, DMS RFP No. 16-007705 USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00904, DWR Project No. 2019-0675 Dear Mr. Dow, While conducting a quarterly site assessment walkthrough in May of Swamp Grape, Axiom Environmental Inc. (Axiom) noted that the upper reach of UT 2 has received excess sediment deposition. The aggregation begins above the UT2 vented-ford crossing, located outside the Site’s conservation easement, and continues downstream through cross sections 14 (pool) and 13 (riffle). Minimal observance of aggregation was documented in cross- section 12 (riffle), and none was observed in cross-section 11 (pool). Once the deposition was noted, Axiom conducted surveys of cross-sections 11-14 to ascertain the degree of aggradation. Cross sections are plotted in Figure 1, attached with photo documentation. Possible causes of aggradation include: 1.) Excessive upstream erosion/agriculture. The online USGS StreamStats portal delineated the UT 2 drainage area entering at 243 acres. Of the drainage area, 80.2% is in agricultural production, with much of the land drained by non-buffered ditches and streams. 2.) A lack of flushing stormwater discharges. Between September 2022 and December 2022, rainfall data indicates rainfall was at or below the 30th percentile. While enough rain fell to move sediment within UT2’s watershed, the rain events lacked the energy to move sediment through the Site’s restored UT2 reach. Rainfall has normalized in the first quarter of 2023. 3.) As indicated in the MY1 (2022) CCPV and included in Figure 1, herbicide treatment for Cattail within and around the subject UT2 area was conducted. While the Cattail treatment successfully curtailed the problematic areas, some Cattail remains (which will be treated in 2023). It is possible that the root structure of the treated Cattail remains and is providing stability to the sediment within UT2. We believe that a combination of these causes resulted in the observed aggregation, with the lack of flushing flows being the main contributor. No aggregation/excess sediment deposition was observed on UT1 or UT3. Restoration Systems is aware of the aggradation and wanted to ensure DMS and the IRT know about this development prior to the July 12th IRT Site walkthrough. Please feel free to contact me to discuss this at your convenience. Sincerely, Raymond Holz Attachments: - Figure 1, Overview and Cross Sections - Photo Documentation - USGS StreamStats – UT 2 Drainage Area Report - 30-70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall #* ") 17 14 13 12 15 10 16 11 Rain Gauge 4 3 UT-2 NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis FIGURE Drawn by: Date: Scale: Project No.: CML NOV 2022 1:2700 20-003 Title: Project: Prepared for: Robeson County, NC SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION SITE Agradation Areas 1 ³ 0 420210Feet Legend Conservation Easement = 24.7 acres Parcel Boundaries Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement (Level I) Stream Enhancement (Level II) Stream Generating No Credit Wetland Restablishment Wetland Rehabilitation Wetland Enhancement Wetland Creation Vegetation Plots Meeting Stem Density Requirement Vegetation Plots Not Meeting Stem Density Requirement Cross Sections ")Rain Gauge/Soil Probe #*Stream Crest Gauges MY1 Invasive Species Treatment Areas Cattails Chinese Privet Chinese Privet, Chinaberry, Tree-of-Heaven UT-2 U T-1 X S 5 XS 6 X S 1 1 X S 12 XS13 XS14 Note: Basemap is drone imagery from October 2021 on top of 2017 aerial orthoimagery from NC OneMap 114 115 116 117 0 102030 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 13, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 113 114 115 116 118 0102030 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 14, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 111 112 113 114 115 0 102030 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 11, Pool Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 3/28/23 113 114 115 0 102030 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Swamp Grape, UT 2, XS - 12, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 9/29/21 MY-01 7/18/22 MY-02 Swamp Grape Mitigation Site: MY2(2023) Observations of Aggregation, UT2 DMS Contract #: 7869; DMS Project ID: 100115; RFP # 16-007705 UT2 Cross Section 14 (pool) -03/30/2023 UT2 Cross Section 13 (riffle) -03/30/2023 Page 1 Swamp Grape Mitigation Site: MY2(2023) Observations of Aggregation, UT2 DMS Contract #: 7869; DMS Project ID: 100115; RFP # 16-007705 UT2 Cross Section 12 (riffle) -03/30/2023 UT2 Cross Section 11 (pool) -03/30/2023 Page 2 Swamp Grape Mitigation Site: MY2(2023) Observations of Aggregation, UT2 DMS Contract #: 7869; DMS Project ID: 100115; RFP # 16-007705 UT2 Vented Ford Crossing -05/17/2023 UT2 below the Vented Ford Crossing -05/17/2023 Page 3 Swamp Grape Mitigation Site: MY2(2023) Observations of Aggregation, UT2 DMS Contract #: 7869; DMS Project ID: 100115; RFP # 16-007705 UT2 upstream of cross section 14 -05/17/2023 UT2 upstream between cross sections 13 and 12 -05/17/2023 Page 4 6/7/23, 9:50 AM StreamStats https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/1/3 StreamStats Report Collapse All Basin Characteristics Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit BASINPERIM Perimeter of the drainage basin as defined in SIR 2004-5262 3.98 miles BSLDEM30FT Mean basin slope, based on slope percent grid 1.15 percent CSL10_85fm Change in elevation between points 10 and 85 percent of length along main channel to basin divide divided by length between points ft per mi 16.71 feet per mi DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 0.38 square miles ELEV Mean Basin Elevation 147 feet ELEVMAX Maximum basin elevation 152 feet I24H50Y Maximum 24-hour precipitation that occurs on average once in 50 years 7.71 inches LC01BARE Percentage of area barren land, NLCD 2001 category 31 0 percent LC01CRPHAY Percentage of cultivated crops and hay, classes 81 and 82, from NLCD 2001 80.2 percent LC01DEV Percentage of land-use from NLCD 2001 classes 21-24 1.4 percent LC01FOREST Percentage of forest from NLCD 2001 classes 41-43 1.5 percent LC01HERB Percentage of herbaceous upland from NLCD 2001 class 71 0 percent LC01IMP Percent imperviousness of basin area 2001 NLCD 0.09 percent LC01SHRUB Percent of area covered by shrubland using 2001 NLCD 1.8 percent LC01WATER Percentage of open water, class 11, from NLCD 2001 0 percent Region ID:NC Workspace ID:NC20230607134256487000 Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude):34.56208, -79.34942 Time:2023-06-07 09:43:11 -0400   6/7/23, 9:50 AM StreamStats https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/2/3 Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit LC01WETLND Percentage of wetlands, classes 90 and 95, from NLCD 2001 15 percent LC06BARE Percent of area covered by barren rock using 2006 NLCD 0 percent LC06DEV Percentage of land-use from NLCD 2006 classes 21-24 1.4 percent LC06FOREST Percentage of forest from NLCD 2006 classes 41-43 1.5 percent LC06GRASS Percent of area covered by grassland/herbaceous using 2006 NLCD 0 percent LC06IMP Percentage of impervious area determined from NLCD 2006 impervious dataset 0.09 percent LC06PLANT Percent of area in cultivation using 2006 NLCD 80.2 percent LC06SHRUB Percent of area covered by shrubland using 2006 NLCD 1.8 percent LC06WATER Percent of open water, class 11, from NLCD 2006 0 percent LC06WETLND Percent of area covered by wetland using 2006 NLCD 15 percent LC11BARE Percentage of barren from NLCD 2011 class 31 0 percent LC11CRPHAY Percentage of cultivated crops and hay, classes 81 and 82, from NLCD 2011 80.2 percent LC11DEV Percentage of developed (urban) land from NLCD 2011 classes 21-24 1.4 percent LC11FOREST Percentage of forest from NLCD 2011 classes 41-43 1.5 percent LC11GRASS Percent of area covered by grassland/herbaceous using 2011 NLCD 0 percent LC11IMP Average percentage of impervious area determined from NLCD 2011 impervious dataset 0.1 percent LC11SHRUB Percent of area covered by shrubland using 2011 NLCD 1.8 percent LC11WATER Percent of open water, class 11, from NLCD 2011 0 percent LC11WETLND Percentage of wetlands, classes 90 and 95, from NLCD 2011 15.1 percent LC92FOREST Percentage of forest from NLCD 1992 classes 41-43 27.3 percent LFPLENGTH Length of longest flow path 1.209 miles LU92BARE Percent of area covered by barren rock using 1992 NLCD 0 percent LU92DEV Percent of area covered by all densities of developed land using 1992 NLCD 0 percent LU92PLANT Percent of area in cultivation using 1992 NLCD 67.3 percent LU92WATER Percent of area covered by water using 1992 NLCD 0 percent LU92WETLN Percent of area covered by wetland using 1992 NLCD 5.3 percent MINBELEV Minimum basin elevation 130 feet OUTLETELEV Elevation of the stream outlet in feet above NAVD88 134 feet PCTREG1 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 1 - Piedmont / Ridge and Valley 0 percent PCTREG2 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 2 - Blue Ridge 0 percent PCTREG3 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 3 - Sandhills 0 percent PCTREG4 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 4 - Coastal Plains 100 percent PCTREG5 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 5 - Lower Tifton Uplands 0 percent PRECIP Mean Annual Precipitation 48.1 inches PROTECTED Percent of area of protected Federal and State owned land 0 percent SSURGOA Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type A from SSURGO 3 percent SSURGOB Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type B from SSURGO 47.1 percent SSURGOC Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type C from SSURGO 25.4 percent SSURGOD Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type D from SSURGO 24.4 percent 6/7/23, 9:50 AM StreamStats https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/3/3 General Disclaimers This watershed has been edited, computed flows and basin characteristics may not apply. For more information, submit a support request from the 'Help' button in the upper-right of the screen, attach a pdf of this report and request assistance from your local StreamStats regional representative. USGS Data Disclaimer: Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. USGS Software Disclaimer: This software has been approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although the software has been subjected to rigorous review, the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to further analysis and review. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore, the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use. USGS Product Names Disclaimer: Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Application Version: 4.15.0 StreamStats Services Version: 1.2.22 NSS Services Version: 2.2.1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ra i n f a l l A m o u n t i n I n c h e s Figure D1: Swamp Grape 30-70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall 30-70th percentile data from WETS Station: Lumberton, NC 2022 2023 2024 2026 2028 30th Percentile 70th Percentile Restoration Systems, LLC 1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 Raleigh, North Carolina Ph: (919) 755-9490 July 14, 2023 Fx: (919) 755-9492 1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492 Emily Dunnigan Project Manager – Eastern Region Division of Mitigation Services Sent via email to: Emily.Dunnigan@deq.nc.gov Copied, Jeremiah Dow, Eastern Regional Supervisor, Division of Mitigation Services: jeremiah.dow@ncdenr.gov Subject: Swamp Grape, MY2 (2023) IRT Site Visit Notes DMS Project No. 100115 USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00904 & DWR Project No. 2019-0675 On July 12, 2023, Restoration Systems (RS) held an on-site meeting with regulatory agencies to review and discuss the Swamp Grape Mitigation Site (Site). Below is a list of attendees and site visit notes, accompanied by a proposed planting effort. Attendees: USACE: - Todd Tugwell - Erin Davis NC DWR: - Maria Polizzi - Mac Haupt NC DMS: - Emily Dunnigan Restoration Systems: - Raymond Holz Axiom Environmental: - Grant Lewis Site Visit Notes: General • The perennial nature of the Site’s streams has prevented the channels from becoming choked out by herbaceous vegetation. RS has not completed and does not anticipate having to perform any stream maintenance work regarding in-channel herbaceous vegetation. RS will continue to monitor the channels for excessive herbaceous vegetation and report to the IRT if the condition changes. • The sedimentation of UT2’s upper reach, as reported in RS’s June 7th letter, appeared to have mostly worked its way through the Site. RS will continue to monitor this reach for sedimentation issues. • The UT1 and UT2 crossings are performing as expected. - The IRT noted that the height of the vented ford crossing on UT2 may be a contributing factor to sediment deposition above and below the crossing. • Treatment of cattails has significantly reduced the on-site monoculture clusters. Treatment will continue, and RS will continue to plot cattail clusters on the yearly CCPV. • Herbaceous monitoring will continue, and RS/Axiom will move the plots yearly, focusing on observed emergent wetland areas. • Beginning in the Year 3 (2024) monitoring report, RS will plot observed emergent wetland areas throughout the Site. UT1-Upper Reach, Right-bank Wetland Seeps • Based on Year 1 (2022) permanent vegetation monitoring plots, and on-site observations, RS will conduct three (3) random vegetation transects between permanent vegetation monitoring plots 19-23, as shown on the attached meeting notes, CCPV. Swamp Grape, MY2 (2023) IRT Site Visit Notes Page 2 DMS Project No. 100115 USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-00904 & DWR Project No. 2019-0675 Easement Encroachment – Residential lot between UT1 and UT2 • RS and the IRT reviewed the observed area of encroachment along UT2’s right easement boundary (shown in the attached figure). RS will replant this area with 3-gallon upland containerized species from the approved Site Mitigation Plan during the dormant season of 2023/2024. The approved mitigation plan planting list is provided below for reference. • RS will install additional treated fence post corners along this boundary line and add additional signage. Table 1. Planting Plan (Swamp Grape Final/Approved Mitigation Plan Vegetation Association Cypress Gum Swamp* Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp* Stream-side Assemblage** TOTAL Area (acres) 2.3 17.4 2.8 22.5 Species # planted* % of total # planted* % of total # planted** % of total # planted Swamp black gum (Nyssa biflora) 391 25 2366 20 776 10 3533 Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) 391 25 2366 20 776 10 3533 Tupelo gum (Nyssa aquatica) 391 25 -- -- -- -- 391 Pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens) 391 25 -- -- -- -- 391 Water oak (Quercus nigra) -- -- 1775 15 776 10 2550 Willow oak (Quercus phellos) -- -- 1775 15 776 10 2550 Schumard oak (Quercus schumardii) -- -- 1183 10 776 10 1959 American elm (Ulmus americana) -- -- 1183 10 776 10 1959 Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata) -- -- 1183 10 776 10 1959 Black willow (Salix nigra) -- -- -- -- 776 10 776 Tag alder (Alnus serrulata) -- -- -- -- 776 10 776 Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) -- -- -- -- 776 10 776 TOTAL 1564 100 11832 100 7756 100 21,152 Highlighted Species are those RS will use for 3-gallon replanting in the observed MY2 (2023) encroachment areas. Attachment: - MY 1 (2022) CCPV with Site Visit Notes ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ #* #* #* ") 3 1 2 3 2 9 6 8 4 7 5 1 11 17 14 13 12 15 21 20 19 10 22 16 18 23 Rain Gauge 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 UT-2 UT-1 Up UT-1 Down NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis FIGURE Drawn by: Date: Scale: Project No.: CML NOV 2022 1:2700 20-003 Title: Project: Prepared for: Robeson County, NC SWAMP GRAPEMITIGATION SITE CCPV 1 ³ 0 500 1,000250Feet Legend Conservation Easement = 24.7 acres Parcel Boundaries Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement (Level I) Stream Enhancement (Level II) Stream Generating No Credit Wetland Restablishment Wetland Rehabilitation Wetland Enhancement Wetland Creation Vegetation Plots Meeting Stem Density Requirement Vegetation Plots Not Meeting Stem Density Requirement ^_Vegetation Plot Origins MY1 Herbaceous Plot Locations (5m x 2m) Cross Sections Groundwater Gauges Meeting Success Criteria Groundwater Gauges Not Meeting Success Criteria ")Rain Gauge/Soil Probe #*Stream Crest Gauges MY1 Invasive Species Treatment Areas Cattails Chinese Privet Chinese Privet, Chinaberry, Tree-of-Heaven UT-2 UT-3 UT-1 UT-1 XS 1 XS 2 XS4XS3 X S 5 X S 6 X S 7 X S 8 X S 9 XS10 X S 1 1 XS12 XS13 XS14 KitchenSt Note: Basemap is drone imagery from October 2021 on top of 2017 aerial orthoimagery from NC OneMap X S 1 5 X S 1 6