The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20181271 Ver 1_HoneyMill_100083_MY3_2023_20240205 MONITORING YEAR 3 ANNUAL REPORT FINAL HONEY MILL MITIGATION SITE Surry County, NC DEQ Contract No. 7619 DMS Project No. 100083 Yadkin River Basin HUC 03040101 USACE Action ID No. SAW-2018-01789 NCDEQ DWR#: 18-1271 RFP #: 16-00746 RFP Issuance Date: December 7, 2017 Data Collection Period: January 2023 – October 2023 FINAL Submission Date: January, 2024 PREPARED FOR: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone 704-332-7754  fax 704-332-3306  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203 January 4, 2024 Mr. Kelly Phillips Project Manager NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services 610 East Center Ave., Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115 RE: Draft: Year 3 Monitoring Report Honey Mill Mitigation Site, Surry County Yadkin River CU 03040101 DMS Project ID No. 100083 / DEQ Contract #007619 Dear Mr. Phillips: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments from the Draft Year 3 Monitoring Report for the Honey Mill Mitigation Site that were received on January 3, 2024. The report has been updated to reflect those comments. The Final MY3 Report is included. DMS’ comments are listed below in bold. Wildlands’ responses to DMS’ comments are noted in italics. DMS’ comment: Report Cover: Thank you for including the data collection dates. Wildlands’ response: You’re welcome. DMS’ comment: Executive Summary: Thank you for providing concise status updates on the primary project monitoring items and referencing measures to accomplish the IRT requests. Wildlands’ response: You’re welcome. DMS’ comment: Section 1.3 Project Attributes - Table 3: Convert the Lat/Long to decimal degrees. Wildlands’ response: The Lat/Long coordinates have been changed to decimal degrees in Table 3 in Section 1.3. DMS’ comment: Section 1.4.1 Vegetation Assessment - IRT Requested Forested Transect Results: Thank you for conducting the planted stem assessment in the forested areas. The reported survival rates are encouraging in these shaded areas. Wildlands’ response: Noted. DMS’ comment: Section 1.4.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity: The full boundary assessment conducted during MY3 is appreciated. Please continue monitoring the easement boundary and document the results in the MY4 report. Wildlands’ response: Noted. DMS’ comment: Section 1.4.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity - Invasive Species Management: The overall reduction in the invasive species population has been effective over the course of the project, the ongoing treatment is appreciated. Wildlands’ response: Noted. Digital Support File Comments: DMS’ comment: Please submit stream and vegetation visual assessment tables in digital format. Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone 704-332-7754  fax 704-332-3306  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203 Wildlands’ response: All stream visual assessment tables have been included in the final digital submittal. As requested, Wildlands has included two (2) hard copies of the final report, a full final .pdf copy of the report with the DMS comment letter and our response letter inserted after the cover page, and a full final electronic submittal of the support files. A copy of the DMS comment letter and our response letter have been included inside the front cover of each report’s hard copy, as well. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kristi Suggs Senior Environmental Scientist ksuggs@wildlandseng.com PREPARED BY: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 Phone: 704.332.7754 Fax: 704.332.3306 Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) implemented a full-delivery stream mitigation project at the Honey Mill Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The project restored and enhanced a total of 8,683 linear feet (LF) of perennial and intermittent stream in Surry County, NC. The Site is located within the Rutledge, Stoney and Flat Shoal Creek – Ararat River targeted local watershed (TWL) and NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) Subbasin 03-07-03. The project is providing 4,793.432 cool stream mitigation units (SMUs) for the Yadkin River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101110020. The Site’s immediate drainage area and the surrounding watershed have a long history of agricultural activity. The project excludes livestock, creates stable stream banks, converts pasture to forest, and implements BMPs to filter agricultural runoff. These actions address stressors by reducing fecal, nutrient, and sediment inputs to project streams, and ultimately to the Ararat River, and reconnect instream and terrestrial habitats on the Site to upstream and downstream resources. Approximately 20.2-acres of land has been placed under permanent conservation easement to protect the Site in perpetuity. The established project goals include: • Improve stream channel stability, • Treat concentrated agricultural run-off, • Improve in-stream habitat, • Restore and enhance native floodplain and wetland vegetation, • Exclude livestock from streams, and • Permanently protect the project Site from harmful uses. The Site is meeting the required stream, vegetation, and hydrology success criteria for Monitoring Year 3 (MY3). In MY3 the Site has met the required stream success criteria. The average planted stem density is 460 stems per acre and all plots met the MY3 density criteria. Three bankfull events were documented on the Venable Creek Reach 3 in MY3. The Site is on track to meet the MY7 bankfull flow requirements. No stream areas of instability were documented, and areas monitored per IRT request have remained stable. All fences are intact, and no encroachments present at the Site as of October 2023. Invasive species areas will continue to be monitored and adaptive management measures will be implemented as necessary to benefit the ecological health of the Site. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL iv HONEY MILL MITIGATION SITE Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW .....................................................................................................1-1 Section 2: METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................2-1 Section 3: REFERENCES .................................................................................................................3-1 Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL v TABLES Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits ……………………………………………………………………………………………1-1 Table 1.1: Credit Summary Table …………………………………………………………………………………………………….1-2 Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements ………………………………………………1-3 Table 3: Project Attributes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1-4 FIGURES Figure 1 Current Condition Plan View (Key) Figures 1a-d Current Condition Plan View APPENDICES Appendix A Visual Assessment Data Table 4a-c Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Table 5 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Stream Photographs Culvert Crossing & BMP Photographs Mature Tree Photographs Supplemental Photographs Permanent and Mobile Vegetation Plot Photographs Forested Vegetation Transect Photographs Appendix B Vegetation Plot Data Table 6a-b Vegetation Plot Data Table 6c Forested Vegetation Transect Data Table 7 Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Appendix C Stream Geomorphology Data Table 8 Baseline Stream Data Summary Table 9 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Section) Cross-Section Plots Appendix D Hydrology Data Table 10 Bankfull Events Table 11 Rainfall Summary Recorded Bankfull Event Plots Appendix E Project Timeline and Contact Info Table 12 Project Activity and Reporting History Table 13 Project Contact Table Appendix F Supplemental Planting March 2022 IRT Approved Planted Supplemental Stems: Species and Quantities Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-1 Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 Project Quantities and Credits Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) implemented a full-delivery stream mitigation project at the Honey Mill Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The project restored and enhanced a total of 8,683 linear feet (LF) of perennial and intermittent stream in Surry County, NC. The Site is located within the Rutledge, Stoney and Flat Shoal Creek – Ararat River targeted local watershed (TWL)and NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) Subbasin 03-07-03. A conservation easement has been recorded and is in place on 20.2 acres. The project is providing 4,793.432 cool stream mitigation units (SMUs) for the Yadkin River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101110020. The Site contains eight unnamed tributaries (UTs) to Venable Creek (UT1, UT2, UT2A, UT2B, UT3, UT4, UT5, and UT6) and the mainstem of Venable Creek, which has been broken into four reaches and flows in a north easterly direction through the Site. Multiple riparian wetlands exist on-site; however, no credit is being sought for project wetlands. Please refer to Table 1 and Table 1.1 for project credits by stream and the credit summary table respectively. Annual monitoring will be conducted for seven years with close-out anticipated to commence in 2027 given the success criteria are met. Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits Project Components Project Stream Mitigation Plan Footage1, 2, 3 As-Built Footage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Credits Venable Creek Reach 1 91 91.000 Cool EII 2.500 36.386 Venable Creek Reach 2 211 211.000 Cool EI 1.500 140.566 Venable Creek Reach 3 1647 1,647.000 Cool R 1.000 1,646.644 Venable Creek Reach 4 1958 1,958.000 Cool EII 2.500 783.042 UT1 273 273.000 Cool R 1.000 272.885 UT2 Reach 1 742 742.000 Cool EII 4.000 185.462 UT2 Reach 2 342 332.000 Cool R 1.000 342.364 UT2A 893 893.000 Cool EII 4.000 223.310 UT2B 70 70.000 Cool N/A 0.000 0.000 UT3 Reach 1 784 784.000 Cool EII 3.000 261.279 Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-2 Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits Project Components Project Stream Mitigation Plan Footage1, 2, 3 As-Built Footage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Credits UT3 Reach 2 306 306.000 Cool R 1.000 306.172 UT4 440 440.000 Cool EII 3.000 146.780 UT5 518 518.000 Cool EII 3.000 172.553 UT6 Reach 1 214 213.000 Cool EII 3.000 71.242 UT6 Reach 2 205 205.000 Cool R 1.000 204.747 Total: 4,793.432 Notes: 1. Internal culvert crossing, and external break excluded from the credited stream footage. 2. No direct Credit for BMPS. 3. UT6 originates within an overhead powerline easement. The conservation easement extends up to UT6’s origin under the powerline, but proposed crediting does not begin until the stream exits the overhead easement. Table 1.1: Credit Summary Table Project Credits Restoration Level Stream Warm Cool Cold Restoration N/A 2,772.812 N/A Enhancement I N/A 140.566 N/A Enhancement II N/A 1,880.054 N/A Preservation N/A N/A N/A Totals N/A 4,793.432 N/A 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives The Site is providing numerous ecological benefits within the Yadkin River Basin. The Site was selected based on its potential to support the objectives and goals of multiple conservation and watershed planning documents such as the 2009 Upper Yadkin River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) and the 2015 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Communion’s (NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). Table 2 below describes the project goals and how functional uplift at the Site will be measured and monitored. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-3 Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Exclude livestock from stream channels. Install livestock fencing on all or portions of the Site and/or permanently remove livestock from all or portions of the Site to exclude livestock from stream channels and riparian areas. Reduced agricultural runoff and cattle trampling in streams. There is no required performance standard for this metric. Visually monitor fenced portions of Site to ensure no cattle are entering the easement. No cattle observed in easement in MY3. Improve stability of stream channels. Construct stream channels that will maintain stable cross- sections, patterns, and profiles over time. Reduction in sediment inputs from bank erosion, reduction of shear stress, and improved overall hydraulic function. Bank height ratios remain below 1.2 over the monitoring period. Visual assessments showing progression towards stability. 11 cross- section surveys in MY1, 2, 3, 5, & 7. In MY3, all cross sections have a BHR <1.2. Channels are stable have maintained the constructed riffle and pool sequence. Reconnect channels with floodplains. Reconstruct stream channels with appropriate bankfull dimensions and depth relative to the existing floodplain. Dispersion of high flows on the floodplain. Four bankfull events, occurring in separate years during the monitoring period. Venable Creek Reach 3- 1 Manual Crest Gage and 1 automated Crest Gage. In MY3 three bankfull events were recorded. In MY2, one bankfull event was recorded. The Site is on track to meet criteria. Improve instream habitat. Install habitat features such as constructed riffles, cover logs, and brush toes into restored/enhanced streams. Add woody materials to channel beds. Construct pools of varying depth. Increase and diversify available habitats for macroinvertebrates, fish, and amphibians leading to colonization and increase in biodiversity over time. There is no required performance standard for this metric. N/A N/A Restore and enhance native floodplain and streambank vegetation. Plant native tree and understory species in riparian zones and plant appropriate species on streambanks. Reduction in floodplain sediment inputs from runoff, increased bank stability, increased LWD and organic material in streams In open planting areas a survival rate of 320 stems per acre at MY3, 260 planted stems per acre at MY5, and 210 stems per acre at MY7. Height requirement is 6 feet at MY5 and 8 feet at MY7. 9 permanent vegetation plots, 5 mobile vegetation plots in MY1, 2, 3, 5, & 7. 14/14 (100%) of the vegetation plots met the MY3 success criteria of 320 stems per acre. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-4 Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Treat concentrated agricultural runoff Install agricultural BMPS in areas of concentrated agricultural runoff. Treatment of runoff before it enters the stream channel. There is no required performance standard for this metric. N/A N/A Permanently protect the project Site from harmful uses. Establish conservation easements on the Site. Protect Site from encroachment on the riparian corridor and direct impact to streams and wetlands. Prevent easement encroachment. Visually inspect the perimeter of the Site to ensure no easement encroachment is occurring. No easement encroachments were observed in MY3. 1.3 Project Attributes The Site’s immediate drainage area as well as the surrounding watershed has a long history of agricultural activity. Stream and wetland functional stressors for the Site were related to both historic and current land use practices. Major stream stressors for the Site pre-restoration included livestock trampling and fecal coliform inputs, lack of stabilizing stream bank and riparian vegetation, active erosion, and incision. The effects of these stressors resulted in channel instability, degraded water quality, and the loss of both aquatic and riparian habitat throughout the Site’s watershed when compared to reference conditions. The overall Site topography consists of steep, confined, and moderately confined valleys along the tributaries and flow into a more open and gradually sloped valley along the mainstem of Venable Creek. The project begins at a roadway culvert located at the intersection of Little Mountain Church Road and Venable Creek. The watersheds for UT3, UT4, and UT6 are roughly bound by Venable Farm Road to the west. All of the reach watersheds are encompassed by the Venable Creek watershed, which extends south past Little Mountain Church Road. The Site is typically defined by forested and agricultural land use with sporadic development of rural homes. Pre-construction conditions are outlined in Table 3 below and Table 8 of Appendix C. Table 3: Project Attributes Project Information Project Name Honey Mill Mitigation Site County Surry County Project Area (acres) 20.2 Project Coordinates 36.428619, -80.610836 Planted Acreage 5 acres (full planting) plus supplemental planting Project Watershed Summary Information Physiographic Province Piedmont River Basin Yadkin River USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03040101 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03040101110020 Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-5 Table 3: Project Attributes Project Watershed Summary Information DWR Sub-basin 03-07-03 2011 NLCD Land Use Classification Forest (65%), Cultivated (21%), Shrubland (5%), Urban (9%), Open Water (0%) Project Drainage Area (acres) 705 Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 0.8% Reach Summary Information Parameters Venable Creek UT1 UT2 UT2A UT2B UT3 UT4 UT5 UT6 R1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 Length of reach (linear feet) - post- restoration 91 211 1,647 1,958 273 742 332 893 80 784 306 440 518 213 205 Valley confinement Unconfined to Confined Drainage area (acres) 183 519 599 705 334 21 43 21 9 15 18 9 12 8 10 Perennial (P), Intermittent (I), Ephemeral (E) P P P P P I/ P P P P P P P I/ P P P NCDWR Water Quality Classification Class C Morphological Description (stream type) - Pre- Restoration N/A E4 E/C4 N/A E4b N/A C4b N/A N/A N/A E4b N/A N/A N/A A4 Morphological Description (stream type) - post- restoration N/A B4 C4 N/A C4b N/A B4 N/A N/A N/A C4b N/A N/A N/A A4 Evolutionary trend (Simon's Model) - Pre- Restoration N/A III IV N/A III N/A V->V N/A N/A N/A III N/A N/A N/A III Regulatory Considerations Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation Waters of the United States - Section 404 Yes Yes USACE Action ID #SAW-2018-01789 Waters of the United States - Section 401 Yes Yes DWR# 18-1271 Division of Land Quality (Erosion and Sediment Control) Yes Yes NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit NCG010000 Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion Document in Mitigation Plan Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-6 Regulatory Considerations Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion Document in Mitigation Plan Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) No N/A N/A FEMA Floodplain Compliance No N/A N/A Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A 1.4 Monitoring Year 3 Data Assessment Annual monitoring for MY3 was conducted between January and October 2023. The stream, vegetation, and hydrologic success criteria for the Site follows the approved success criteria presented in the Honey Mill Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2020). 1.4.1 Vegetation Assessment Supplemental Planting Background, IRT Approval, and Table 7 Densities Please note that Table 7 only summarizes stem densities for the species included in the approved Mitigation Plan Performance Standard. However, with IRT approval, Wildlands conducted supplemental planting in 2.5 acres of wetland across the Site to support woody stem growth in March of 2022. During the same planting, additional stems were also planted in the enhancement II reaches with existing forest (approximately 7 acres) per IRT request. All species approval and substitutions were documented in the MY1 Annual Monitoring Report (Wildlands, 2021) and MY2 Annual Monitoring Report (Wildlands, 2022). Please refer to the IRT approved planted supplemental stems species and quantities in Appendix F. The approved supplemental wetland and riparian species have been included in the vegetative survey and factored into the density and species composition for all vegetation data analysis as “Approved Post Mitigation Plan” species. To account for the IRT approved supplemental species please refer to Table 6 “Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard” densities discussed in the results below. Permanent and Mobile Vegetation Plot Results The MY3 permanent plot planted stem density using the “Post Mitigation Plan” performance standard ranged from 324 to 486 stems per acre. All densities within the permanent plots (9/9) exceeded the MY3 criteria of 320 stems per acre. The MY3 “Post Mitigation Plan” planted stem densities in random mobile vegetation plots ranged from 324 to 688 stems per acre and all 5 mobile plots met the MY3 density criteria. The mobile plots are distributed across the Site to provide representative data of the open planting riparian corridor. IRT Requested Forested Transect Results As requested by the IRT in MY2, two forested woody vegetation transects have been added to monitor the survivorship of the shaded supplemental planting and will be assessed through MY7 but are not held to the Site’s density or height requirements. Forested transect 1 was established on UT2 R1 and had a total stem count of 14 planted stems in MY2 and 13 stems in MY3 resulting in a 93% survival rate. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-7 Forested transect 2 was established on UT4 and had a total stem count of 11 stems in MY2 and 9 stems in MY3 for an 82% survival rate. Vegetation Data Results Summary Overall, 100% (14/14) vegetation plots met the MY3 density criteria. The average stem height was 3 feet and is on track to meet MY5 criteria. Additionally, the overall planted density for the Site in MY2 was 460 stems per acre. There was an average of 7 species present per plot in MY3, despite dense herbaceous cover in wetlands areas. Following the supplemental planting in March 2022 woody stem survivorship, vigor, and diversity have improved substantially across the Site when compared to the initial planting. Please see the Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) maps for permanent vegetation plot locations, MY3 mobile plot locations, and the March 2022 wetland and shaded supplemental planting areas. Vegetation plot and vegetation transect photographs are located in Appendix A. All vegetation summary data for plots and transects are in Appendix B. 1.4.2 Stream Assessment Riffle cross-sections (XS) on the restoration reaches should be stable and show little change in bankfull area, maximum depth ratio, and width-to-depth ratio. All riffle cross-sections should fall within the parameters defined for the designated stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Indicators of instability include a vertically incising thalweg and/or eroding channel banks. Morphological surveys for MY3 were conducted in June 2023. Cross-section survey results indicate that channel dimensions are stable and functioning as designed on all restoration reaches with minimal adjustments from MY1 to MY3. There are no indicators of stream instability across this Site in MY3. 1.4.3 Stream Hydrology Assessment An automated pressure transducer is being used to monitor for bankfull flow events. Henceforth, this device is referred to as an automatic “crest gage (CG)” of CG1. A manual crest gage located at XS7 is also being used to corroborate the results of CG1. At the end of the seven-year monitoring period, four or more bankfull flow events must have occurred in separate years. One bankfull event was recorded on Site in MY2 by CG1 on Venable Creek Reach 3. In MY3, three bankfull events were recorded by CG1 on 4/28/23, 6/20/23, and 8/6/23. Additionally, evidence of a bankfull event was captured at the manual crest gage in August 2023. Therefore, two bankfull events have been recorded in two separate years, the Site is on track to meet the performance criteria of four bankfull events occurring in separate years during the monitoring period. The 30th and 70th percentile data were collected from the Mount Airy 2 W, WETS station for years 1971-2020. As of August 2023, there has been an annual precipitation total of 30.95 inches per USGS 362416080334345 RAINGAGE AT ARARAT RIVER AT ARARAT, NC. The amount of precipitation the Site experiences is likely to fall in the average range for MY3. The manual crest gage and automatic crest gage locations are included on the MY3 CCPV Figures 1a - 1d. Please refer to Appendix D for hydrology summary data and gage plots, and the Supplemental Photographs located in Appendix A for bankfull documentation at the manual crest gage. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-8 1.4.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity Stream Stability The streams appear stable and functioning with vegetation developing on the channel banks. No areas of instability were noted during the MY3 visual assessment that took place on 8/30/23. Per IRT request, a few areas that appeared to be stabilizing in MY2 have continued to be monitored in MY3. The spring wetland seep in the right floodplain of Venable Creek Reach 3 provides important floodplain storage and is filling in with stabilizing vegetation. The pour point from the seep to the channel is stable. Wildlands will continue to monitor the seep in future monitoring years. UT2B (not for credit) which was dry during the MY2 Site walk, was flowing during the MY3 visual assessment on 8/30/23 and has remained stable. During dry times of the year, UT3 flows subsurface to the Venable Creek Reach 3 confluence. A marker was installed at the UT3 confluence to monitor vertical incision and no incision has occurred since installation in MY2. The meander bend above the UT3 confluence has continued to fill in with willows armoring the bank after being live staked in before the start of the MY3 growing season. All of these areas have been monitored and photographed in MY3. Please refer to Appendix A for the supplemental photolog. All culverts, crossing areas, and BMPs have remained stable with riparian vegetation filling in nicely in the surrounding riparian corridor. The visual assessment tables and Supplemental BMP photographs are located in Appendix A. Easement Exception and Fencing There are three areas of easement exceptions that were documented at baseline conditions and will remain on the CCPV maps throughout the seven-year monitoring period per IRT request. No easement encroachments were observed in MY3. Additional fencing was installed and any breaks in fencing were also repaired in September 2022. A full boundary inspection has been completed in MY3. All fences on the Site are intact and no encroachments were present as of October 2023. Invasive Species Management There were four established wooded areas with understory invasive species including multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Japanese barberry (Berberis thunbergia), and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense). within the project area. These areas occupy less than 2% of the easement and are located within the existing forests along UT2, UT2A, UT3, and UT6, as shown on CCPV Figures 1a - 1d. Treatments in MY2 were effective and there was a reduction in density of invasives within the mapped polygons from MY2 to MY3. In order to continue to keep the population in check throughout MY3, re- sprout treatments took place in May and July of 2023. Invasive areas will continue to be monitored for re-sprouts and treated as necessary. The open planting areas have established native herbaceous vegetation and are largely free of invasive species. See the vegetation condition assessment Table 5 in Appendix A. 1.5 Monitoring Year 3 Summary Overall, the Site has met the required stream success criteria for MY3. The average planted stem density was 460 stems per acre and all vegetation plots met the MY3 density requirement of 320 stems per acre. Geomorphic surveys indicate that cross-section bankfull dimensions closely match the baseline monitoring with some minor adjustments, and streams are functioning as intended. Three bankfull events were documented in MY3, and the Site is on track to meet the MY7 bankfull flow requirements. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-9 The MY3 visual assessment identified a few areas of invasive vegetation re-sprouts in wooded enhancement II reaches that were treated as needed throughout the year. The open planting areas have established native herbaceous vegetation and are largely free of invasive species. No stream areas of instability were documented. No easement encroachment was observed on the Site and boundary is intact. Wildlands will continue to monitor the Site and adaptive management measures will be implemented as necessary to benefit the ecological health of the Site. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 2-1 Section 2: METHODOLOGY Geomorphic data were collected following the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site: An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). All Integrated Current Condition Mapping was recorded using a Trimble handheld GPS with sub-meter accuracy and processed using Pathfinder and ArcGIS. Stream gages were installed in riffles and monitored quarterly. Hydrologic monitoring instrument installation and monitoring methods are in accordance with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE, 2003) standards. Vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008); however, vegetation data processing follows the NCDMS Vegetation Data Entry Tool and Vegetation Plot Data Table (NCDMS, 2020). Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 3-1 Section 3: REFERENCES Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream Restoration a Natural Channel Design Handbook. Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest, and Range Experiment Station. 61 p. North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2020. Vegetation Data Entry Tool and Vegetation Plot Data Table. Raleigh, NC. https://ncdms.shinyapps.io/Veg_Table_Tool/ NCDMS. 2017. DMS Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements, and Content Guidance. June 2017, Raleigh, NC. North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services and Interagency Review Team Technical Workgroup. 2018. Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter. Raleigh, NC. North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services and Interagency Review Team Technical Workgroup. 2021. Pebble Count Data Requirements. Raleigh, NC. NCDMS. 2009. Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities. Raleigh, NC. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2015. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC. North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR), 2015. Surface Water Classifications. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications. Phillips, K. 2021. Email correspondence, pebble counts MY1-MY7. 18 November 2021. Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books. Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 14(1):11-26. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)., October 2016. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resource Conservation District (NRCS), 2022. WETS Station, Mount Airy 2 W, Surry County, NC. https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/climate/navigate_wets.html. Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2022. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC. Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2021. Honey Mill Mitigation Site As-built Baseline Monitoring Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC. Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2021. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 1 Annual Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC. Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2020. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan. DMS, Raleigh, NC. [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [[ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ !A !A !A !5 !5 !5 !5!5 !5 !5!5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 GFGF GF GF GF GF GF GFGFGF GF GF GF GF GFGFGF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GFGF GF GF GF GF !P !P !P !P !P !P [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ GF GF GF GF Ve n a b l e C r e e k UT4 UT3 Reach 1 UT 1 UT2 UT2A Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 4 UT5 Reach 1 Reach 2 UT2B Ve n a b l e C r e e k 10 ft. Farm Path Exception Crossing Exception Figure 1d Figu r e 1 c Figure 1b Figure 1a UT6 Figure 1. Current Condition Plan View Key Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Surry County, NC ¹0 250 500125 Feet 2018 Aerial Photography GF GF !A !P !A !A Conservation Easement Project Parcels Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022) Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0 Acres, March 2022) Forested Vegetation Transects Vegetation Plots- Permanent (MY3) Meets Criteria Vegetation Plots- Mobile (MY3) Meets Criteria Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3) Multiflora Rose, Japanese Barberry, Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts) Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts) Easement Exception (MY0) 10 ft. Farm Path Exception Crossing Exception Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement I Stream Enhancement II No Stream Credit Design to As-Built Alignment Deviation Bankfull Non-Project Streams [Fence Line [New Fence Line Installed 2022 Overhead Utility Cross Sections !A Manual Crest Gage !A Automatic Crest Gage !A Barotroll GF BMP Photo Points GF Photo Points !P Reach Breaks [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ !A !A !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 !5 GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF !P !P XS3 X S 2 X S 1 XS4 X S 5 1 0 0 + 0 0 1 0 1 + 0 0 1 0 2 + 0 0 1 0 3 + 0 0 1 0 4 + 0 0 10 5 + 0 0 10 6 + 0 0 10 7 + 0 0 108+0 0 1 0 9 + 0 0 110+0 0 1 1 1 + 0 0 11 2 + 0 0 113 + 0 0 200+00 201+00 20 2 + 0 0 PP1 PP2 PP3 PP4 PP5 PP6 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 10 ft. Farm Path Exception (MY0) Ve n a b l e C r e e k UT1 V e n a b l e C r e e k VP2 VP1 MP1 Figure 1a. Current Condition Plan View Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Surry County, NC ¹ 2018 Aerial Photography 0 80 160 Feet Conservation Easement Project Parcels Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022) Vegetation Plots- Permanent (MY3) Meets Criteria Vegetation Plots- Mobile (MY3) Meets Criteria Easement Exception (MY0) 10 ft. Farm Path Exception Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement I Stream Enhancement II No Stream Credit Bankfull Non-Project Streams [Fence Line Overhead Utility Cross Sections GF Photo Points !P Reach Breaks 0 90 180 Feet [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ !A !A !A GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GF GF !P !P !P [[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ XS6 X S 7 XS8 1 0 9 + 0 0 110+0 0 1 1 1 + 0 0 11 2 + 0 0 113 + 0 0 1 1 4 + 0 0 115+ 0 0 11 6 + 0 0 117 + 0 0 118+0 0 119 + 0 0 300+00 301+ 0 0302+00 303+0030 4 + 0 0 305+00 306+00 307+ 0 0 308+ 0 0 30 9 + 0 0 310+00 3 1 1 + 0 0 400 + 0 0 401+0 0402+0 0 403 + 0 0 404+0 0 405+00 406+00 407 + 0 0 4 0 8 + 0 0 509+00 510+ 0 0 51 1 + 0 0 100+00 PP5 PP6 PP13 PP12 PP10 PP9 PP8 PP11 PP18 PP19 MT1 PP7 PP14 PP15 Manual CG Barotroll CG1 T-1 X S 9 XS10 UT2 UT2A Reach 3 Reach 1 Reach 2 UT2B Figure 1b 10 ft. Farm Path Exception (MY0) Crossing Exception Ve n a b l e C r e e k VP3 VP2 VP4 VP5 UT3 Reach 2 Reach 2 MP3 MP2 Figure 1b. Current Condition Plan View Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Surry County, NC ¹ Conservation Easement Project Parcels Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022) Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0 Acres, March 2022) Forested Vegetation Transects Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY3) Meets Criteria Mobile Vegetation Plots (MY3) Meets Criteria Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3) Multiflora Rose, Japanese Barberry, Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts) Easement Exception (MY0) 10 ft. Farm Path Exception Crossing Exception Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement II No Stream Credit Non-Project Streams Cross Sections Bankfull [Fence Line [New Fence Line Installed 2022 !P Reach Breaks !A Manual Crest Gage !A Automatic Crest Gage !A Barotroll GF Photo Points [ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ !A !A GF GF GFGF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF !P !P [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ GF GF XS6 11 7 + 0 0 118+00 11 9 + 0 0 120+00 12 1 + 0 0 12 2 + 0 0 1 2 3 + 0 0 1 2 4 + 0 0 12 5 + 0 0 126 + 0 0 1 2 7 + 0 0 12 8 + 0 0 500+0 0 501+00 502+00 503+00 504+00 505+0 0 506 + 0 0 507+ 0 0 508+0 0 509+ 0 0 510 + 0 0 51 1 + 0 0 600+0 0 601 + 0 0 602 + 0 0 603+00 604 + 0 0 100+00 PP17 PP16 PP18 PP19 PP20 PP21 PP22 MT2 PP7 CG1 XS9 XS10 T2 Ve n a b l e C r e e k UT4 UT3 Reach 3 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 4 Figure 1c VP4 VP6 VP5 UT3 Rea c h 2 MP3 MP4 Figure 1c. Current Condition Plan View Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Surry County, NC ¹0 100 200 Feet 2018 Aerial Photography Conservation Easement Project Parcels Existing Wetlands Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022) Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0 Acres, March 2022) Forested Vegetation Transects Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY3) Meets Criteria Mobile Vegetation Plots (MY3) Meets Criteria Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3) Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts) Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement II No Stream Credit Cross Sections Bankfull [Fence Line [New Fence Line Installed 2022 !A Automatic Crest Gage GF BMP Photo Points GF Photo Points !P Reach Breaks [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ !5 !5 !5!5 GF GF GFGF GF GFGF GF GF GF !P [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ GF Ve n a b l e C r e e k XS1 1 12 7 + 0 0 128 + 0 0 12 9 + 0 0 13 0 + 0 0 131 + 0 0 132+00 13 3 + 0 0 13 4 + 0 0 135 + 0 0 1 3 6 + 0 0 13 7 + 0 0 1 3 8 + 0 0 139+00 140+00 700+0 0 70 1 + 0 0 702+00 70 3 + 0 0 7 0 4 + 0 0 800+00 801+00 802+0 0 803+0 0 804+00 805+00 PP22 MT2 PP24 PP23 PP25 PP26PP27 PP28 PP29 UT6 UT5 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 4 VP7 VP8 VP9 MP4 MP5 Figure 1d. Current Condition Plan View Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Surry County, NC ¹0 90 180 Feet 2018 Aerial Photography Conservation Easement Project Parcels Internal Crossing Existing Wetlands Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022) Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0 Acres, March 2022) Vegetation Plots- Permanent (MY3) Meets Criteria Vegetation Plots- Mobile (MY3) Meets Criteria Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3) Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts) Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement II No Stream Credit Design to As-Built Alignment Deviation Bankfull Non-Project Streams [Fence Line [New Fence Line Installed 2022 Overhead Utility Cross Sections GF BMP Photo Points GF Photo Points !P Reach Breaks APPENDIX A. Visual Assessment Data Table 4a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023 Venable Creek R2 141 282 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% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 5 5 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100% Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023 Venable Creek R3 1,647 3,294 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% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 15 15 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 18 18 100% Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As‐built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As‐built Amount of Unstable Footage Table 4b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023 UT1 273 546 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% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 6 6 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100% Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023 UT2 R2 342 684 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% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 15 15 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100% % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As‐built Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure Totals: Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As‐built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Table 4c. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023 UT3 R2 306 612 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% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 11 11 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 5 5 100% Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023 UT6 R2 205 410 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% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 6 6 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. N/A N/A N/A Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As‐built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As‐built Amount of Unstable Footage Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023 Planted Acreage 4.97 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold (ac) Combined Acreage % of Planted Acreage Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.0.10 0 0% Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria.0.10 0 0% 00% Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 0 0% 0.0 0% Date of visual assessment: October, 2023 Easement Acreage 20.20 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold (ac) Combined Acreage % of Easement Acreage Invasive Areas of Concern Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short‐term or community structure for existing communities. Invasive species included in summation above should be identified in report summary. 0.10 0.42 2% 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 Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Total Cumulative Total 0% STREAM PHOTOGRAPHS PHOTO POINT 1 Venable Creek R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 1 Venable Creek R1 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 2 UT1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 2 UT1 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 3 Venable Creek R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 3 Venable Creek R2 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 4 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 4 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 5 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 5 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 6 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 6 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 7 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 7 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 8 UT2 R1 Headcut – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 8 UT2 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 9 UT2 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 9 UT2 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 10 UT2 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 10 UT2 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 11 UT2A – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 11 UT2A – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 12 UT2A – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 12 UT2A – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 16 UT3 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 16 UT3 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1– downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 19 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 19 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 20 UT4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 20 UT4 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 21 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 21 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 22 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 22 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 23 UT5 Headcut – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 23 UT5 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 24 UT5 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 24 UT5 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 25 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 25 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 26 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 26 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 27 UT6 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 27 UT6 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 28 UT6 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 28 UT6 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 29 Venable Creek R4 Ford Crossing – (03/23/2023) CULVERT CROSSING & BMP PHOTOGRAPHS Venable Creek R1 Culvert – Outlet (03/23/2023) Venable Creek R2 Crossing - Looking Upstream (03/23/2023) Venable Creek R2 Crossing - Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) Venable Creek R4 Crossing - Looking Upstream (03/23/2023) Venable Creek R4 Crossing - Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) UT1 Culvert – Outlet (03/23/2023) UT2 Crossing Culvert – Inlet (03/23/2023) UT2 Crossing Culvert – Outlet (03/23/2023) UT3 BMP – Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) UT4 BMP – Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) UT6 BMP – Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) MATURE TREE PHOTOGRAPHS Mature Tree Photo Point 1 (Northeast) – Venable Creek Reach 3 (08/30/2023) Mature Tree Photo Point 2 (Northeast) – Venable Creek Reach 4 (08/30/2023) SUPPLEMENTAL PHOTOGRAPHS UT2B‐ channel confluence with mainstem upstream (08/30/2023) UT3‐ Subsurface Flow to Venable Creek stable upstream (08/30/2023) VC R3‐ Meander Bend stabilizing above UT3 confluence after live staking in winter 2022 (08/30/2023) VC R3‐ Wetland seep filling in with vegetation and forming vernal pool (08/30/2023) VC R3‐ Wetland Seep to Main Channel on right floodplain stable (08/30/2023) VC R3‐ bankfull event recorded at manual gage (08/30/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 1 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 2 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 3 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 4 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 5 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 6 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 7 (08/30/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 08 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 9 (08/08/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 1 (08/08/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 2 (08/08/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 3 (08/08/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 4 (08/08/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 5 (08/08/2023) FORESTED VEGETATION TRANSECT PHOTOGRAPHS FORESTED VEGETATION TRANSECT 1 (08/08/2023) FORESTED VEGETATION TRANSECT 2 (08/08/2023) APPENDIX B. Vegetation Plot Data Table 6a. Vegetation Plot Data Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 5 2021‐03‐01 2022‐03‐21 2023‐08‐08 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 111122 1111 33 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1111 Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FACU 11331111 Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 22 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 332211 112211 11 Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1 112211 Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 1 1 11222211 Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU 3 3 1 1 111122 11 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 1111 Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Shrub UPL Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 112233222222221112 Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU 1 1 Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 1 1 1 1 2222 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 11 Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 2211 2233 Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 1111 22 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 22 11 Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 Sum Performance Standard 12 12 9 9 12 12 9 9 10 10 11 11 13 13 8 8 10 11 Post Mitigation Plan Species Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 2 2 1 1 2211 Sum Proposed Standard 12 12 9 9 14 14 9 9 11 11 11 11 13 13 10 10 11 12 12 9 12 9 10 11 13 8 11 486 364 486 364 405 445 526 324 445 777687867 25 22 21 22 18 18 15 30 25 235445325 000000000 12 9 14 9 11 11 13 10 12 486 364 567 364 445 445 526 405 486 778697878 25 22 21 22 18 18 15 30 25 235445335 000000000 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. Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Indicator 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 6b. Vegetation Plot Data Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 5 2021‐03‐01 2022‐03‐21 2023‐08‐08 0.0247 Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Veg Plot 5 R Total Total Total Total Total Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 3 1 1 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1 3 Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FACU Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 3 Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1 Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC 1 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 2 2 2 Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU 1 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Shrub UPL 2 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 3 5 5 2 Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 2 1 2 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 6 Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1 Sum Performance Standard 8 7 8 12 17 Post Mitigation Plan Species Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 2 4 Sum Proposed Standard 8 9 12 12 17 8781217 324 283 324 486 688 54 447 38 33 42 42 35 32 432 00 000 8 9 12 12 17 324 364 486 486 688 55 547 38 33 42 42 35 33 432 00 000 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. Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Indicator Status 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 Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Vegetation Plot Data DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Scientific Name Performance Standard Approval MY2 Stems MY3 Stems Ilex opaca Approved Mit Plan 4 4 Lindera benzoin Approved Mit Plan 2 1 Platanus occidentalis Approved Mit Plan 3 3 Oxydendrum arboreum Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Liriodendron tulipifera Approved Mit Plan 3 2 Fagus grandifolia Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Diospyros virginiana Approved Mit Plan 0 1 TOTAL STEM COUNT: 14 13 TOTAL SPECIES COUNT: 66 AVERAGE PLOT HEIGHT (Meters) 0.5 0.7 Scientific Name Performance Standard Approval MY2 Stems MY2 Stems Morus rubra Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Carpinus carolinana Approved Mit Plan 2 1 Cornus florida Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Ulmus americana Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Lindera benzoin Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Acer negundo Approved Mit Plan 2 1 Prunus serotina Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Platanus occidentalis Approved Mit Plan 1 1 Quercus rubra Approved Mit Plan 1 1 TOTAL STEM COUNT: 11 9 TOTAL SPECIES COUNT: 99 AVERAGE PLOT HEIGHT (Meters) 0.6 0.7 Table 6c. Forested Vegetation Transect Table Transect 1: UT2 Transect 2: UT4 *Transects represent understory planting and are not held to density or height requirements per MY1 IRT site walk comments (8/16/2022). Table 7. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 486 2 7 0 364 3 7 0 486* 5 7 0 526 2 8 0 364 3 7 0 405* 4 6 0 486 2 7 0 405 2 8 0 364 3 5 0 567 2 8 0 526 2 10 0 445 2 6 0 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 364 4 6 0 405* 4 8 0 445 5 7 0 324 3 5 0 405* 2 8 0 283 3 6 0 202 2 4 0 324 2 7 0 324 2 6 0 567 2 9 0 364 2 8 0 607 2 10 0 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 526 3 8 0 324* 2 6 0 445* 5 7 0 486 3 9 0 364 2 6 0 486* 3 6 0 526 2 9 0 486 2 8 0 243 2 4 0 526 2 9 0 607 2 9 0 405 2 9 0 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 324 3 5 0 283* 2 4 0 324* 4 4 0 324 5 4 0 607* 4 5 0 405* 2 5 0 81 2 2 0 445 2 10 0 405 2 5 0 445 2 7 0 567 2 11 0 445 2 8 0 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 486 3 4 0 688 2 7 0 445*2 7 0 729 2 10 0 405 2 4 0 607 2 8 0 567 2 10 0 688 2 8 0 Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F. 1. Veg Plot Group 2R met criteria in MY3 with a density of 364 Stems/Ac. when "Post‐Mitigation Plan" IRT approved species (including March 2022 supplemental stems) were included in table 7. *For stem densities in plots that inlcude post‐mitigation plan approved species planted during the March 2022 supplemental planting please refer to table 7 for the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" referenced in the text. Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F Veg Plot Group 1 R Veg Plot Group 2 R1 Veg Plot Group 3 R Veg Plot Group 4 R Veg Plot Group 5 R Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 APPENDIX C. Stream Geomorphology Data Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Parameter Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft)1 10.5 10.8 2 1 1 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 90 113 2 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1.6 1.7 2 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 2.2 2.3 2 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 16.9 18.1 2 1 1 1 1 Width/Depth Ratio 1 6.1 6.9 2 1 1 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio1 1 8.6 10.5 2 1 1 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 1.3 1.6 2 1 1 1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 2 1 1 1 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2 Parameter Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 1 1 1 1 1 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 1 1 1 1 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2 Parameter Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft)1 14.6 15.8 3 1 1 1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 93 104 3 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1.1 1.2 3 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 1.8 2.0 3 1 1 1 1 Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 1 16.0 19.4 3 1 1 1 1 Width/Depth Ratio 1 12.8 14.2 3 1 1 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio1 1 6.0 6.7 3 1 1 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 1 3 1 1 1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 3 1 1 1 1 Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)78 100 3 Sinuosity Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2 1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross-sect 2. Channel slope is calculated from the surface of the channel bed rather than water surface. (---): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable 14.8 33 0.7 5.0 1.0 17.7 1.0 19.0 6.2 51 0.5 0.7 2.8 13.5 8.2 1.0 6.2 1.0 14.8 9.3 57 0.5 0.8 4.8 17.8 6.1 20.2 11.1 1.0 17.1 12.1 75 0.9 1.6 11.0 1.0 2.0+ 1.0-1.1 24.1 5 --- 1.4+ 1.0-1.1 8.5 11.2 5.6 11 0.5 --- 2.6 12.1 9.5 4.9 10 0.4 --- 1.9 12.3 2.0+ 1.0-1.1 3.1 1.0-1.1 --- 11.5 25 1.0 --- 11.1 11.8 2.2+ 1.0-1.1 16.4 13.8 1.0-1.1 --- 15.6 34 1.1 --- 17.3 14.1 8 1.1 3.7 2.6 8.5 15.0 6.4 1.5 3.1 1.4 30 1.1 --- 24.1 4.2 27 0.9 1.1 3.8 4.7 9.5 4.0 11 0.3 0.4 1.2 12.7 2.7 1.01.6 40.6 13.3 8.7 69 1.1 1.6 9.8 7.6 10.6 46 1.5 2.0 15.6 7.2 0.0245 B4 4.5 15.0 68 0.0152 0.0232 0.0440 0.0387 0.0869 1.03 1.31 1.20 1.05 1.05 1.05 142 54 24 12 19 C4 C4b B4 B4 A4 6.6 0.4 3.0 15.013.4 1.3 2.1 As-Built/ Baseline Venable Creek R2 Venable Creek R3 UT1 UT2 R2 UT3 R2 UT6 R2 0.0230 0.0140 0.0210 0.0380 0.0340 0.0822 1.08 1.29 1.14 1.02 1.02 1.00 75 83 52 10 6 4 B4 C4 C4b B4 B4 A4 0.0870 Pre-Existing Condition Venable Creek R2 E4 75 1.08 0.0190 Venable Creek R3 E/C4 83 1.14 0.0136 Design Venable Creek R2 Venable Creek R3 UT1 UT2 R2 UT3 R2 UT6 R2 1.01 2.1 UT1 UT2 R2 652 UT6 R2 A4 0.8 4 C4b UT3 R2 4.3 E4b 10 E4b 3.7 0.0212 0.0352 1.471.04 2.7 1.6 7.9 24.7 2.0+2.2+ 0.3 1.2 1.18 0.0369 Table 9. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters ‐ Cross‐Section) Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1039.2 1039.3 1039.3 1039.3 1034.6 1034.7 1034.7 1034.7 Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1037.6 1037.5 1037.6 1037.7 1037.6 1037.7 1037.7 1037.8 1032.5 1032.6 1032.6 1032.4 LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1039.7 1039.7 1039.7 1039.7 1039.2 1039.3 1039.3 1039.3 1034.6 1034.7 1034.5 1034.6 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.1 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.2 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)18.1 16.7 17.0 14.5 11.0 11.1 10.7 10.5 20.2 19.3 18.5 19.1 Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1024.1 1024.0 1024.1 1024.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1021.4 1021.6 1021.3 1021.5 1022.3 1022.2 1022.3 1022.2 1013.1 1013.0 1013.1 1013.0 LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1024.7 1024.8 1024.7 1024.7 1024.1 1024.0 1024.1 1024.1 1016.3 1016.3 1016.3 1016.3 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)3.3 3.2 3.5 3.1 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.3 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)33.4 33.6 35.9 34.1 17.1 18.1 17.5 18.3 33.3 35.0 35.9 36.1 Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 1015.9 1015.9 1015.9 1015.9 1020.0 1020.4 1020.4 1020.4 1011.6 1011.6 1011.6 1011.6 Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1013.9 1013.9 1013.8 1013.8 1019.1 1019.4 1019.3 1019.2 1009.8 1009.8 1009.9 1009.8 LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1015.9 1015.9 1015.8 1015.8 1020.0 1020.1 1020.1 1020.1 1011.6 1011.7 1011.7 1011.5 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.8 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)19.4 18.5 18.6 19.9 4.8 2.9 3.1 2.9 16.0 16.8 16.7 15.0 Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 1011.9 1012.0 1012.0 1012.0 998.6 998.7 998.7 998.7 Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.9 Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1011.2 1011.2 1011.2 1011.2 997.9 998.1 998.0 998.0 LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1011.9 1011.9 1011.9 1011.9 998.6 998.6 998.6 998.6 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.7 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2.8 2.4 2.2 2.0 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.6 1Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As‐built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent year's bankfull elevation. UT6 R2 Cross‐Section 11 Riffle Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 4 Pool UT2 R2 Cross‐Section 8 Riffle 2LTOB 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. Venable Creek R3 Cross Section 9 Riffle UT3 R2 Cross Section 10 Riffle UT1 Cross‐Section 1 Pool UT1 Cross‐Section 2 Riffle Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 5 Riffle Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 6 Pool Venable Creek R2 Cross‐Section 3 Riffle Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 7 Riffle Bankfull Dimensions 14.5 x-section area (ft.sq.) 15.5 width (ft) 0.9 mean depth (ft) 2.0 max depth (ft) 16.6 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.9 hydraulic radius (ft) 16.5 width-depth ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 1-UT1 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1036 1038 1040 1042 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 200+77 Pool MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 10.5 x-section area (ft.sq.) 12.0 width (ft) 0.9 mean depth (ft) 1.5 max depth (ft) 12.5 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.8 hydraulic radius (ft) 13.6 width-depth ratio 74.9 W flood prone area (ft) 6.3 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 2-UT1 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1036 1038 1040 1042 20 30 40 50 60 70 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 201+02 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 19.1 x-section area (ft.sq.) 14.3 width (ft) 1.3 mean depth (ft) 2.2 max depth (ft) 15.3 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.2 hydraulic radius (ft) 10.7 width-depth ratio 68.1 W flood prone area (ft) 4.8 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 3-Venable Creek R2 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1032 1034 1036 1038 20 30 40 50 60 70 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 102+85 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 34.1 x-section area (ft.sq.) 20.9 width (ft) 1.6 mean depth (ft) 3.1 max depth (ft) 22.2 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.5 hydraulic radius (ft) 12.8 width-depth ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 4-Venable Creek R3 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1020 1022 1024 1026 0 10 20 30 40 50 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 107+61 Pool MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 18.3 x-section area (ft.sq.) 16.2 width (ft) 1.1 mean depth (ft) 1.9 max depth (ft) 16.8 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.1 hydraulic radius (ft) 14.3 width-depth ratio 103.7 W flood prone area (ft) 6.4 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 5-Venable Creek R3 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1021 1023 1025 1027 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 107+94 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 36.1 x-section area (ft.sq.) 20.0 width (ft) 1.8 mean depth (ft) 3.3 max depth (ft) 21.7 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.7 hydraulic radius (ft) 11.1 width-depth ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 6-Venable Creek R3 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1012 1014 1016 1018 10 20 30 40 50 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 114+68 Pool MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)Bankfull Bankfull Dimensions 19.9 x-section area (ft.sq.) 15.5 width (ft) 1.3 mean depth (ft) 2.1 max depth (ft) 16.3 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.2 hydraulic radius (ft) 12.1 width-depth ratio 93.1 W flood prone area (ft) 6.0 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 7-Venable Creek R3 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1013 1015 1017 1019 20 30 40 50 60 70 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 115+18 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 2.9 x-section area (ft.sq.) 5.7 width (ft) 0.5 mean depth (ft) 0.9 max depth (ft) 6.1 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.5 hydraulic radius (ft) 11.2 width-depth ratio 57.5 W flood prone area (ft) 10.1 entrenchment ratio 0.7 low bank height ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 8-UT2 R2 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1018 1020 1022 0 10 20 30 40 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 310+51 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 15.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.) 13.9 width (ft) 1.1 mean depth (ft) 1.8 max depth (ft) 14.6 wetted perimeter (ft) 1.0 hydraulic radius (ft) 13.0 width‐depth ratio 101.7 W flood prone area (ft) 7.3 entrenchment ratio 1.0 low bank height ratio Survey Date: 06/2023 Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross‐Section 9‐Venable Creek R3 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross‐Section Plots 1009 1011 1013 1015 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 El e v a t i o n (f t ) Width (ft) 117+20 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 2.0 x-section area (ft.sq.) 5.7 width (ft) 0.3 mean depth (ft) 0.7 max depth (ft) 6.0 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.3 hydraulic radius (ft) 16.4 width-depth ratio 50.0 W flood prone area (ft) 8.7 entrenchment ratio 0.8 low bank height ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 10-UT3 R2 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 1011 1012 1013 10 20 30 40 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 510+87 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area Bankfull Dimensions 2.6 x-section area (ft.sq.) 6.5 width (ft) 0.4 mean depth (ft) 0.7 max depth (ft) 6.7 wetted perimeter (ft) 0.4 hydraulic radius (ft) 16.3 width-depth ratio 36.3 W flood prone area (ft) 5.6 entrenchment ratio 0.9 low bank height ratio Survey Date:06/2023 Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering View Downstream Cross-Section 11-UT6 R2 Monitoring Year 3 - 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Cross-Section Plots 997 999 1001 0 10 20 30 El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Width (ft) 803+64 Riffle MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023) Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area APPENDIX D. Hydrology Data Reach MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027) Venable Creek R3 None 11/6/2022 4/28/2023, 6/20/2023, 8/6/2023 MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027) Annual Precip Total (Inches)1 35.67 46.89 30.95* WETS 30th Percentile (Inches)32.45 32.45 32.45 WETS 70th Percentile (Inches)58.85 58.85 58.85 Type of Year2 Average Average * 30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from WETS Station: MOUNT AIRY 2 W, NC for years 1971‐2020 1. Precipitation data collected from USGS 362416080334345 RAINGAGE AT ARARAT RIVER AT ARARAT, NC. The gage is located approximately 4 miles from the Site. 2. Type of year refers to amount of rainfall in the current year compared to the average percentiles i.e. Below Average, Average, Above Average. * Annual precipitation total was collected until 8/30/2023. Data will be updated in MY4. Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Table 10. Bankfull Events Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Table 11. Rainfall Summary Recorded Bankfull Flow Events Plot Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1006 1007 1008 1009 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n (i n ) El e v a t i o n (f t ) Monitoring Year 3 ‐2023 Daily Precipitation Water Level Thalweg Bankfull 30‐Day Rolling Precip Total 30th & 70th Percentile Honey Mill: Crest Gage #1 (Venable Creek, Reach #3) APPENDIX E. Project Timeline and Contact Info Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023 Seed Mix Sources Bare Roots Live Stakes Herbaceous Plugs October 2023 N/A N/A October 2021 Monitoring, POC Kristi Suggs (704) 332.7754 x.110 Green Resource LLC Nursery Stock Suppliers Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. Wetland Plants Inc. Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Fremont, NC 27830 Seeding Contractor Main Stream Earthworks, Inc. 631 Camp Dan Valley Rd Reidsville, NC 27320 Reidsville, NC 27320 Planting Contractor Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. PO Box 1197 March 2022 704.332.7754 Construction Contractors Main Stream Earthworks, Inc. 631 Camp Dan Valley Rd Designers Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Aaron Earley, PE, CFM 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 Encroachment 1Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed. Table 13. Project Contact Table Year 7 Monitoring Stream Survey Encroachment N/A N/A Vegetation Survey Remediation Remediation Encroachment Encroachment Year 6 Monitoring Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Year 5 Monitoring Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Remediation Encroachment September 2022 January 2022 Invasive Treatment Encroachment Encroachment March‐ October 2021 Year 4 Monitoring Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Year 3 Monitoring Stream Survey June 2023 Vegetation Survey August 2023 Invasive Treatment May & July 2023 Remediation June 2022 Vegetation Survey August 2022 Year 1 Monitoring Stream Survey Vegetation Survey Remediation December 2021 N/A Table 12. Project Activity and Reporting History Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Completion or Delivery 404 Permit September 2020 October 2020 Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments1 February 2021 February 2021 Construction November 2020 ‐ February 2021 February 2021 Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area1 February 2021 February 2021 Fencing Installation/ Repair October 2022 N/A Mitigation Plan August 2019 ‐ October 2020 October 2020 Final Design ‐ Construction Plans September 2020 September 2020 Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments March 2021 March 2021 Baseline Monitoring (Year 0) Stream Survey March ‐ June 2021 June 2021 Vegetation Survey March 2021 Remediation Encroachment N/A N/A Year 2 Monitoring Stream Survey APPENDIX F. Supplemental Planting March 2022 Honey Mill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100083 Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2022 Species Common Name Max Spacing (ft)Indiv. Spacning (ft)Min. Caliper Size Stratum Percentage Wetland Indicator Code Quantity Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 10% FACW 76 Carya cordiformis Bitternut Hickory 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FACU 38 Ulmus rubra Slippery Elm 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FAC 38 Carpinus caroliniana* Ironwood 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FAC 38 Diospyros virginiana Persimmon 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 10%FAC 76 Morus rubra*Red Mulberry 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38 Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FAC 38 Eunoymus americanus*American Strawberry Bush 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Shrub 5%FAC 38 Calycanthus floridus* Sweetshrub 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Shrub 5%FACU 38 Hamamelis virginiana* Witch Hazel 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38 Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FACU 38 Fagus grandifolia American Beech 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 7%FACU 53 Quercus alba White Oak 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 8%FACU 61 Lindera benzoin*Spicebush 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Shrub 5%FAC 38 Cornus florida*Flowering Dogwood 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38 Ozydendron arboreum* Sourwood 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%UPL 38 Ilex opaca*American Holly 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38 100%Total 760 Species Common Name Max Spacing (ft)Indiv. Spacing (ft)Min. Caliper Stratum Percentage Wetland Indicator Code Quantity Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 12 6 x 12 0.25" Canopy 15% FACW 164 Ulmus americana American Elm 12 6 x 12 0.25" Canopy 10% FACW 109 Sambucus canadensis* Elderberry 12 6 x 12 0.25" Subconopy 10%FAC 109 Acer negundo Boxelder 12 6 x 12 0.25" Canopy 10%FAC 109 Cephalanthus occidentalis* Buttonbush 12 6 x 12 0.25" Shrub 5%OBL 54 Alnus serrulata*Tag Alder 12 6 x 12 0.25" Subconopy 10%OBL 109 60%Total 654 Live Stake Salix nigra Black Willow 12 6 x 12 0.5" cal. Canopy 20%OBL 218 Salix sericea*Silky Willow 12 6 x 12 0.5" cal. Subconopy 12%OBL 130 Cornus amomum*Silky dogwood 12 6 x 12 0.5" cal. Subconopy 8% FACW 88 40%Total 436 * Subcanopy or shrub species ‐ not held to monitoring height requirements Italicized species were approved post‐mitigation plan IRT Approved Planted Supplemental Stems: Species and Quantities Shaded Bare Roots (7.0 AC) Wetland Planting Zone (2.5 AC)