HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200021 Ver 1_BullChute_100137_MY2_2023_20240201MY2 (2023) FINAL MONITORING REPORT
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland
Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
Yadkin River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040103
DMS Project ID No. 100137
Full Delivery Contract No. 7878‐01
RFP #16‐007878 (Issued: 5/6/2019)
USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2020‐00049
DWR Project No. 20200021
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
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
clearwatermitigation@gmail.com
January 17, 2024
Mr. Matthew Reid
NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services
Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. 70 Highway
Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211
Re: Bull Chute – MY-2 Report (DMS Project No. 100137)
Response to Comments
Dear Mr. Reid,
Please find below the response to comments on the Bull Chute MY-2 Report provided by
DMS, dated January 4, 2024:
1) General: The MY2 monitoring summary included behind the cover page is a nice
addition to the report. Thank you for providing this brief summary of the 2023
monitoring activities.
Re: Noted, thank you.
2) 3.1 Stream Assessment: Please include additional information regarding bankfull
events. Please list which monitored reaches recorded bankfull events and which
ones did not. Please briefly discuss the malfunction/replacement of the UT4 gauge.
Re: A summary of reaches that recorded bankfull events as well as a gauge
malfunction summary were added to Section 3.1.
3) 3.1 Stream Assessment: Please include additional information regarding bankfull
events. Please list which monitored reaches recorded bankfull events and which
ones did not. Please briefly discuss the malfunction/replacement of the UT4 gauge.
Re: A summary of reaches that recorded bankfull events as well as a gauge
malfunction summary were added to Section 3.1.
4) 3.1 Stream Assessment: Please include additional information regarding the
malfunction/ replacement of the UT3 and UT4a flow gauges.
Re: A gauge malfunction summary was added to Section 3.1.
5) 3.2 Hydrology Assessment: Recommend revising discussion regarding Gauge 3 in this
section. The hydrology data submitted with the draft report shows that Gauge 3
dropped below 12” for 14 days in April. The report indicates there were only 4 days
below in April. I recognize that there was a 4 day period in April (4/3-4/6) below 12”
CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS Bull Chute MY-2 Report
Response to Comments
P a g e | 2
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
clearwatermitigation@gmail.com
that prevented the success criteria from being met. Revising the discussion for clarity
would be helpful.
Re: The discussion of Gauge 3 has been revised to reflect the correct water levels in
April.
6) 3.3 Vegetative Assessment: Section states that no vegetation areas of concern were
identified in MY2. However, there is a low stem density area near VP19 that will
receive supplemental planting and soil amendments this winter. Please revise this
section and include a short discussion of this area and planned remediation work.
Re: A brief discussion regarding the area of low stem density near VP19 has been
added to Section 3.3.
7) 3.3 Vegetative Assessment: Include short discussion about invasive species
treatment that occurred in October 2023. Please add Invasive Treatment to Table 14.
Re: Invasive species treatment that took place in October 2023 included Chinese
privet and multiflora rose along UT1, UT2, UT3, and UT4. This information has been
added to Table 14.
8) During the 2022 Credit Release Meeting, the IRT requested that vegetation diversity
be considered during species selection if supplemental planting occurs. Please
consider this when the low stem density area is planted.
Re: Vegetation diversity will be considered during species selection when
supplemental planting occurs. A statement indicating this was added to the
supplemental planting discussion in Section 3.3.
9) Please include an update in the MY3 report regarding the supplemental planting.
Please include species, quantities, type (bare root, container, etc), and planting area
size. Also, please make sure that species selected are from the approved Mitigation
Plan.
Re: Information regarding the proposed 2024 supplemental planting will be included
in the MY3 monitoring report. Species will be selected from the approved Mitigation
Plan with vegetation diversity taken into consideration.
10) Please include an update in the MY3 report regarding the action items identified
during the boundary inspection that was conducted in November 2023. If the action
items have been completed prior to submitting the MY2 final report, please update
this report.
Re: A summary of the November 2023 boundary inspection is located in Section 3.4
Monitoring Year 2 Summary. The action items are also listed and have not yet been
completed. Completion information will be included in the MY3 report.
CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS Bull Chute MY-2 Report
Response to Comments
P a g e | 3
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
clearwatermitigation@gmail.com
11) CCPV – Recommend including the low stem density area near VP19 on the CCPV and
updated Table 5 to reflect this area.
Re: The CCPV has been updated to show the low stem density area near VP19 and
Table 5 has been updated to reflect this area.
12) Crest Gauge graphs were not included in the hard copy draft. Please make sure final
hard copies include all pages when submitted.
Re: Crest gauge graphs are included in this submission. Apologies for the oversight.
13) Table 11: Recommend adding a column for “Monitoring Year” to Table 11 to make it
easier to see when events occurred.
Re: A column for “Monitoring Year” has been added to Table 11.
14) Bankfull Events: Recommend either only including bankfull photos from the current
year or updating the photo label to show MY1, MY2, MY3, etc.
Re: The bankfull event photo labels have been updated to show MY1 and MY2.
15) Bankfull Events: Photo 5 indicates a bankfull event on UT4, but the description of the
event in Table 11 does not mention UT4. UT4 gauge data experienced a malfunction
on the date of the photo (Feb. 12, 2023), but the photo can be used to document the
event. Recommend revising table to clearly show which tributaries met the bankfull
standard for each event.
Re: A sentence has been added to the Feb. 12, 2023 bankfull event description in
Table 11 that indicates bankfull events were documented via trail cameras on both
UT3 and UT4 on this date. This information was also included in the bankfull
summary in section 3.1.
16) Table 14: Please add two lines below MY1 and MY2 Monitoring Reports for
Vegetation Survey and Stream Survey and include dates that data collection occurred
for each entry. Table 14 in the MY1 Final Report included this, but the MY2 does not.
Re: Lines have been added to Table 14 that show dates of data collection for
Vegetation and Stream Surveys.
CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS Bull Chute MY-2 Report
Response to Comments
P a g e | 4
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
clearwatermitigation@gmail.com
Digital Deliverable Review:
17) No comments. Please submit updated files based on comments above.
Re: Noted. The digital files have been updated based on above comment responses.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions at 919-624-6901.
Sincerely,
Kevin Yates
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Executive Summary
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Bull Chute MY2, 2023 Monitoring Summary
General Notes
No encroachment was identified in Year 2 (2023).
No evidence of nuisance animal activity (i.e., heavy deer browsing, beaver activated, etc.) was
observed.
Streams
All streams within the Site are stable and functioning as designed. No stream areas of concern
were identified during MY2 (2023). Refer to Appendix A for the Visual Stream Morphology Stability
Assessment Table (Table 4A‐I) and Stream Photographs and Appendix C for Stream
Geomorphology Data.
Three bankfull events were documented during MY2 (2023) for a total of 6 bankfull events during
the 2 monitoring years (Table 11, Appendix D).
All Site tributaries showed evidence of channel formation during MY2 (2023), with each stream
flow gauge documenting greater than 30 consecutive days of flow (Tables 13A‐F and Flow Gauge
Graphs, Appendix D).
Wetlands
Seven of the 10 groundwater monitoring gauges met success criteria during MY2 (2023) (Appendix
D).
MY2 (2023) Groundwater Hydrology Data
Gauge
12% Hydroperiod 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
1 day (0.4%)
No
2 days (0.8%)
2 Yes
62 days (25.4%)
Yes
48 days (20.5%)
3 No
19 days (7.8%)
No
11 days (4.7%)
4 No
7 days (2.9%)
No
5 days (2.1%)
5 Yes
124 days (50.8%)
Yes
136 days (58.1%)
6 Yes
63 days (25.8%)
Yes
131 days (56.0%)
7 Yes
64 days (26.2%)
Yes
49 days (20.9%)
8 Yes
63 days (25.8%)
Yes
54 days (23.1%)
9 Yes
45 days (18.4%)
Yes
221 days (94.4%)
10 Yes
33 days (13.5%)
Yes
221 days (94.4%)
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Executive Summary
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Vegetation
Vegetation monitoring resulted in a sitewide stem density average of 609 planted stems per acre,
above the interim requirement of 320 stems per acre required at MY3. All 21 fixed vegetation plots
and 10 temporary plots met the interim success criteria (Appendix B).
There is an area of stunted vegetation within Plot 19 and directly adjacent to Plot 19 (~ 0.10‐acre),
likely due to previous construction activities at this location. Clearwater is planning to add soil
amendments and supplemental planting in this area in January/February 2024.
Site Monitoring Activity and Reporting History
Project Millstones
Stream
Monitoring
Complete
Vegetation
Monitoring
Complete
Wetland
Monitoring
Data Analysis
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Construction Earthwork ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ March 8, 2022
Planting ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ March 18, 2022
As‐Built Documentation May 11, 2022 April 4, 2022 ‐‐ May 2022 June 2022
Year 1 Monitoring November 9, 2022 August 30, 2022 Jan. – Nov. 2022 November 2022 January 2023
Year 2 Monitoring June 16, 2023 August 24, 2023 Jan. – Nov. 2023 November 2023 January 2024
Site Maintenance Report (2023)
Invasive Species Work Maintenance work
Chinese privet and multiflora rose along UT1, UT2,
UT3, and UT4 were sprayed with herbicide using
backpack sprayers in October 2023.
Clearwater will be adding soil amendments and
supplemental planting in and around Plot 19
(~0.10‐acre) in Jan./Feb. 2024.
MY2 (2023) FINAL MONITORING REPORT
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland
Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
Yadkin River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040103
DMS Project ID No. 100137
Full Delivery Contract No. 7878‐01
RFP #16‐007878 (Issued: 5/6/2019)
USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2020‐00049
DWR Project No. 20200021
Data Collection: January ‐ November 2023
Submission: January 2024
Prepared For:
And
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Axiom Environmental, Inc.
604 Macon Place 218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Contact: Kevin Yates Contact: Grant Lewis
Phone: 919‐624‐6901 Phone: 919‐215‐1693
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Table of Contents page i
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND, COMPONENTS, AND STRUCTURE.................................................................. 1
TABLE 1. PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES AND CREDITS ....................................................................... 2
TABLE 2. SUMMARY: GOALS, PERFORMANCE, AND RESULTS .................................................................... 3
1.2 SUCCESS CRITERIA...................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 PROJECT MONITORING – METHODS ...................................................................................... 4
2.1 MONITORING ........................................................................................................................... 4
3.0 MONITORING YEAR 2 – DATA ASSESSMENT .......................................................................... 6
3.1 STREAM ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................. 6
3.2 HYDROLOGY ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................... 7
3.3 VEGETATIVE ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................... 7
3.4 MONITORING YEAR 2 SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 7
TABLE 3. PROJECT ATTRIBUTE TABLE ................................................................................................... 9
4.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 10
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Table of Contents page ii
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View
Table 4A‐I. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Site Photo Log
Appendix B. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6A. Planted Bare‐Root Woody Vegetation
Table 6B. Permanent Seed Mix
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool
Appendix C. Stream Geomorphology Data
Cross‐Sections with Annual Overlays
Table 9A‐F. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables
Table 10A‐E. Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
Appendix D. Hydrologic Data
Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Tables 13A‐F. Channel Evidence
Surface Water Gauge Graphs
Figure D1. 30/70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall
Appendix E. Project Timeline and Contact Info
Table 14. Project Timeline
Table 15. Project Contacts
Appendix F. Boundary Inspection Report – MY2
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 1
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions has established the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) Bull Chute Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the “Site”). The
Site includes Unnamed Tributaries (UTs) to Caraway Creek in the Southern Outer Piedmont
ecoregion of North Carolina. The Site is located in the Yadkin River Basin, cataloguing unit
03040103 and Targeted Local Watershed and Local Watershed Plan Area (Caraway Creek)
03040103050040 and North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) subbasin number 03‐
08‐38. Site watersheds range from approximately 0.008 of a square mile (5.4 acres) on UT2 to
0.19 of a square mile (120.9 acres) at the Site’s outfall.
1.1 Project Background, Components, and Structure
Located in Randolph County, less than one‐mile northwest of New Market and 4.5 miles
northwest of Randleman, the Site encompasses 31.7 acres. Restoration activities within the Site
included the construction of meandering, E/C‐type stream channel resulting in 6974 linear feet
of Priority I stream restoration, 617 linear feet of stream enhancement (Level I), 833 linear feet
of stream enhancement (Level II), 450 linear feet of stream enhancement (Level II with an
adjusted ratio), 3.13 acres of riparian wetland re‐establishment, 0.114 acres of riparian wetland
rehabilitation, and 1.462 acre of riparian wetland enhancement. The site is expected to provide
7742.933 warm water stream credits and 3.937 riparian wetland credits by closeout (Table 1,
page 2). A conservation easement was granted to the State of North Carolina and recorded at
the Randolph County Register of Deeds on April 9, 2021.
Prior to construction, the Site was characterized by disturbed forest and livestock pasture. Site
design was completed in May 2021. Construction started on September 6, 2021 and ended within
a final walkthrough on March 8, 2022. The Site was planted on March 18, 2022. Completed
project activities, reporting history, completion dates, and project contacts are summarized in
Tables 14‐15 (Appendix E).
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 A 173 187 Warm EII 2.50000 69.200
UT 1 Reach B 468 456 Warm EI 1.50000 312.000
UT 1 Reach C 68 68 Warm EII 2.50000 27.200
UT 1 Reach D 149 149 Warm EI 1.50000 99.333
UT 1 Reach E 2164 2168 Warm R 1.00000 2,164.000
UT 2 592 592 Warm EII 2.50000 236.800
UT 3 Reach A 418 423 Warm R 1.00000 418.000
UT 3 Reach B 306 303 Warm EII* 7.50000 40.800
UT 3 Reach C 1137 1119 Warm R 1.00000 1,137.000
UT 4A 410 402 Warm R 1.00000 410.000
UT 4B 295 290 Warm R 1.00000 295.000
UT 4C 180 175 Warm No Credit 0.00000 0.000
UT 4 2482 2492 Warm R 1.00000 2,482.000
Approx. 30 lf (approx. sta. 10+11 to 10+41) was realigned during
construction to avoid damaging mature trees. This resulted in an increase
of stream restoration footage along this reach at MY0. However, no
change to crediting is proposed for MY0.
UT 5A 37 36 Warm No Credit 0.00000 0.000
UT 5B 38 38 Warm R 1.00000 38.000
UT 6 121 130 Warm No Credit 0.00000 0.000
UT 7 68 77 Warm EII* 5.00000 13.600
Total: 7,742.933
Wetland
Wetland Reestablish ‐‐3.13 R REE 1.00000 3.130
Wetland Rehabilitation 0.114 0.114 R RH 1.50000 0.076
Wetland Enhancement 1.462 1.462 R E 2.00000 0.731
Total: 3.937
Project Credits
Riparian Non‐Rip Coastal
Warm Cool Cold Wetland Wetland Marsh
Restoration 6,944.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Re‐establishment 3.130 0.000 0.000
Rehabilitation 0.076 0.000 0.000
Enhancement 0.731 0.000 0.000
Enhancement I 411.333 0.000 0.000
Enhancement II 333.200 0.000 0.000
Enhancement II* 54.400 0.000 0.000 *Enhancement Level II with an adjusted ratio (based on IRT comment and review).
Creation 0.000 0.000 0.000
Preservation 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Totals 7,742.933 3.937
Total Stream Credit 7,742.933
Total Wetland Credit 3.937
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. Bull Chute Mitigation Site (ID‐100137) Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits
Restoration Level
Stream
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 3
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph 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.
Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore
overbank flows
Plant woody riparian buffer
Deep rip floodplain soils to reduce compaction and increase soil
surface roughness
Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and
longitudinal profile
BHR not to exceed 1.2
Document four overbank events in separate monitoring years
Continuous intermittent surface flow for at least 30 days
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 proper pattern, dimension, and
longitudinal profile
Remove livestock from the property
Construct stable channels with appropriate substrate
Upgrade existing piped channel crossings and install piped
crossings at existing forded crossings
Stabilize stream banks
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 agricultural livestock and reduce agricultural land/inputs
Install marsh treatment areas
Plant woody riparian buffer
Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
Provide surface roughness and reduce compaction through deep
ripping/plowing
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 appropriate substrate
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 indicate 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. 100137) page 4
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph 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 on‐site NC SAM and NC WAM data collection. From a mitigation perspective, several
of the 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 annual success criteria.
Success Criteria
Streams
All streams must maintain an Ordinary High‐Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05‐05.
Continuous surface flow in intermittent streams must be documented each year for a minimum of 30
consecutive days.
Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured cross‐section.
BHR at any measure riffle cross‐section should not change by more than 10% from baseline condition during
any given monitoring period.
The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met through four
separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1‐7.
Wetland Hydrology
Saturation or inundation, measured annually, 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 in height 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.
Any volunteer species on the approved planting list must be established for at least 2 years to count towards
success and will be subject to the average height standard.
*In accordance with IRT request after submittal of the MY0 report, the growing season for this site will be based on the latest 30‐
year WETS data (Station Asheboro 2 W, NC) and is defined as March 18 to November 16.
2.0 PROJECT MONITORING – METHODS
Monitoring will be conducted in accordance with 2016 NCIRT Guidelines. Monitoring will be
conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc based on the schedule below. A summary of monitoring is
outlined in Section 3.1. Annual monitoring reports will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration
Systems no later than December 1 of each monitoring year data is collected.
Monitoring Schedule
Resource Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
Streams
Wetlands
Vegetation
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
2.1 Monitoring
The monitoring parameters are summarized in the following table.
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 5
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph 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 26 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 Continuous monitoring surface water
gauges and/or trail camera
Continuous recording through
monitoring period
6 surface water gauges on UT 1, UT
2, UT 3, UT 4A, UT 4B, and UT 7
Surface water data for each monitoring
period
Bankfull Events
Continuous monitoring surface water
gauges and/or trail camera
Continuous recording through
monitoring period
3 crest gauges on UT 1, UT 3, and
UT 4
Surface water data for each monitoring
period
Visual/Physical Evidence Continuous through
monitoring period
Periodic Site visits throughout the
year.
Visual evidence, photo documentation,
and/or rain data.
Wetland Parameters
Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported
Wetland
Restoration Groundwater gauges
Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
throughout the year with the
growing season defined as
March 18‐November 16*
10 gauges spread throughout
restored wetlands
Groundwater and rain data for each
monitoring period
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 21 plots spread across the Site Species, height, planted vs. volunteer,
stems/acre
Annual random vegetation plots,
0.0247 acre (100 square meters) in size As‐built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 10 plots randomly selected each
year Species and height
*In accordance with IRT request after submittal of the MY0 report, the growing season for this site will be based on the latest 30‐year WETS data (Station Asheboro 2 W, NC, 1992‐
2022) and is defined as March 18 to November 16 (244 days). Soil temperature and bud burst documentation will not be required to verify growing season start dates.
Note: Photo points will be taken at all cross sections and at vegetation plot origin points. In addition, photo points will be located at
all culverts and crossings.
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 6
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
3.0 MONITORING YEAR 2 – DATA ASSESSMENT
Annual monitoring and site visits were conducted between January and November 2023 to assess
the condition of the project. Stream, wetland, and vegetation criteria for the Site follow the
approved success criteria presented in the Mitigation Plan and summarized in Section 1.2;
monitoring methods are detailed in Section 2.0.
3.1 Stream Assessment
Morphological surveys for MY2 were conducted on June 16, 2023. All streams within the Site are
stable and functioning as designed. Refer to Appendix A for the Visual Stream Morphology
Stability Assessment Table (Table 4A‐I) and Stream Photographs. Refer to Appendix C for Stream
Geomorphology Data. No stream areas of concern were identified during MY2 (2023).
Three bankfull events were documented during MY2 (2023) for a total of 6 bankfull events during
the 2 monitoring years (Table 11, Appendix D).
Bankfull Events by Tributary – MY2 (2023)
UT1 – 3 total bankfull events were recorded; February 12, April 8, and July 8, 2023 (all via
crest gauge).
UT3 – 2 total bankfull events were recorded; February 12 (via time‐lapse trail camera) and
July 8, 2023 (via crest gauge).
UT4 – 1 bankfull event was recorded; February 12, 2023 (via time‐lapse trail camera). See
below for description of the UT4 crest gauge malfunction.
Additionally, all Site tributaries showed evidence of channel formation during MY2 (2023), with
each stream flow gauge documenting greater than 30 consecutive days of flow (Tables 13A‐F and
Flow Gauge Graphs, Appendix D).
Gauge Malfunction Summary – MY2 (2023)
UT4 crest gauge data was initially collected for MY2 on April 17, 2023, however a shuttle failure
occurred, resulting in the loss of data up to this date. The gauge remained in working order
thereafter, but over the course of year 2 (2023) monitoring, the crest gauge showed a continued
upward trend in water level. This looks significantly different than the overall trend of other crest
gauges and seems indicative of a pressure sensor malfunction. The gauge will be replaced early
in the MY3 monitoring year to ensure accurate documentation of MY3 bankfull events on this
reach.
The flow gauge on UT3 malfunctioned starting on April 18, 2023, resulting in a loss of data. The
gauge was replaced when this was discovered on May 26, 2023, and the gauge continued working
the rest of the year. The flow gauge on UT4A also malfunctioned starting on January 27, 2023, in
which water levels were reading sporadically and incorrectly. The gauge was relaunched when
the issue was discovered on April 17, 2023, and read properly the rest of the year.
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 7
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
3.2 Hydrology Assessment
Seven of the 10 groundwater monitoring gauges met success criteria during MY2 (2023). The area
surrounding gauge 1 is characterized by hydrophytic vegetation and surface hydrology, but gauge
data are not indicative of this. Clearwater proposes to reinstall a new gauge prior to MY3 (2024)
monitoring.
Gauge 3 read above 12” for 9 days, followed by 4 days below 12” in April, then another 11 days
above 12”. This gauge would have met success criteria had it not been for the 4 days below 12”
in April. With normal to high rainfall, this gauge is expected to exceed the 10% hydroperiod.
Gauge 4 was installed in a non‐credit‐generating area to monitor the possible formation of
wetlands after the removal of drain tile upstream of the UT‐1 origin. It has not yet met success
criteria but will continue to be monitored during subsequent years. See groundwater gauge data
in Appendix D.
3.3 Vegetative Assessment
The MY2 (2023) vegetative survey was completed on August 24, 2023. Vegetation monitoring
resulted in a sitewide stem density average of 609 planted stems per acre, above the interim
requirement of 320 stems per acre required at MY3. All 21 fixed vegetation plots and 10
temporary plots met the interim success criteria. Please refer to Appendix A for Vegetation Plot
Photographs and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table, and Appendix B for MY2
Vegetation Plot Data.
There is an area of stunted vegetation within and directly adjacent to Plot 19 (~ 0.20‐acre), likely
due to poor soil from previous construction activities at this location. Clearwater is planning to
add soil amendments and perform a supplemental planting in this area in January/February 2024.
Vegetation diversity will be considered at the request of the IRT, and species will be chosen from
the list on the approved mitigation plan. The area of low stem density is depicted on Figure 1
(Appendix A). A summary of the replanting effort, including species, quantities, type (bare root,
containerized, etc.), and planting area size will be included in the MY3 (2024) monitoring report.
Additionally, Chinese privet and multiflora rose along UT1, UT2, UT3, and UT4 were sprayed with
herbicide using backpack sprayers in October 2023. These areas will continue to be monitored
during subsequent monitoring years and may be retreated if necessary.
3.4 Monitoring Year 2 Summary
Overall, the Site looks good, is performing as intended, and is on track to meet success criteria.
All vegetation plots are on track to exceed the MY3 interim requirement of 320 planted stems
per acre, wetlands are trending toward success, and all streams within the Site are stable and are
meeting project goals.
A boundary inspection of the Site was conducted by NCDMS Property Specialist, Mr. Kelly Phillips
on November 16, 2023. The NCDMS boundary inspection report is in Appendix F. During the site
inspection there were no easement encroachments identified nor observed during MY2. The
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 8
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
cattle exclusion fencing is still intact along the entire perimeter of the conservation easement
boundary. There is a portion of a fallen tree across the fence on UT3, that will be removed. All
easement corners are marked with appropriately stamped aluminum caps atop #5 rebar. The
corners were generally well marked with appropriate conservation easement signs. Several
corners were missing a sign, and there were some areas of more than 200‐ft without a sign, as
identified in a .kmz provided by Mr. Phillips. Action items to properly identify the boundary and
bring it back into compliance will be conducted in January/February 2024, and are as follows:
Install witness signs/posts at each unmarked corner.
Install in‐line marking at a frequency of 200’ spacing or less. Shorter segments should have
the signs installed equidistant from the corners, but signs must be installed at a spacing
no greater than 200’.
Remove fallen tree from the exclusion fencing in the north central section of the site
(UT3).
UT 1UT 2UT 3UT 4UT 4A/B UT 4C UT 5UT 6UT 7
3022 592 1861 2482 705 180 75 121 68
3149 592 1907 2558 693 175 75 130 77
A, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, C
97.6 48.1 48.1 120.9 10.2/8.9 8.3 12.5 5.4 16
Int/Per Int Int/Per Per Int Int Int Int Int
G5 ‐‐‐G5 Fg/G5 Eg/Cf5 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐---‐‐‐
Ce 3/4 ‐‐‐Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 ‐‐‐Ce 3/4
IV IV IV IV IV III III III III
3040103050040
03‐07‐09
218.5
<2%
Managed Herbaceous Cover & Hardwood Swamps
3.206 restored & 0.731 enhanced
Riparian riverine
Mecklenburg, Wynott‐Enon Complex, and field identified Wehadkee Variant
Non‐hydric, Non‐hydric, and Hydric
Reach Summary Information
C
Wetland Summary Information
Wetlands
Dominant Stream Classification (proposed)
Dominant Evolutionary class (Simon) if applicable
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined,
Drainage area (acres)
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
Table 3. Project Attribute Table
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site
Randolph County, North Carolina
31.7
35.8325, ‐79.8879
Project Name
County
Project Area (acres)
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude decimal degrees)
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA) No N/A
Water of the United States ‐ Section 404 Yes Yes
Water of the United States ‐ Section 401 Yes Yes
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes
N/A
Mapped Soil Series
Post‐project (acres)
Wetland Type (non‐riparian, riparian)
Parameters
Section 404 Permit
Section 401
CE Document
CE Document
N/A
Parameters Applicable? Resolved?
Soil Hydric Status
Regulatory Considerations
Supporting Docs?
Project Watershed Summary Information
Southern Outer Piedmont
Yadkin
Pre‐project (acres)
Dominant Stream Classification (existing)
River Basin
DWR Sub‐basin
Post‐project (feet)
Pre‐project length (feet)
Physiographic Province
Parameters
Project Drainage Area (acres)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
Land Use Classification
3.130 acre drained & 1.576 acre degraded
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8‐digit
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 10
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
4.0 REFERENCES
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS‐EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Monitoring Guidelines. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
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.
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
APPENDIX A
Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 4A‐I. Stream Visual Stability Assessment
Table 5. Visual Vegetation Assessment
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Site Photo Log
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
#*
")
#*
!(
!(
#*
#*!(
#*
!(
#*
#*#*
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(#*
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_^_
5
8
2
4
1
7
6
9
3
10
1A1B
2B 2A
3A
3B
4B
4A
9
8
2
6
5
7
10
1
3
4
1
5
9
3
8
6
2
4
7
11
12
19
17
14
10
18
20
16
21
15
13
NC Ce nt er f or G eo gr aphic I nf orm a tion & An aylsis
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
KRJ
JA N 2024
1:3500
20-006
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Randolph County, N C
BULL C HU TEMITIGATION SITE
CUR RE NTCONDITIONSPLAN VIEW
1
³
0 50 0 1,0 0 0250Fe e t
Lege nd
Bul l C hu te Sit e E ase me nt = 3 1.7 a c
Asb u ilt Str uctu res
Stre am Re stor ati on
Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l I)
Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l II)
Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l II, 5:1 )
Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l II, 7.5 :1 )
Stre am Ge ne ra tin g No Cred it
Wet la nd Re esta bl ishme nt
Wet la nd Re ha bi lit at ion
Wet la nd En ha nce me nt
^_Pho to Po in ts (Bri dg e Cro ssin gs)
^_Veg e tat io n P lo t Ori gi ns
!(Grou n dwa te r Ga u ge s Me eti n g MY 2 Su cce ss Crit er ia
!(Grou n dwa te r Ga u ge s No t Me e tin g MY2 Su ccess Cri te ri a
")Rai n Gau g e/So il Pro b e
#*Stre a m Cre st Ga ug e
#*Stre a m Fl ow Ga ug e
Cross Se ct io ns
Perma ne nt Ve ge ta ti on Pl ots Me et ing MY3 St em De n si ty Re qu ire men t
2x50 m Ra nd om Te mp or ary Pl ot s Me e tin g MY 3 S te m Den si ty Re qu ire men t
MY 2 S tun te d Growt h Are a (Q1 2 02 4 Su pp le me nt al Pl an tin g )
U T-1
UT-1
U
T
-
2
UT-3
U
T
-
4
UT-4
UT-4A
U
T
-
4
B
UT-4C
U T -7
UT-5
UT-6
X
S
-
1
XS-2
X
S
-
3
XS-4
X
S
-
5
X
S-
6
XS-7
XS-8
XS-9
XS-10
X S -11
X S -1 2
X
S
-
1
3
XS-14
XS-15
XS-16
X S -1 7XS-18
X S -1 9XS-2 0
XS-21
XS-22
X S -2 3XS-2 4 XS-25
XS-26
N ote : B a se ma p i s d ron e i ma ge ry fro m A pri l 2 02 2 o ntop o f 20 18 ae ri al orth oi ma ge ry fro m N C On eMa p
At re que st o f IRT, plot 2 0 wasmoved int o a nea rby we tlan dreestablishment ar ea pr ior t oMY1 m o nito ring.
Table 4A. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 1
Assessed Stream Length 3149
Assessed Bank Length 6298
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. 46 46 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
46 46 100%
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Table 4B. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 2
Assessed Stream Length 592
Assessed Bank Length 1184
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. 0 0 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
0 0 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4C. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 3
Assessed Stream Length 1907
Assessed Bank Length 3814
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. 30 30 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
30 30 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4D. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 4
Assessed Stream Length 2558
Assessed Bank Length 5116
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. 27 27 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
27 27 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4E. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 4A
Assessed Stream Length 401
Assessed Bank Length 802
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. 17 17 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
17 17 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4F. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 4B
Assessed Stream Length 290
Assessed Bank Length 580
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. 10 10 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
10 10 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4G. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 4C
Assessed Stream Length 175
Assessed Bank Length 350
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. 4 4 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
4 4 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4H. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 5
Assessed Stream Length 75
Assessed Bank Length 150
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. 0 0 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
0 0 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4I. Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 7
Assessed Stream Length 77
Assessed Bank Length 154
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. 1 1 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring
guidance document)
1 1 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Totals
Survey Date: November 9, 2023
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As‐built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 5. Visual Vegetation Assessment
Planted acreage 28.5
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 0.20 0.7%
0.20 0.7%
Easement Acreage 31.7
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 shortterm 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
% of Planted
Acreage
Total
Cumulative Total
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
Combined
Acreage
0 Encroachments noted
Combined
Acreage
% of Easement
AcreageVegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
Bull Chute Mitigation Site
MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Taken August 24, 2023)
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023
Plot 7
Plot 1 Plot 2
Plot 3 Plot 4
Plot 5 Plot 6
Plot 8
Plot 15
Plot 9 Plot 10
Plot 11 Plot 12
Plot 13 Plot 14
Plot 16
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023
Bull Chute Mitigation Site
MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Taken August 24, 2023)
Plot 17 Plot 18
Plot 19 Plot 20
Plot 21
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023
Bull Chute Mitigation Site
MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Taken August 24, 2023)
Bull Chute Mitigation Site
MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log
Photo Point 1A: UT-1 Upper Crossing,
Upstream End Facing Downstream
Photo Point 1B: UT-1 Upper Crossing,
Downstream End Facing Upstream
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023
Photo Point 2A: UT-1 Lower Crossing,
Upstream End Facing Downstream
Photo Point 2B: UT-1 Lower Crossing,
Downstream End Facing Upstream
Bull Chute Mitigation Site
MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023
Photo Point 3A: UT-3 Crossing,
Upstream End Facing Downstream
Photo Point 3B: UT-3 Crossing,
Downstream End Facing Upstream
Bull Chute Mitigation Site
MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023
Photo Point 4A: UT-4 Crossing,
Upstream End Facing Downstream
Photo Point 4B: UT-4 Crossing,
Downstream End Facing Upstream
Bull Chute Mitigation Site
MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Appendix B
Vegetation Data
Table 6A. Planted Bare‐Root Woody Vegetation
Table 6B. Permanent Seed Mix
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 6A. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site
Species Wetland Indicator Total
Acres 28.5
Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata) OBL 2,500
River Birch (Betula nigra) FACW 4,000
Redbud (Cercis canadensis) FACU 600
Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa) FACU 200
Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) FACW 5,000
Common Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) FAC 420
Tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera) FACU 1,700
Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica) FAC 600
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) FACW 5,500
Water Oak (Quercus nigra) FAC 5,500
Willow Oak (Quercus phellos) FAC 4,000
Black Willow (Salix nigra) OBL 1,600
TOTALS 31,620
Average Stems/Acre 1,110
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 6B. Permanent Seed Mix
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site
Species Wetland Indicator Percent of Total Mix
Redtop (Agrostis gigantea) FACW 10%
VA Wild Rye (Elymus virginicus) FACW 15%
Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) FAC 15%
Eastern Gammagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides) FAC 5%
PA Smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum) FACW 5%
Little Bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) FACU 5%
Soft Rush (Juncus effusus) FACW 5%
Bur Marigold (Bidens cernua) OBL 10%
Lance‐leaved Tickseed (Coreopsis lanceolata) FACU 10%
Deertongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum) FAC 10%
Big Bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) FAC 5%
Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans) FACU 5%
TOTAL 100%
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 7. Planted Vegetation Totals
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site
Plot # Planted Stems/Acre Success Criteria Met?
1 1133 Yes
2 729 Yes
3 567 Yes
4 526 Yes
5 850 Yes
6 769 Yes
7 769 Yes
8 1336 Yes
9 486 Yes
10 405 Yes
11 405 Yes
12 1376 Yes
13 769 Yes
14 486 Yes
15 972 Yes
16 688 Yes
17 567 Yes
18 445 Yes
19 405 Yes
20* 891 Yes
21 405 Yes
Transect 1 (2x50 m) 526 Yes
Transect 2 (2x50 m) 607 Yes
Transect 3 (2x50 m) 445 Yes
Transect 4 (2x50 m) 769 Yes
Transect 5 (2x50 m) 486 Yes
Transect 6 (2x50 m) 769 Yes
Transect 7 (2x50 m) 364 Yes
Transect 8 (2x50 m) 769 Yes
Transect 9 (4x25 m) 486 Yes
Transect 10 (4x25 m) 850 Yes
Average Planted Stems/Acre 679 Yes
*At request of IRT, plot 20 was moved into a nearby wetland reestablishment area prior to MY1 monitoring.
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool
28.5
2022‐03‐18
NA
2023‐08‐24
2023‐08‐24
0.0247
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 11 11 1 1
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 2 2 2 2 21 21
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC
Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU 1111
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 20 20 111166
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 22
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW 1 1
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 227711
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 8833 3366
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 11
Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 336644111133
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 11551111 22
Quercus sp.996611
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 22
Sum Performance Standard 32 32 18 18 17 17 13 13 21 21 19 19 27 27
32 18 17 13 21 19 27
1133 729 567 526 850 769 769
4646565
62 33 65 46 43 32 78
2122222
0000000
32 18 17 13 21 19 27
1133 729 567 526 850 769 769
4646565
62 33 65 46 43 32 78
2122222
0000000
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
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
Species
Included in
Approved
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan
Performance
Standard
Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 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/Shrub
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)
28.5
2022‐03‐18
NA
2023‐08‐24
2023‐08‐24
0.0247
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 1144
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 8822 331166
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC
Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 5 5 12 12 14 14 5555
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 3 3 11
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 3322 22 11
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 774411 4466
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW
Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 1111224455
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW 1 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 551133 2211
Quercus sp.6622 11
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW
Sum Performance Standard 33 33 12 12 10 10 15 15 34 34 19 19 12 12
33 12 10 15 34 19 12
1336 486 405 405 1376 769 486
7643863
24 33 50 80 41 32 50
22222222
0000000
33 12 10 15 34 19 12
1336 486 405 405 1376 769 486
7643863
24 33 50 80 41 32 50
22222222
0000000
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
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 Tree/Shrub
Indicator
Status
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
Veg Plot 10 F Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 F Veg Plot 13 F Veg Plot 14 FVeg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (continued)
28.5
2022‐03‐18
NA
2023‐08‐24
2023‐08‐24
0.0247
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 1122
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 1122
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC
Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 11 11 4 4 3333
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 2 2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 1111 77
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 22
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 11776644 101055
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW
Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 5 5 2 2
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 4444334433
Quercus sp.1111 2233 22
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 11
Sum Performance Standard 24 24 17 17 14 14 11 11 10 10 22 22 10 10
24 17 14 11 10 22 10
972 688 567 445 405 891 405
6554444
46 41 43 36 30 45 50
2222143
0000000
24 17 14 11 10 22 10
972 688 567 445 405 891 405
6554444
46 41 43 36 30 45 50
2222143
0000000
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.
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Post 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 Tree/Shrub
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Veg Plot 20 F Veg Plot 21 FIndicator
Status
Species
Included in
Approved
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan
Performance
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Veg Plot 15 F Veg Plot 16 F Veg Plot 17 F Veg Plot 18 F Veg Plot 19 F
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (continued)
28.5
2022‐03‐18
NA
2023‐08‐24
2023‐08‐24
0.0247
Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Veg Plot 5 R Veg Plot 6 R Veg Plot 7 R Veg Plot 8 R Veg Plot 9 R Veg Plot 10 R
Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 4 2 2
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 3 2 5 2
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1 1
Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 1 1214
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW 2 1
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 4 1 2 6 1 2 1
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 36751 1655
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL 1
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW
Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 2 2 313212
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW 4
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 24524 513
Quercus sp.
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 3 1 1 8
Sum Performance Standard 13 15 12 19 12 19 9 19 12 21
13 15 12 19 12 19 9 19 12 21
526 607 445 769 486 769 364 769 486 850
6636775555
31 40 58 26 25 32 44 32 42 38
22222221222
0000000000
13 15 12 19 12 19 9 19 12 21
526 607 445 769 486 769 364 769 486 850
6636775555
31 40 58 26 25 32 44 32 42 38
22222221222
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
Indicator
Status
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 Tree/Shrub
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Appendix C
Stream Geomorphology Data
Cross‐Sections with Annual Overlays
Table 9A‐F. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables
Table 10A‐E. Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
Station Elevation
-0.5 714.0 713.57
2.2 713.9 0.99
5.5 713.7 712.78
8.1 713.6 713.57
9.3 713.2 0.79
10.1 712.9 5.7
11.1 712.9
12.0 712.9
13.0 712.8
14.0 712.8
15.0 712.8
16.0 712.9
16.8 713.1 E/C 4
17.6 713.4
19.2 713.6
21.6 713.4
25.2 713.5
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -1
712
713
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 1, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 714.9 714.82
3.0 714.7 0.97
7.1 714.8 712.59
8.7 714.3 714.76
9.4 713.7 2.17
10.5 713.1 11.2
11.4 712.8
12.8 712.6
13.3 712.8
13.9 713.1
14.4 713.3
14.8 713.6
15.0 713.9 E/C 4
15.6 714.3
16.4 714.8
17.7 714.9
19.8 715.0
22.8 714.8
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -2
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
712
713
715
716
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 2, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.2 727.6 727.61
3.5 727.7 0.92
6.0 727.7 726.74
7.4 727.5 727.54
7.9 727.2 0.80
8.2 726.9 5.0
8.9 726.8
9.7 726.9
10.2 726.8
10.9 726.8
11.2 726.8
11.7 726.9
12.4 726.7 E/C 4
13.2 726.7
13.8 726.9
14.2 727.0
15.0 727.3
15.8 727.5
17.5 727.7
19.2 727.4
22.3 727.72
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -3
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
726
727
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 3, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 727.8 727.95
3.1 728.0 0.92
6.0 727.9 726.30
7.6 727.8 727.82
8.2 727.5 1.52
8.7 727.1 7.9
9.3 726.8
10.1 726.7
10.6 726.6
11.6 726.3
12.2 726.3
12.6 726.4
13.1 726.5 E/C 4
13.5 726.7
13.8 726.8
14.4 727.2
15.2 727.5
16.3 727.8
18.0 727.7
19.3 727.9
21.9 727.98
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -4
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
726
727
728
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 4, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
-0.3 739.7 739.85
3.5 739.7 0.79
6.3 739.8 738.83
7.5 739.4 739.64
8.2 739.2 0.81
8.8 738.9 6.1
9.6 738.9
10.2 738.9
11.2 738.9
11.9 738.9
12.9 738.8
13.4 738.8
13.8 738.8 E/C 4
14.7 738.9
15.5 738.9
15.9 739.3
16.3 739.6
17.4 739.7
19.6 739.7
22.6 739.6
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -5
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
738
739
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 5, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 740.1 740.05
2.2 740.0 0.97
4.3 740.0 738.42
6.4 739.6 740.00
8.0 739.2 1.58
8.6 739.0 11.2
9.2 738.8
10.1 738.6
11.1 738.5
11.7 738.5
12.3 738.6
13.6 738.8
14.2 739.0 E/C 4
14.8 739.2
15.4 739.4
15.9 739.9
17.2 740.3
17.4 740.3
20.0 740.3
23.5 740.1
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -6
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
738
739
741
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 6, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 747.7 747.79
2.6 747.6 0.90
5.1 747.8 746.79
7.3 747.7 747.68
8.0 747.2 0.90
9.0 746.8 5.9
9.9 746.8
10.5 746.8
11.1 746.8
12.0 746.8
12.8 747.0
13.9 746.9
14.8 747.0 E/C 4
15.3 747.4
16.6 747.7
18.3 747.8
23.8 747.3
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -7
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
746
747
748
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 7, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 747.8 747.99
4.8 748.0 0.98
7.7 747.7 746.39
8.6 747.2 747.96
10.0 747.1 1.58
10.7 746.9 10.0
11.5 746.7
11.9 746.5
12.4 746.4
13.0 746.4
14.2 746.5
14.7 746.7
15.4 746.9 E/C 4
15.8 747.3
16.8 747.8
17.9 748.1
19.4 748.0
22.9 748.0
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -8
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
746
747
748
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 8, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 764.5 763.65
1.9 764.6 0.90
3.5 764.2 763.26
4.1 763.8 763.61
5.1 763.6 0.35
5.8 763.5 1.1
6.4 763.3
7.1 763.3
7.4 763.3
8.2 763.3
8.9 763.4
9.4 763.4
10.1 763.6 E/C 4
11.2 763.8
12.1 763.7
13.6 763.6
15.5 763.6
17.9 763.8
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -9
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
763
764
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 9, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 765.6 764.50
0.9 765.6 0.90
1.8 765.0 763.55
3.4 764.5 764.41
4.3 764.0 0.86
5.2 763.6 5.5
6.2 763.6
7.1 763.5
8.1 763.6
9.3 763.6
10.1 763.8
11.2 764.1
12.6 764.4 E/C 4
14.8 764.4
16.6 764.5
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT1, XS -10
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
763
764
765
767
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 10, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 722.5 722.69
3.4 722.5 0.88
6.3 722.7 721.70
7.2 722.2 722.58
8.0 722.0 0.88
8.7 721.7 5.3
9.5 721.8
10.4 721.9
11.0 721.7
11.6 721.7
12.2 721.8
13.0 722.0
13.9 722.0 E/C 4
15.3 722.6
17.7 722.7
21.7 722.5
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT3, XS -13
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
721
722
724
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 13, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 723.3 722.99
2.6 723.2 0.98
5.0 723.0 721.13
5.8 722.5 722.96
6.9 721.8 1.83
7.5 721.6 10.0
8.3 721.4
9.1 721.1
10.0 721.4
10.9 721.5
11.7 721.8
12.3 722.4
13.7 722.5 E/C 4
16.5 723.0
19.0 723.0
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT3, XS -14
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
720
721
722
724
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 14, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
-0.2 734.3 734.23
2.5 734.0 0.80
4.1 734.0 732.97
4.8 733.8 733.98
5.2 733.5 1.01
5.6 733.2 4.6
6.2 733.0
6.6 733.0
7.4 733.0
8.0 733.1
8.6 733.2
9.2 733.4
10.2 733.5 E/C 4
11.3 733.7
12.1 734.1
12.9 734.3
15.3 734.2
17.6 734.2
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT3, XS -15
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
733
734
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 15, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 734.9 734.91
3.7 734.9 1.04
5.5 734.9 734.02
6.5 734.5 734.95
7.1 734.2 0.93
7.6 734.0 5.1
8.1 734.0
8.8 734.1
9.5 734.1
9.9 734.1
10.9 734.3
11.6 734.3
12.3 734.5 E/C 4
13.5 734.7
14.3 735.1
17.6 734.9
20.2 735.0
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT3, XS -16
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
734
735
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 16, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
-0.2 763.7 763.60
1.8 763.6 1.03
3.2 763.4 762.55
4.0 762.9 763.63
5.0 762.8 1.08
5.6 762.5 5.4
6.5 762.8
7.5 763.0
8.3 762.8
8.8 762.9
9.5 763.0
10.2 763.5
11.1 763.7 E/C 4
12.2 763.7
14.7 763.6
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT3, XS -17
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
762
763
764
0 10
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 17, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 764.0 763.79
2.9 763.7 0.87
4.2 763.3 762.55
4.9 763.0 763.63
5.5 762.6 1.08
5.9 762.6 5.0
6.6 762.5
7.1 762.6
7.8 762.8
8.2 762.7
9.2 763.1
10.4 763.5
12.6 763.6 E/C 4
15.1 763.5
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT3, XS -18
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
762
763
764
0 10
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 18, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.2 715.3 714.81
2.8 715.2 1.05
5.4 714.9 713.29
6.7 714.5 714.88
7.1 714.1 1.59
7.7 713.5 8.6
8.7 713.4
9.6 713.5
11.1 713.3
11.5 713.5
12.1 713.9
12.6 714.0
13.1 714.4 E/C 4
13.9 714.6
14.5 714.8
15.5 714.9
16.7 715.0
18.3 715.0
20.9 714.9
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT 4 Downstream, XS -11
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
712
713
715
716
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4 Downstream, XS - 11, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 715.5 715.44
3.6 715.5 0.99
6.2 715.4 714.39
7.6 714.9 715.43
8.5 714.7 1.05
9.5 714.7 8.4
11.0 714.5
12.6 714.5
13.1 714.5
13.8 714.5
14.5 714.4
15.1 714.5
15.9 714.5 E/C 4
16.5 714.7
17.1 715.2
17.7 715.5
18.5 715.5
20.2 715.5
22.9 715.4
26.9 715.5
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4, XS -12
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
713
715
716
717
0 10 20 30
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4 Downstream, XS - 12, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-01 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
-0.4 732.9 732.36
1.1 733.0 0.97
3.0 732.7 731.10
4.4 732.5 732.33
5.5 732.3 1.23
5.9 731.8 6.4
6.6 731.5
7.4 731.5
8.2 731.3
8.8 731.2
9.5 731.1
10.4 731.1
11.0 731.4 E/C 4
11.7 731.5
12.4 732.0
13.0 732.2
14.1 732.4
15.7 732.5
17.0 732.4
19.2 732.6
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -19
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
730
731
733
734
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 19, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 733.7 733.77
1.6 733.8 0.91
3.9 733.7 732.89
5.6 733.7 733.69
6.7 733.5 0.81
7.6 733.2 4.5
8.1 733.2
9.0 733.1
9.7 733.1
10.5 733.0
11.1 733.0
11.9 733.1
12.7 732.9 E/C 4
13.4 733.0
14.1 733.5
15.0 733.7
16.3 733.7
17.6 733.7
18.9 733.6
19.9 733.8
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -20
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
733
734
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 20, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.2 750.3 749.98
4.3 750.0 0.96
5.8 749.5 749.11
6.4 749.3 749.95
7.2 749.1 0.84
8.2 749.1 5.4
8.3 749.1
8.8 749.2
9.4 749.3
10.1 749.1
10.8 749.3
11.6 749.2
12.2 749.4 E/C 4
13.3 749.8
15.0 749.9
18.3 750.1
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -21
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
748
750
751
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 21, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 750.3 750.19
2.5 750.4 0.93
3.6 750.0 748.52
5.1 749.5 750.08
6.0 749.2 1.56
6.8 748.8 7.3
7.4 748.7
8.2 748.5
8.9 748.6
9.4 748.8
10.2 749.4
11.6 749.9
12.4 750.1 E/C 4
15.6 750.3
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -22
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
747
748
750
751
0 10
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 22, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.0 758.2 757.86
3.7 757.8 0.90
5.2 757.4 756.89
6.0 757.2 757.76
6.4 757.0 0.88
6.9 756.9 2.7
7.2 757.0
7.7 757.3
8.5 757.5
9.8 757.5
12.3 757.8
14.9 758.0
E/C 4
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4B, XS -23
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
756
758
759
0 10
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4B, XS - 23, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 758.0 758.04
2.8 758.0 0.87
3.9 757.8 757.60
4.8 757.8 757.98
5.6 757.7 0.38
6.1 757.6 1.2
6.8 757.7
7.4 757.7
8.0 757.8
9.3 758.0
12.4 757.9
E/C 4
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4B, XS -24
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
757
758
759
0 10
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4B, XS - 24, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.5 758.4 758.13
3.7 758.4 0.92
4.9 758.3 757.44
5.7 758.1 758.07
6.2 758.0 0.63
6.4 757.6 1.2
6.6 757.5
7.0 757.4
7.5 757.5
7.8 757.5
8.1 757.6
8.4 757.9
8.9 758.0 E/C 4
9.8 758.1
10.7 758.1
12.2 758.3
14.4 758.2
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4A, XS -25
Feature Pool
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
757
758
759
0 10
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4A, XS - 25, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Station Elevation
0.1 758.7 758.60
3.5 758.6 0.77
5.4 758.6 757.97
6.8 758.3 758.45
7.5 758.3 0.48
8.3 758.2 0.9
8.8 758.0
9.0 758.0
9.6 758.2
10.1 758.4
11.0 758.5
12.3 758.4
16.0 758.2 E/C 4
Site Bull Chute Site
Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103
XS ID UT4A, XS -26
Feature Riffle
Date:6/16/2023
Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
SUMMARY DATA
758
759
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Bull Chute, UT 4A, XS - 26, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 5/11/22
MY-01 11/29/22
MY-02 6/16/2023
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)5.6 8.5 16 8.5 9.8 5.5 10.2 5
Floodprone Width (ft)10 14 100 50 150 25 100 5
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.2 0.8 5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6 1.1 1.4 0.8 1.1 0.4 1.1 5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6 6 6 6 6 1.3 8.1 5
Width/Depth Ratio 5.1 12.1 40 12 16 12.8 22.9 5
Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.4 15.9 5.9 15.3 4.6 11.4 5
Bank Height Ratio 1.3 2.8 5 1 1.3 1 1 5
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)3.3 5.1 7.1 6.7 7.7 8.0 10.0 2
Floodprone Width (ft)7 9 50 50 100 75 75 2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.5 0.7 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.8 1 1.7 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 4.8 6.4 2
Width/Depth Ratio 3 7.3 13.5 12 16 12.4 15.6 2
Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.5 13.5 7.5 13 7.5 9.4 2
Bank Height Ratio 1.5 2.5 4 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
0.0254 0.0225 0.0199
13.7 13.7 13.7
1.02 1.15 1.15
G 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4
Table 9B. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Bull Chute - UT 3
Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design
Monitoring Baseline
(MY0)
Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)
Monitoring Baseline
(MY0)Design
Table 9A. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Bull Chute - UT 1
1.15
0.0211 0.0189 0.0197
1.03 1.15
22.922.9 22.9
Ce 4G 5 Ce 3/4
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)5 8.3 10.4 7.2 8.3 8.5 8.9 2
Floodprone Width (ft)6 11 24 50 100 75.0 75.0 2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.6 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.5 1.1 1.2 0.7 0.9 0.8 1.0 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 5.1 5.8 2
Width/Depth Ratio 5.6 15.4 26 12 16 13.7 14.1 2
Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.3 2.6 7 12.1 8.4 8.8 2
Bank Height Ratio 2.5 3.1 5.4 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)7.8 9.2 10 9.1 10.5 11.0 11.0 1
Floodprone Width (ft)9 11 14 50 150 100.0 100.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.7 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.9 1 1.1 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.2 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 8.5 8.5 1
Width/Depth Ratio 6.8 9.7 12.6 12 16 14.0 14.0 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.2 1.4 5.5 14.3 9.1 9.1 1
Bank Height Ratio 4.7 5.3 5.9 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
0.0165 0.0146 0.01484
26.7 26.7 26.7
1.02 1.15 1.15
G 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4
Table 9D. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Bull Chute - UT 4 Downstream
Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design
Monitoring Baseline
(MY0)
0.212 0.0196 0.0182
16.1 16.1 16.1
1.06 1.15 1.15
Fg 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4
Table 9C. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Bull Chute - UT 4 Upstream
Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design
Monitoring Baseline
(MY0)
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)2.3 3.3 4.5 3.9 4.6 4.7 4.7 1
Floodprone Width (ft)6 8 12 20 50 35 35 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.3 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6 0.6 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.7 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1
Width/Depth Ratio 4.6 8.3 15 12 16 15.5 15.5 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 3.5 3.6 5.1 11 7.5 7.5 1
Bank Height Ratio 1.7 3 3.9 1 1.3 1 1 1
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)3.1 5 6.9 3.9 4.6 5.3 5.3 1
Floodprone Width (ft)9 14 18 20 50 35 35 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.3 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1
Width/Depth Ratio 7.8 21.1 34.5 12 16 17.5 17.5 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 3.6 5.8 5.1 11 6.6 6.6 1
Bank Height Ratio 1.3 4.3 7.3 1 1.3 1 1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Other
0.0359 0.0336 0.034
4.3 4.3 4.3
1.03 1.1 1.1
Cf 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4
Table 9F. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Bull Chute - UT 4B
Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design
Monitoring Baseline
(MY0)
0.0444 0.0336 0.0356
4.3 4.3 4.3
1.02 1.1 1.1
Eg 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4
Table 9E. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Bull Chute - UT 4A
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 713.54 713.53 713.57 714.80 714.91 714.82 727.56 727.61 727.61 727.84 727.98 727.95 739.80 739.86 739.85
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 1.01 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.92 1.00 0.99 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.79
Thalweg Elevation 712.66 712.78 712.78 712.56 712.69 712.59 726.64 726.79 726.74 726.21 726.32 726.30 738.69 738.88 738.83
LTOB2 Elevation 713.54 713.50 713.57 714.80 714.92 714.76 `727.56 727.59 727.54 727.84 727.96 727.82 739.80 739.81 739.64
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.88 0.73 0.79 2.24 2.24 2.17 0.91 0.80 0.80 1.64 1.63 1.52 1.11 0.93 0.81
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)5.7 5.48 5.66 11.7 11.83 11.17 5.5 5.27 4.96 9.4 9.07 7.92 8.1 7.29 6.12
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 739.99 740.05 740.05 747.73 747.79 747.79 747.94 748.03 747.99 763.66 763.64 763.65 764.42 764.51 764.50
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.90 0.90 1.00 0.94 0.98 1.00 0.95 0.90 1.00 0.96 0.90
Thalweg Elevation 738.45 738.54 738.42 746.66 746.80 746.79 746.29 746.37 746.39 763.30 763.31 763.26 763.33 763.64 763.55
LTOB2 Elevation 739.99 740.06 740.00 747.73 747.70 747.68 747.94 747.94 747.96 763.66 763.63 763.61 764.42 764.47 764.41
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.54 1.52 1.58 1.07 0.90 0.90 1.65 1.56 1.58 0.36 0.32 0.35 1.09 0.83 0.86
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)12.0 12.05 11.22 6.9 5.95 5.91 10.3 9.34 9.96 1.3 1.23 1.12 6.3 5.78 5.49
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)
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 9 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 10 (Pool)
Table 10A. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
(Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 1
UT 1 - Cross Section 1 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 2 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 3 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 4 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 5 (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.
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+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 722.63 722.64 722.69 722.98 723.01 722.99 734.17 734.23 734.23 734.92 734.91 734.91 763.55 763.58 763.60
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.01 0.80 1.00 1.01 1.04 0.98 1.00 1.03
Thalweg Elevation 721.62 721.65 721.70 720.98 721.08 721.13 732.78 732.99 732.97 733.97 734.06 734.02 762.51 762.53 762.55
LTOB2 Elevation 722.63 722.64 722.58 722.98 723.00 722.96 `734.17 734.25 733.98 734.92 734.92 734.95 763.52 763.58 763.63
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.02 0.99 0.88 2.00 1.92 1.83 1.39 1.26 1.01 0.95 0.86 0.93 1.01 1.05 1.08
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.3 6.36 5.32 10.4 10.26 10.04 7.0 7.10 4.60 4.74 4.80 5.07 4.94 5.09 5.37
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 763.85 763.86 763.79
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 0.98 0.87
Thalweg Elevation 762.31 762.57 762.55
LTOB2 Elevation 763.85 763.84 763.63
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.55 1.27 1.08
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.58 6.40 5.03
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)
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 3 - Cross Section 18 (Pool)
Table 10B. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
(Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 3
UT 3 - Cross Section 13 (Riffle)UT 3 - Cross Section 14 (Pool)UT 3 - Cross Section 15 (Pool)UT 3 - Cross Section 16 (Riffle)UT 3 - Cross Section 17 (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+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 714.76 714.92 714.81 715.38 715.44 715.44 732.43 732.39 732.36 733.76 733.76 733.77 750.00 749.98 749.98
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.07 0.99 1.00 1.01 0.97 1.00 0.94 0.91 1.00 1.02 0.96
Thalweg Elevation 713.25 713.40 713.29 714.22 714.45 714.39 731.14 730.93 731.10 732.93 732.99 732.89 748.99 749.06 749.11
LTOB2 Elevation 714.76 715.00 714.88 715.38 715.52 715.43 `732.43 732.41 732.33 733.76 733.72 733.69 `750.00 750.00 749.95 `
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.51 1.60 1.59 1.16 1.06 1.05 1.29 1.48 1.23 0.84 0.73 0.81 1.00 0.94 0.84
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)7.9 8.71 8.63 8.5 9.59 8.44 6.7 6.88 6.42 5.2 4.68 4.47 5.7 5.88 5.37
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 750.27 750.20 750.19
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.03 0.93
Thalweg Elevation 748.69 748.58 748.52
LTOB2 Elevation 750.27 750.26 750.08 `
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.58 1.68 1.56
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)8.3 8.90 7.28
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)
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 4 - Cross Section 22 (Pool)
Table 10C. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
(Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 4
UT 4 - Cross Section 11 (Pool)UT 4 - Cross Section 12 (Riffle)UT 4 - Cross Section 19 (Pool)UT 4 - Cross Section 20 (Riffle)UT 4 - Cross Section 21 (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+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 758.11 758.02 758.13 758.57 758.62 758.60
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.03 0.92 1.00 0.89 0.77
Thalweg Elevation 757.29 757.36 757.44 757.79 758.00 757.97
LTOB2 Elevation 758.11 758.04 758.07 758.57 758.55 758.45 `
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.82 0.68 0.63 0.78 0.56 0.48
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.5 1.52 1.24 1.6 1.19 0.93
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)
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.
Table 10D. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
(Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 4A
UT 4A - Cross Section 25 (Pool)UT 4A - Cross Section 26 (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+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 757.88 757.89 757.86 758.07 758.04 758.04
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.05 0.90 0.52 1.00 0.87
Thalweg Elevation 756.83 756.93 756.89 757.50 757.63 757.60
LTOB2 Elevation 757.88 757.94 757.76 758.07 758.04 757.98 `
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.05 1.01 0.88 0.57 0.41 0.38
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.4 3.80 2.66 1.6 1.56 1.22
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)
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.
Table 10E. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
(Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 4B
UT 4B - Cross Section 23 (Pool)UT 4B - Cross Section 24 (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.
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Appendix D
Hydrologic Data
Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Tables 13A‐F. Channel Evidence
Surface Water Gauge Graphs
Figure D1. 30/70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events
Date of Data
Collection
Date of
Occurrence
Monitoring
Year Method Photo
(if available)
May 23, 2022 May 23, 2022 MY1
Crest gauges on UT‐1, UT‐3, and UT‐4 documented a bankfull
event, with crests of 17 inches, 12 inches, and 14.5 inches
respectively after 1.88 inches of rain were captured at an
onsite rain gauge.
‐‐
September 30,
2022
September 30,
2022 MY1
Crest gauges on UT‐1, UT‐3, and UT‐4 documented a bankfull
event, with crests of 16 inches, 13 inches, and 10 inches
respectively after 2.48 inches of rain were captured at an
onsite rain gauge as a result of tropical storm Ian.
‐‐
November 29,
2022
November 27,
2022 MY1
Wrack and laid‐back vegetation were observed along the top of
bank and floodplain of all Site reaches after 1.49 inches of rain
were captured at an onsite rain gauge.
1, 2, 3
February 12,
2023
February 12,
2023 MY2
Crest gauge on UT‐1 documented a bankfull event, with a crest
of 13 inches after 1.78 inches of rain were captured at an
onsite rain gauge. The event was also documented on UT‐3 and
UT‐4 by time‐lapse trail cameras.
4, 5
April 8, 2023 April 8, 2023 MY2
Crest gauge on UT‐1 documented a bankfull event with a crest
of 13 inches after 3.10 inches of rain were recorded by an
onsite rain gauge the days leading up to the event.
‐‐
July 8, 2023 July 8, 2023 MY2
Crest gauges on UT‐1 and UT‐3 documented a bankfull event
with crests of 17 inches and 12 inches respectively after 2.91
inches of rain were recorded by an onsite rain gauge the days
leading up to the event.
‐‐
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Photo 1: Bankfull event documented on UT‐2 (MY1)
Photo 2: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐3 (MY1)
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Photo 3: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐4 (MY1)
Photo 4: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐3 (MY2)
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Photo 5: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐4 (MY2)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
22
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
)
Bull Chute UT1 Crest Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
Bankfull
Event
Bankfull
Event
Bankfull
Event
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
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
)
Bull Chute UT3 Crest Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
Bankfull
Event
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
22
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
)
Bull Chute UT4 Crest Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
Upward trend indicates some
sort of malfunction. This gauge
will be replaced prior to the
MY3 growing season.
Gauge malfunctioned
resulting in data loss. It was
reinstalled on 4/17/2023
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Summary of Monitoring Period/Hydrology Success Criteria by Year
Gauge
12% Hydroperiod 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
1 day (0.4%)
No
2 days (0.8%)
2 Yes
62 days (25.4%)
Yes
48 days (20.5%)
3 No
19 days (7.8%)
No
11 days (4.7%)
4 No
7 days (2.9%)
No
5 days (2.1%)
5 Yes
124 days (50.8%)
Yes
136 days (58.1%)
6 Yes
63 days (25.8%)
Yes
131 days (56.0%)
7 Yes
64 days (26.2%)
Yes
49 days (20.9%)
8 Yes
63 days (25.8%)
Yes
54 days (23.1%)
9 Yes
45 days (18.4%)
Yes
221 days (94.4%)
10 Yes
33 days (13.5%)
Yes
221 days (94.4%)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 1
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
2Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 2
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
48 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 3
Year 2 (2023 Data)End Growing Season
November 16Start Growing Season
March 18
11 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 4
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
5 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 5
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
136 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 6
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
131 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 7
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
49 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 8
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
54 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 9
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
221 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐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
)
Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 10
Year 2 (2023 Data)
End Growing Season
November 16
Start Growing Season
March 18
221 Days
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 13A. UT‐1 Channel Evidence
UT‐1 Upstream Channel Evidence Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Max consecutive days channel flow 105 125
Presence of litter and debris (wracking) Yes Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport Yes Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or
transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including
hydrophytes)
Yes Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural
topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No
Other:
Table 13B. UT‐2 Channel Evidence
UT‐2 Channel Evidence Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Max consecutive days channel flow 124 204
Presence of litter and debris (wracking) Yes Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport Yes Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or
transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including
hydrophytes)
Yes Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural
topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No
Other:
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 13C. UT‐3 Channel Evidence
UT‐1 Upstream Channel Evidence Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Max consecutive days channel flow 239 107
Presence of litter and debris (wracking) Yes Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport Yes Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or
transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including
hydrophytes)
Yes Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural
topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No
Other:
Table 13D. UT‐7 Channel Evidence
UT‐2 Channel Evidence Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Max consecutive days channel flow 124 293
Presence of litter and debris (wracking) Yes Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport Yes Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or
transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including
hydrophytes)
Yes Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural
topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No
Other:
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Table 13E. UT‐4A Channel Evidence
UT‐1 Upstream Channel Evidence Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Max consecutive days channel flow 239 163
Presence of litter and debris (wracking) Yes Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport Yes Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or
transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including
hydrophytes)
Yes Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural
topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No
Other:
Table 13F. UT‐4B Channel Evidence
UT‐2 Channel Evidence Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Max consecutive days channel flow 239 293
Presence of litter and debris (wracking) Yes Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport Yes Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or
transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including
hydrophytes)
Yes Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural
topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No
Other:
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
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
)
Bull Chute UT1 Flow Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
125 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
22
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
)
Bull Chute UT2 Flow Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
204 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
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
)
Bull Chute UT3 Flow Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
107 Days
Guage Malfunction.
Re‐installed 5/26/23
68 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
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
)
Bull Chute UT7 Flow Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
293 Days
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
22
26
30
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
)
Bull Chute UT4A Flow Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
163 Days
Malfunction: errant
readings. Gauge re‐
launched 4/17/23
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
‐10
‐6
‐2
2
6
10
14
18
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
)
Bull Chute UT4B Flow Gauge
Year 2 (2023 Data)
293 Days
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Ra
i
n
f
a
l
l
Am
o
u
n
t
in
In
c
h
e
s
Figure D1: Bull Chute
30‐70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall
Current year data from onsite rain gauge
30‐70th percentile data from WETS Station: Randleman, NC (1992‐2022)
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
30th Percentile
70th Percentile
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Appendix E
Project Timeline and Contact Info
Table 14. Project Timeline
Table 15. Project Contacts
Table 14. Project Timeline
Data Collection Task Completion or
Activity or Deliverable Complete Deliverable Submission
Project Instituted NA Nov‐19
Mitigation Plan Approved NA 13‐May‐21
Construction (Grading) Completed NA 8‐Mar‐22
Planting Completed NA 18‐Mar‐22
As‐built Survey Completed Jun‐22 Jun‐22
MY‐0 Baseline Report May‐22 Jul‐22
MY‐1 Vegetation Survey 30‐Aug‐22 N/A
MY‐1 Stream Survey 29‐Nov‐22 N/A
MY‐1 Monitoring Report Nov‐22 Jan‐23
MY‐2 Vegetation Survey 16‐Jun‐23 N/A
MY‐2 Stream Survey 24‐Aug‐23 N/A
MY‐2 Invasive Treatment ‐ Chinese privet, multiflora rose N/A Oct‐23
MY‐2 Monitoring Report Nov‐23 Jan‐24
Remediation Items (e.g. beaver removal, supplements, repairs etc.)
Encroachment
Table 15. Project Contacts
Provider Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
604 Macon Pl.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Mitigation Provider POC Kevin Yates
919‐624‐6901
Designer Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27603
Primary project design POC Grant Lewis
919‐215‐1693
Construction Contractor KBS Earthworks, Inc.
5616 Coble Church Rd
Julian, NC 27283
Kory Strader
336‐362‐0289
Bull Chute/100137
MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices
Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024
Appendix F
Boundary Inspection Report – MY2
1
November 17, 2023 Matthew Reid
Project Manager NCDEQ - Division of Mitigation Services Asheville Regional Office 2090 U.S. 70 Highway Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211 Subject: Boundary Inspection Report – MY2 Bull Chute, Randolph County, NC; DMS ID No. 100137 Matthew, The MY2 boundary inspection was conducted by DMS on November 16, 2023. The inspection was conducted in accordance with the DMS Property Checklist which included an office review and a site visit to document site conditions. The entire easement boundary was inspected during the site visit to validate easement integrity and identify any potential issues on the site. This report summarizes those inspection results.
Office Review:
• The plat clearly depicted the conservation easement and numbered corners.
• No encroachments were noted in the MY1 report.
• Aerial photography did not indicate any areas of concern.
Field Inspection:
• The easement corners were monumented with stamped aluminum caps. Multiple caps were confirmed and #5 rebar was present at the newly installed corner locations.
• The site corners were generally well marked, two signs were commonly installed at gated entrances. Some of the corner monuments lacked a witness post with conservation easement signs as shown on the attached kmz.
• In-line marking was generally deficient where multiple line segments with an excess of 200’ sign spacing were noted.
• One witness post was missing, and one was located too far from the monument.
• A downed tree was resting across the fence in the north central portion of the site.
Action Items
• Install witness signs/posts at each unmarked corner.
• Install in-line marking at a frequency of 200’ spacing or less. Shorter segments should have the signs installed equidistant from the corners, but signs must be installed at a spacing no greater than 200’.
• Remove fallen tree from the exclusion fencing in the north central section of the site.
2
Let me know if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely,
Kelly Phillips Property Specialist NCDEQ-DMS 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115 Cell: (919) 723-7565 cc: R:\EEP PROJECT LIBRARY FILES\PROJECT DELIVERABLES(REPORTS)\FD PROJECTS\Bull Chute Site_7878-01 (#100137)\4_T2_Cons_Ease\DMS Easement Inspections