20221493 Ver 1_2024-02-21 EMH Farm MY0_Response to Comments_DWR#2022-1493v1_20240221

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions P a g e | 1
604 Macon Place, Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
[e-mail]

February 21, 2024
Ms. Katie Merritt
Nutrient Offset & Buffer Banking Coordinator
NCDEQ Division of Environmental Quality
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27620

Re: EMH Farm - Response to Comments for MY-0 As-Built &
Baseline Monitoring Report / NCDWR Project No. 2022-1493v1
Dear Ms. Merritt,
Please find below the response to comments provided on January 9, 2024 for the
EMH Farm MY-0 As-Built and Baseline Monitoring Report.:

Page 1:
1. Plots 1,2,10 (3 of 19) have at least 1 species that is representing more than 50% of the
planted stems in the plot. This could suggest that these areas were not planted as
diverse as the rest of the project area. However, since the Provider planted 11 species
instead of just the required 4 species, DWR is not concerned that the project will fail
the diversity performance standard of having at least 4 species represented across the
site. Considering that only 3 of the 19 are failing the diversity standard, DWR will not
requiring any supplemental planting. It is important to note, that mixing stems before
planting is a good measure to ensure better diversity site wide.
Response: Noted.

2. DWR noticed an abundance of sycamores planted adjacent to Plot 1 and has
requested that any existing or future supplemental planting efforts along that side of
the project not include Sycamore in the planting plan.
Response: Noted. Please additional response to Comment for Page 10 (#1) below.

3. No Height data was included in the AsBuilt Report, and is necessary to be included.
Average heights/plot are acceptable for an asbuilt report. in response to this comment,
provide DWR with a table showing the average heights of planted stems in the plots.
Response: Table 6. Vegetation Height and Vigor Data was added to Appendix C in
the monitoring report. Individual stem height/vigor as well as average height/vigor
per plot are shown.

4. The Survey is not signed by the surveyor. Therefore the survey does not meet the
requirements in your MBI. Provide DWR with a signed survey.
Response: This submittal contains a digitally signed as-built survey.

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions P a g e | 2
604 Macon Place, Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
[e-mail]

Page 10:
1. No proposed planting plan was included in the Appendix. Submit a table showing
your planting plan. Exclude sycamores from the list. Also, Willow Oak seem to be
overly prevalent near and around Plot 2 based on the Plot data included in the report.
It is suggested that Willow Oak not be planted on the side near Plot 2 to expand
diversity potential on that side of the project area.
Response: As noted in section 5.1, Clearwater intended to replant all three areas prior
to MY1 monitoring, however, during the Fall of 2023 and MY1, several additional
areas of planted stem mortality were observed on-site. As such, Clearwater elected to
hold off replanting until after MY1 measurements to use the MY1 data to pinpoint
additional areas of planted stem mortality, likely due to the planting period and
subsequent drought conditions. The three transect areas and additional areas proposed
for supplemental planting total approximately 10.55-acres. Due to the size of the total
area proposed for supplemental planting (10.55-acres) Sycamores are proposed within
the supplemental planting list, however efforts will be made to ensure Sycamores are
not planted within the three transect areas noted. Additionally, efforts will be made to
not plant Willow Oaks near Plot 2. An adaptive management plan is proposed for Q1
2024 that includes planting 6,070 bare-root stems across 10.55 acres. The adaptive
management plan is detailed in Appendix D with a Figure of the proposed planting
areas (Appendix D). Vegetation transects will be performed in planted areas during
MY2 monitoring to document sufficient planting.

Page 16:
1. When determining whether a Plot meets performance criteria, the Plan and the MBI
indicate there are 2 criteria that plots must meet. 1) Diversity - "no one stem
represents more than 50% of the stems in the plot" and 2) Density - 260 stems/acre.
There are 3 plots not meeting the Diversity performance standard: 1, 2 and 10. make
sure to represent this accurately in the monitoring reports.
Response: Figure 2. CCPV has been updated to indicate plots 1, 2, and 10 are not
meeting MY0 success criteria, and the vegetation monitoring narrative has been
updated to indicate that while all plots are meeting the stem density requirement,
these 3 plots are not meeting the diversity success criteria. Additionally, a footnote
was added to Table 5 indicating that these plots did not meet the species diversity
performance standard.

Page 17:
1. This legend stated fencing "to be" removed. Has it not been removed already?
Response: This fence was removed during riparian restoration activities. Figure 3 has
been updated accordingly.

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions P a g e | 3
604 Macon Place, Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
[e-mail]

Page 19:
1. No signature. need signature that this survey is accurate
Response: This submittal contains a digitally signed as-built survey.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions at 919-624-6901.
Sincerely,

Kevin Yates

As-Built and Baseline Monitoring Report

EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Guilford County, NC

Randleman Watershed – Cape Fear River Basin

NCDWR Project No. 2022-1493v1

Sponsored by:
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions

POC: Kevin Yates
Ph: 919-624-6901
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

POC: Grant Lewis
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603

February 2024

As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report Table of Contents page i
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4
2.0 BANK PARCEL LOCATION .................................................................................................. 4
2.1 BANK PARCEL BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................ 5
2.2 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................. 5
3.0 RESTORATION ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................ 6
3.1 RIPARIAN AREA RESTORATION ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................... 6
3.2 RIPARIAN BUFFER ENHANCEMENT ................................................................................................. 7
3.3 RIPARIAN BUFFER PRESERVATION ACTIVITIES ................................................................................... 8
3.4 BANK PARCEL PROTECTION .......................................................................................................... 8
4.0 MITIGATION POTENTIAL .................................................................................................. 8
5.0 MONITORING PROTOCOL AND SUCCESS CRITERIA ............................................................ 9
5.1 MONITORING PROTOCOL ............................................................................................................. 9
5.2 SUCCESS CRITERIA .................................................................................................................... 10
5.3 BANK PARCEL MAINTENANCE ..................................................................................................... 10
6.0 MITIGATION CREDITS, CREDIT RELEASE, & SERVICE AREA ............................................... 10
6.1 CREDIT GENERATION ................................................................................................................. 10
6.2 CREDIT RELEASE ....................................................................................................................... 11
6.3 SERVICE AREA .......................................................................................................................... 11
7.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 13

As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report Table of Contents page ii
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
TABLES

Table 1. Ecological and Water Quality Goals ................................................................................. 6
Table 2. Bare-Root Planted Stems ................................................................................................. 6
Table 3A. Permanent Seed Mix ...................................................................................................... 7
Table 3B. Temporary Seed Mix ...................................................................................................... 7
Table 4. Project Credits ................................................................................................................. 12

As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report Table of Contents page iii
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
APPENDICES

Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Site Location and Service Area
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Figure 3. Aerial with Restoration Activities Completed

Appendix B. As-Built Survey Plat

Appendix C. Baseline Vegetation Data
Table 5. Total Stems by Plot and Species
Table 6. Vegetation Height and Vigor Data
Vegetation Plot Photos

Appendix D. NCDWR As-Built Correspondence and Adaptive Management Plan
EMH As-Built Walk-Through Notes Correspondence
2023 Adaptive Management Plan with Planting Plan

As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 4
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions, LLC (Sponsor) is pleased to provide this As-Built and Baseline
Monitoring Report for the EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank (Bank Parcel). The Bank Parcel was
made under the terms and conditions of the accepted EMH Farm Mitigation Banking Instrument
(MBI). The Bank Parcel was designed to provide riparian buffer mitigation credits (RBC) for
unavoidable impacts due to development within the Randleman watershed of the Cape Fear
River Basin per the Randleman Nutrient Strategy (15A NCAC 02B .0724). The Bank Parcel was
planned and designed according to the MBI with NCDWR, and the Consolidated Mitigation Rule
15A NCAC 02B.0295, which became effective on November 1, 2015.

Stormwater runoff from the Bank Parcel drains directly to unnamed tributaries to the Deep River,
just upstream from the Randleman Reservoir. According to the final Cape Fear River Basin
Restoration Priorities (NCEEP 2009), this watershed should be targeted for restoration to protect
the critical area that ultimately drains into the WS-IV water supply at Randleman Reservoir.
Mitigation activities will reduce sediment and nutrient levels and improve water quality within
the Bank Parcel and their downstream watersheds. The Bank Parcel includes the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of riparian areas along three unnamed tributaries and two
ephemeral channels in Guilford County, NC. The sole purpose of the Bank Parcel is to provide
RBC to mitigate buffer impacts within the Randleman Lake Watershed, Hydrologic Unit Code
(HUC) 03030003 and the NCDWR Sub-basin 03-06-08 of the Cape Fear River Basin.

All riparian areas were assessed by NCDWR during an onsite visit to determine viability for buffer
mitigation. Approximately 26.81 acres are protected with a permanent conservation easement.
Of those 26.81 acres, 21.35 acres are being restored, 1.10 acres are being enhanced by
supplementally planting partially forested riparian areas, and 3.11 acres are preserved. Riparian
restoration/enhancement area widths on streams and ephemeral channels extend out to a
maximum of 200 feet from the top of bank with a minimum width of 20 from top of banks.
Riparian buffer enhancement and preservation credits generated on this Bank Parcel are allowed
pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n), 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(5), and 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7).
No nutrient offset credit will be generated on the Bank Parcel.
2.0 BANK PARCEL LOCATION
Located in the South Atlantic/Gulf Region approximately 4 miles east of Archdale, NC in
southwest Guilford County (Figure 1, Appendix A), the Bank Parcel is hydrologically situated
within the USGS 14-digit HUC 03030003010050 of the Cape Fear River Basin and Randleman Lake
Watershed (North Carolina Division of Water Quality Subbasin Number 03-06-08).

Directions to the Site from Raleigh, North Carolina.
 Head west on I-40 for 69 miles
 Just after Exit 220, stay left, following signs for I-85 Bus S
 Continue onto I-85BL S/US-29 S/US-70 W, and travel 2.8 miles
 Take Exit 33 toward I-73 N/Groometown Road
As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 5
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
 Keep left at the fork, following signs for Groometown Road
 Turn left onto Groometown Road
 The Site on the right after 5.7 miles
o Site Latitude, Longitude
35.9194ºN, 79.8941ºW (WGS84)
2.1 Bank Parcel Background
The Bank Parcel encompasses 26.81 acres of land containing unnamed tributaries to the Deep
River. It is located in a region of the state dominated by agriculture and livestock, but is also
affected by urban runoff from nearby Archdale and High Point. Restoration of the riparian buffer
is expected to result in immediate water quality benefits within the vicinity of the Bank Parcel
through the removal of livestock access to streams and ephemeral channels, as well as the
establishment of riparian vegetation.

Situated within the Southern Outer Piedmont portion of the Piedmont Ecoregion of North
Carolina, the Bank Parcel’s regional physiography is characterized by dissected irregular plains;
low rounded hills and ridges; and low to moderate gradient streams with mostly cobble, gravel,
and sandy substrates. On-site elevations range from a high of 802-feet NGVD above the upper
reaches of UT 2 to a low of approximately 750-feet NGVD at the Bank Parcel outfall (USGS High
Point East, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle). Surrounding land use consists
primarily of wooded and agricultural land, with some low-density residential housing.

Three unnamed tributaries (UTs) were deemed subject to the Randleman Lake Buffer Protection
Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0724) by NCDWR in correspondence dated September 24, 2021 (NCDWR
Site Viability Letter, Appendix B). The upper portion of UT2 (Feature E-1) and Feature E-2 are
ephemeral streams and were determined to be not subject. The drainage areas of site streams
range from 0.007 mi² to 0.24 mi². Present and historical land use practices included the
maintenance and removal of riparian vegetation and the relocation, dredging and straightening
of onsite streams. This resulted in degraded water quality and unstable channel characteristics
(stream entrenchment, erosion, bank collapse, and stream aggradation).
2.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The major goals of the riparian buffer mitigation project are to provide ecological and water
quality enhancements to the Randleman watershed by restoring the riparian area to create a
functional riparian corridor. Specific enhancements to water quality and ecological processes are
outlined in Table 1.

As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 6
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
Table 1. Ecological and Water Quality Goals
Goal Objective
Decrease nutrient levels
Nutrient input will be decreased by filtering runoff from the agricultural
fields through restored native buffer zones. The off-site nutrient input will
also be absorbed on-site by filtering flood flows through restored floodplain
areas, where flood flows can disperse through native vegetation.
Decrease Sediment Input Sediment from off-site sources will be captured by deposition on restored
floodplain areas where native vegetation will slow overland flow velocities.
Decrease water temperature and
increase dissolved oxygen concentration
Planted riparian trees will shade the streams as they mature reducing
thermal pollution.
Create appropriate riparian habitat Riparian areas adjacent to streams and ephemeral channels will be restored
by planting native vegetation.
Permanently protect the parcel from
harmful uses A conservation easement will be recorded on the Bank Parcel.

3.0 RESTORATION ACTIVITIES
3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities
Riparian area restoration involved an herbaceous treatment of existing fescue grasses, shallow
ripping of pasture areas, paralleling streams and ephemeral channels to promote floodwater
attenuation by increasing frictional resistance of floodwaters crossing Bank Parcel floodplains,
and planting appropriate native tree species along the riparian corridor throughout Bank Parcel
riparian restoration areas (21.35 acres). Continued herbicide applications may be needed over
the first few years of tree establishment in the riparian restoration areas to prevent
encroachment of undesirable species, such as fescue and Tree of Heaven, that may out-compete
the planted native vegetation. Tree species planted across the Bank Parcel are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Bare-Root Planted Stems
Common Name Scientific Name # of Planted Stems % of Total Planted Trees Canopy Type
River birch Betula nigra 2650 17.6 Canopy
Tulip Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 1500 10 Canopy
Red mulberry Morus rubra 750 5 Midstory
Black willow Salix nigra 750 5 Midstory
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 2650 17.6 Canopy
Mockernut hickory Carya tomentosa 750 5 Canopy
Swamp chestnut oak Quercus michauxii 1500 10 Canopy
Water oak Quercus nigra 1500 10 Canopy
Willow oak Quercus phellos 1500 10 Canopy
Shumard oak Quercus shumardii 750 5 Canopy
American elm Ulmus americana 750 5 Canopy
Total 15050 100

Trees were planted at a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers, sufficient
to meet the performance standards outlined in Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 of 260 planted trees
per acre at the end of five years of monitoring. Bare-root tree stock was mixed during planting to
ensure diversity and that no one tree species will be greater than 50% of the established stems
As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 7
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
in permanent vegetations plots. Planting occurred on April 20, 2023. As-built measurements
indicate that all nineteen plots are meeting the stem density success criteria, with an average of
555.9 stems per acre, and all but plots 1, 2, and 10 are meeting the species diversity success
criteria (Table 5, Appendix C).

Several additional restoration activities occurred on the Bank Parcel. Three total culverts were
removed: a non-functioning culvert on UT 1, and two functioning culverts on UT 2 and UT 3. The
culverts were removed with a mini-excavator with low pressure tracks, and impacted stream
banks were sloped at 3:1 grade, matted, seeded, and live-staked to ensure future stability. An
existing ditch feature along the eastern boundary of the Bank Parcel (Feature E 3) was plugged
and filled for diffuse flow into UT 3. Graded/disturbed areas were strawed and seeded to
minimize sediment inputs. Minor bank stabilization was needed along UT3. This included
mechanically sloping at 3:1 grade, matting, seeding, and live-staking.

Appropriate seed mixes of pollinator-attracting annual and perennial species were applied to
provide temporary and permanent ground cover for soil stabilization and reduction of sediment
loss during rain events in areas without existing herbaceous cover, especially where earthwork
was performed. Seed mixes are listed in Tables 3A-B. The pasture area surrounding the Bank
Parcel will be abandoned by the landowner, and existing fencing will be maintained to
permanently exclude cattle from the conservation easement area. Additionally, a small section
of fencing within the easement boundary was removed.

Table 3A. Permanent Seed Mix
Species Percent of Total Mix
Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nustans) 26.57%
Big Bluestem (Andropogon geradii) 14.34%
Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) 14.34%
Little Bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) 13.57%
Deertongue (Panicum clandestinum) 13.15%
Creeping Red Fescue (Festuca rubra) 9.90%
Organic Matter 8.13%
TOTAL 100%

Table 3B. Temporary Seed Mix
Species Application Rate
Grain Rye (Secale cereale) 100 lbs. per acre
Brown Top Millet (Urochloa ramosa) 40 lbs. per acre
German Millet (Setaria italica) 25 lbs. per acre
3.2 Riparian Buffer Enhancement
Riparian buffer enhancement includes supplementally planting and permanently protecting
existing riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas via exclusionary fencing, cutting, clearing,
filling, and grading. Enhancement areas (1.10 acres) on the Bank Parcel were primarily disturbed
mixed hardwoods and were supplementary planted (Figure 2). The enhancement area extends a
As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 8
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
maximum of 200 feet from the top of bank with a minimum width of 20 feet from the top of
bank.
3.3 Riparian Buffer Preservation Activities
Riparian buffer preservation includes permanently protecting existing riparian buffer from
cutting, clearing, filling, grading, and any similar activities that would affect the functionality of
the riparian buffer. Areas specified for Preservation, as defined in 15A NCAC 02B .0295, are
shown in Figure 2 (Appendix A). These areas are primarily mixed hardwoods (3.11 acres), with
the number of high value species above 200 stems per acre. They are areas where livestock are
currently fenced out, and there has been little or no historic livestock access.
3.4 Bank Parcel Protection
A Permanent Conservation Easement will preserve all areas and prohibit all use of the property
inconsistent with its use as mitigation property, including any activity that would materially alter
the biological integrity of the Bank Parcel. The Sponsor has agreed to transfer or assign the
conservation easement and its interests in perpetuity to a qualified holder under NC General
Statute ("GS") 121-34 et seq. and 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code prior to the submittal of
the Year 4 Monitoring Report. The holder shall be a land trust or stewardship program that will
hold and enforce the conservation easement and the interests in perpetuity. The Sponsor shall
choose a land trust or stewardship program that is accredited by the Land Trust Accreditation
Commission and/or has been approved by DWR prior to the end of the fourth year of monitoring
period. A land trust must be certified under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

The Bank Parcel is surrounded by cattle exclusion fencing. Easement boundaries have been
identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the Bank Parcel and adjacent
properties. Boundaries are variously identified by cattle fence, markers on t-post, tree-blazing,
or other means as allowed by site conditions. Boundary markers contain contact information for
the Bank Parcel. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired or replaced
as needed.
4.0 MITIGATION POTENTIAL
The EMH Farm Mitigation Bank Parcel will provide Randleman Lake RBC for development impacts
within the Randleman Lake Watershed (Figure 1 and Table 4). The width of the credit-generating
areas will begin at the most landward limit of the top of bank or the rooted herbaceous
vegetation and extend perpendicular and landward a maximum distance of 200 feet where the
Sponsor is able. No credit-generating areas will be less than 20 feet in width from TOB.

Consolidated Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B.0295 (o)(7) states that the area of the mitigation site
on ephemeral channels shall comprise no more than 25 percent of the total area of buffer
mitigation. Riparian buffer credit generated on ephemeral channels is 9.6 percent of the Bank
Parcel’s total area of buffer mitigation. Additionally, Consolidated Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC
02B.0295 (o)(5) states that the area of preservation credit within a buffer mitigation site shall
As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 9
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
comprise of no more than 25 percent of the total area of buffer mitigation. The area of
preservation credit comprises 10.4 percent of the Bank Parcel’s total area of buffer mitigation.

The Sponsor will maintain a credit ledger for the Bank Parcel under the MBI for riparian buffer
credits, both in square feet and acres. Credit shall be released in accordance with the schedule
described in the MBI.
5.0 MONITORING PROTOCOL AND SUCCESS CRITERIA
5.1 Monitoring Protocol
Permanent vegetation monitoring plots were installed and evaluated within the riparian buffer
restoration and enhancement areas to measure the survival of the planted trees. The plots are
100 square meters each, randomly placed throughout the planted riparian areas. A total of
nineteen (19) plots (2.09% of the restoration/enhancement credit generating area) were
established within the riparian restoration and enhancement areas (Figure 2, Appendix A).

Planting occurred on April 20, 2023. As-built vegetation monitoring was performed on April 25,
2023. Vegetation assessments are conducted following the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS)
Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation (Lee et al., 2008). In this baseline monitoring report
and each annual report submitted thereafter, a photo taken at the origin of the vegetation plot
will be provided (Appendix C). All planted stems are marked with flagging tape and recorded. As-
built measurements indicate that all nineteen plots are meeting the stem density success criteria
of 260 stems per acre, with an average of 555.9 stems per acre (Table 5, Appendix C). Plots 1, 2,
and 10 each have single species making up greater than 50% of the established planted stems.
These species include American sycamore (69% of plot 1), willow oak (57% of plot 2), and
mockernut hickory (58% of plot 10).

The first annual monitoring activities will commence at the end of the first growing season, at
least five months after planting was completed and no earlier than the fall season. Species
composition, height, survival rates, and vigor will be evaluated on an annual basis for each plot.
The total number of volunteer woody stems will also be documented and reported.

During a June 5, 2023 as-built site walk-through with NCDWR, three areas with visibly low stem
density were delineated (Figure 2, Appendix A; NCDWR Correspondence, Appendix D). One area
along the northwestern easement boundary was determined to have been missed during Site
planting efforts and will require a supplemental planting effort. The other two areas, one along
the easement boundary just north of feature E 2 and another along the right bank of UT 1, were
characterized by dense herbaceous vegetation, making it difficult to assess stem density.
Clearwater intended to replant all three areas prior to MY1 monitoring, however, during the Fall
of 2023 and MY1, several additional areas of planted stem mortality were observed on-site. As
such, Clearwater elected to hold off replanting until after MY1 measurements to use the MY1
data to pinpoint additional areas of planted stem mortality, likely due to the planting period and
subsequent drought conditions. Supplemental planting is proposed for Q1 2024 that includes
As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 10
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
planting 6,070 bare-root stems across 10.55 acres. The adaptive management plan and planting
plan is detailed in Appendix D with a Figure of the proposed planting areas (Appendix D).
Vegetation transects will be performed in planted areas during MY2 monitoring to document
sufficient planting.
5.2 Success Criteria
The measure of vegetative success for the Parcel will be the survival of at least four native
hardwood tree species, where no one species is greater than 50% of the established planted
stems, and an established density of at least 260 planted trees per acre at the end of monitoring
year five. Appropriate and desirable native volunteer species may be included in the Bank Parcel’s
density to meet the performance standards with NCDWR approval.

The Sponsor shall submit the annual monitoring report to NCDWR by December 31 of each year
for five consecutive years and will follow the terms and conditions of the MBI.
5.3 Bank Parcel Maintenance
In the event that the Bank Parcel or a specific component of the Bank Parcel fails to achieve
success criteria as outlined in section 5.2, a remedial action plan will be developed and
implemented with the approval of NCDWR. Vegetation maintenance and repair activities may
include pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. If exotic invasive plant species require treatment, such
species will be controlled by mechanical (physical removal with the use of a chainsaw) and/or
chemical methods (aquatic approved herbicide) in accordance with North Carolina Department
of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.

The easement boundary will be checked annually as part of monitoring activities. Easement
boundary conditions and any maintenance performed will be reported in the annual monitoring
reports to NCDWR. If mowing is deemed necessary by the Sponsor during the monitoring period,
the Sponsor must receive approval from NCDWR prior to conducting any mowing activities within
Randleman Buffer Zones 1 and 2 to ensure that no buffer violations have occurred.

6.0 MITIGATION CREDITS, CREDIT RELEASE, & SERVICE AREA
6.1 Credit Generation
Approximately 26.81 acres are protected with a permanent conservation easement. Of those
26.81 acres, 21.35 acres are being restored, 1.10 acres are being enhanced by supplementally
planting partially forested riparian areas, and 3.11 acres are preserved. Riparian
restoration/enhancement area widths on streams and ephemeral channels extend out to a
maximum of 200 feet from the top of bank with a minimum width of 20 from top of banks.
Riparian buffer enhancement and preservation credits generated on this Bank Parcel are allowed
pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n), 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(5), and 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7).
No nutrient offset credit will be generated on the Bank Parcel. Credit calculations are shown in
Table 4.
As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 11
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
6.2 Credit Release
Upon submittal of the appropriate documentation by the Sponsor, and subsequent approval by
NCDWR, the mitigation credits associated with the Bank Parcel will be released as described in
the MBI.
6.3 Service Area
The Bank Parcel Service Area will be the Randleman Lake watershed (Figure 1, Appendix A).
Table 4. EMH Farm, 2022‐1493v1, Project Credits
Project Area
N Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)
P Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)
Credit Type Location
Subject? (enter 
NO if 
ephemeral or 
ditch 1)
Feature Type Mitigation Activity Min‐Max Buffer 
Width (ft)Feature Name Total Area (ft2)
Total (Creditable) 
Area of Buffer 
Mitigation (ft2)
Initial Credit 
Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit  Final Credit 
Ratio (x:1) 
 Convertible to 
Riparian 
Buffer? 
 Riparian Buffer 
Credits 
 Convertible to 
Nutrient Offset? 
 Delivered 
Nutrient 
Offset: N (lbs) 
 Delivered 
Nutrient 
Offset: P (lbs) 
Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0‐100 UT1, UT2, UT3 473,753 473,753 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 473,753.000 N/A — —
Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101‐200 UT1, UT2, UT3 348,749 348,749 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 115,087.285 N/A — —
Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 0‐100 E1, E2 42,733 42,733 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 42,733.000 N/A — —
Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 101‐200 E1, E2 64,327 64,327 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 21,227.931 N/A — —
———
Buffer Rural Yes I / P Enhancement 0‐100 UT1 18,003 18,003 2 100% 2.00000 Yes 9,001.500 N/A — —
Buffer Rural Yes I / P Enhancement 101‐200 UT1 29,604 29,604 2 33% 6.06061 Yes 4,884.657 N/A — —
Buffer Rural Yes I / P Enhancement 20‐29 UT1 200 200 2 75% 2.66667 Yes 75.000 N/A — —
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
———
Totals (ft2):977,369 977,369 666,762.373 0.000 0.000
Total Buffer (ft2):977,369 977,369
Total Nutrient Offset (ft2):0 N/A
Total Ephemeral Area (ft2) for Credit:107,060 107,060
Total Eligible Ephemeral Area (ft2):278,218 9.6%Ephemeral Reaches as % TABM
Enter Preservation Credits Below Total Eligible for Preservation (ft2):325,790 10.4%Preservation as % TABM
Credit Type Location Subject? Feature Type Mitigation Activity Min‐Max Buffer 
Width (ft)Feature Name  Total Area (sf) 
Total (Creditable) 
Area for Buffer 
Mitigation (ft2)
Initial Credit 
Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit  Final Credit 
Ratio (x:1) 
 Riparian 
Buffer Credits 
Buffer Rural Yes I / P0‐100 UT1 77,678 77,678 10 100% 10.00000 7,767.800
Rural Yes I / P 101‐200 UT1 56,991 56,991 10 33% 30.30303 1,880.703
Rural Yes I / P20‐29 UT1 831 831 10 75% 13.33333 62.325
—
—
Preservation Area Subtotals (ft2):135,501 135,501
Square Feet Credits
929,562 652,801.216
47,807 13,961.157
135,501 9,710.828
1,112,870 676,473.201
Square Feet Credits
Nitrogen:0.000
Phosphorus:0.0000
TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM)
TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATION
Mitigation Totals
Nutrient Offset:
Preservation:
Total Riparian Buffer:
Cape Fear ‐ Randleman
N/A
N/A
Restoration:
Enhancement:
Mitigation Totals
1.  The Randleman Lake buffer rules allow some ditches to be classified as subject according to 15A NCAC 02B .0250 (5)(a).
last updated 08/03/2020
As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Report page 13
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024
7.0 REFERENCES

Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot Version 4.2. Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

Randleman Lake Buffer Protection Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0724

As-Built and Baseline Monitoring Report Appendices
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024

APPENDIX A
FIGURES

Figure 1. Site Location and Service Area
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Figure 3. Aerial with Restoration Activities Completed
Copyright:(c) 2018 Garmin
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
MAR 2023
1:400,000
22-033
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Guilford County, NC
EMH FARM
BUFFER
MITIGATION
BANK PARCEL
1
³
0 10 205Miles
Legend
EMH Farms Bank Location
USGS Hydrologic Unit 03030003
NC River Subbasins: 14-digit HUCs
Riparian Buffer Credit Service Area: Randleman Lake Watershed
BANK LOCATION
AND
CREDIT
SERVICE AREA
EMH Farms Buffer Mitigation Bank
Guilford County
USGS HUC 03030003010050
35.9194ºN, 79.8941ºW
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
7
6
9
5
2
1
3
4
8
19
11
14
10
15
16
13
17
12
18
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
1:2000
22-033
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Guilford County, NC
2
³
0 300 600150Feet
Legend
EMH Farm Easement = 26.81 ac
Subject Parcel Boundaries
Riparian Restoration, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Restoration on Ephemeral Channel, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Restoration, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Restoration on Ephemeral Channel, 101-200 Feet
Riparian Enhancement, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Enhancement, 101-200 Feet
Riparian Enhancement, 20-29 Feet
Riparian Preservation, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Preservation, 101-200 Feet
Riparian Preservation, 20-29 Feet
Intermittent/Perennial Stream Channel Top of Bank
Ephemeral Channel Top of Bank
MY0 CVS Plot Meeting Success Criteria
MY0 CVS Plot Not Meeting Success Criteria
Top of Bank to 20-Feet
Top of Bank to 30-FeetTop of Bank to 50-Feet
!!Top of Bank to 100-Feet
! !Top of Bank to 200-FeetObserved Low Stem Density During As-Built Walk
Current ConditionsPlan View
JUL 2023
EMH FARMBUFFERMITIGATIONBANK PARCEL
UT 1
UT 3
E 2
E 1
UT 2
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
1:2000
22-033
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Guilford County, NC
3
³
0 300 600150Feet
Legend
Subject Parcel Boundary
EMH Farms Easement = 26.81 ac
Intermittent/Perennial Stream Channel
Ephemeral Channel
Ditch
Removed Culverted Crossing
Fencing to be Maintained For Cattle Exclusion
Removed Fencing
Duke Energy Right of Way
AERIAL WITH
RESTORATION
ACTIVITES
COMPLETED
UT 1 (Subject)
UT 3 (Subject)
E 2 (Not Subject)
E 1 (Not Subject)
UT 2 (Subject)
E 3 (Not Subject) - This feature was plugged
and filled for diffuse flow into UT 3. Graded/
disturbed areas were strawed and seeded.
Minor bank stabilization completed as needed
along this reach. Banks were sloped back,
matted, seeded, and live-staked.Existing culverts (two functioning on UT2 and UT3,
and one non-functioning on UT1) were removed.
Banks were sloped back at 3:1 grade, matted,
seeded, and live-staked.
AUG 2023
EMH FARM
BUFFER
MITIGATION
BANK PARCEL
As-Built and Baseline Monitoring Report Appendices
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024

APPENDIX B
AS-BUILT SURVEY PLAT

As-Built and Baseline Monitoring Report Appendices
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024

APPENDIX C
BASELINE VEGETATION DATA

Table 5. Total Stems by Plot and Species
Table 6. Vegetation Height and Vigor Data
Vegetation Plot Photos

Table 5: Total Stems by Plot and Species
PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T
Betula nigra river birch Tree 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 444222
Carya hickory Tree
Carya alba mockernut hickory Tree 111 111777
Carya carolinae‐septentrionalis southern shagbark hickory Tree
Carya ovata shagbark hickory Tree
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 333222333222 444333555
Morus rubra red mulberry Tree 111 111
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 999111444666111222222444555111
Quercus oak Tree 222222444222222222
Quercus alba white oak Tree
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3
Quercus nigra water oak Tree 2 2 2 111222 111
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 888222444 111333222111
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree
Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree 1 1 1 111222111 111
Salix nigra black willow Tree 222
Ulmus americana American elm Tree 111111 111
13 13 13 14 14 14 12 12 12 14 14 14 16 16 16 12 12 12 16 16 16 14 14 14 16 16 16 12 12 12
333555444555999777666555888444
526.1 526.1 526.1 566.6 566.6 566.6 485.6 485.6 485.6 566.6 566.6 566.6 647.5 647.5 647.5 485.6 485.6 485.6 647.5 647.5 647.5 566.6 566.6 566.6 647.5 647.5 647.5 485.6 485.6 485.6
Color for Density
*Plots 1, 2, and 10 contain species that make up more than 50% of stems in these plots, therefore these plots do not meet the species diversity success criteria
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type
22033‐01‐0001*22033‐01‐0002*
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
1
0.02
1
0.02
22033‐01‐0007
Species count
Stems per ACRE
1
0.02
1
0.02 0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
Current Plot Data (MY0 2023)
22033‐01‐0008 22033‐01‐0009 22033‐01‐0010*22033‐01‐0003 22033‐01‐0004 22033‐01‐0005 22033‐01‐0006
Table 5: Total Stems by Plot and Species (continued)
PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T
Betula nigra river birch Tree 333111111333444111 252525
Carya hickory Tree 111 111
Carya alba mockernut hickory Tree 111333 222444191919
Carya carolinae‐septentrionalis southern shagbark hickory Tree 111111
Carya ovata shagbark hickory Tree 222222
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 222111333 111 444111343434
Morus rubra red mulberry Tree 111222111111 111 111 999
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 222111 111555 111 454545
Quercus oak Tree 222111 1 1 1 18 18 18
Quercus alba white oak Tree 111333444
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 111111111222111 141414
Quercus nigra water oak Tree 111111222222111333555 212121
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 111222444222 111444111 363636
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree 333333
Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree 111111111111 101010
Salix nigra black willow Tree 555111 888
Ulmus americana American elm Tree 444111111222 11 11 11
14 14 14 12 12 12 14 14 14 14 14 14 12 12 12 16 16 16 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 261 261 261
888888888999666777555999666171717
566.6 566.6 566.6 485.6 485.6 485.6 566.6 566.6 566.6 566.6 566.6 566.6 485.6 485.6 485.6 647.5 647.5 647.5 526.1 526.1 526.1 526.1 526.1 526.1 566.6 566.6 566.6 555.9 555.9 555.9
Color for Density
Annual Means
MY0 (2023)22033‐01‐0013 22033‐01‐0014 22033‐01‐0015 22033‐01‐0016 22033‐01‐0017 22033‐01‐0018
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
19
0.47
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type
Stem count
Current Plot Data (MY0 2023)
size (ares)
22033‐01‐001922033‐01‐0011 22033‐01‐0012
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
EMH Farm Site
MY0 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (taken April 25, 2023)
EMH Farm Site Appendix C: Baseline Vegetation Data
MY0 Monitoring Report –May 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
EMH Farm Site
MY0 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (taken April 25, 2023)
EMH Farm Site Appendix C: Baseline Vegetation Data
MY0 Monitoring Report –May 2023
Plot 17 Plot 18
Plot 19
EMH Farm Site
MY0 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (taken April 25, 2023)
EMH Farm Site Appendix C: Baseline Vegetation Data
MY0 Monitoring Report –May 2023
Plot Scientific Name X Y Height (cm) DBH Vigor Plot Average Vigor Plot Average Height (cm)
1 Quercus shumardii 3.1 1.6 33 3
1 Liriodendron tulipifera 3.4 4 23 4
1 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.4 2 69 4
1 Liriodendron tulipifera 9.1 2.3 40 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 8.3 4.9 32 3
1 Platanus occidentalis 7.5 7.2 69 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 3.5 9.6 50 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 9.8 8 22 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 8.9 9.8 58 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 4.2 9.3 69 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 2.5 6.4 40 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 5.8 0 60 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 1.7 8.8 35 3
2 Liriodendron tulipifera 1.1 1.6 22 4
2 Quercus phellos 0.3 0.4 69 4
2 Quercus phellos 2.2 4.1 54 4
2 Quercus nigra 3.3 0.6 58 4
2 Liriodendron tulipifera 3.8 1.6 23 1
2 Quercus nigra 5 4.4 52 4
2 Quercus phellos 7.9 4.5 69 4
2 Quercus michauxii 8.2 0.4 65 4
2 Quercus phellos 5.9 0.3 72 4
2 Platanus occidentalis 6.3 7 38 4
2 Quercus phellos 3.5 6.6 62 4
2 Quercus phellos 4.7 9.6 60 4
2 Quercus phellos 2.4 9.2 66 4
2 Quercus phellos 1 6.7 64 4
3 Platanus occidentalis 1.5 3.7 69 4
3 Platanus occidentalis 3.4 4.2 60 4
3 Platanus occidentalis 5.9 4.4 52 4
3 Betula nigra 8.8 4.2 60 4
3 Liriodendron tulipifera 5.6 6.9 50 4
3 Betula nigra 6.6 8.9 43 4
3 Betula nigra 9 9.7 41 4
3 Liriodendron tulipifera 8.3 7.2 33 4
3 Quercus phellos 4.2 9 75 4
3 Liriodendron tulipifera 2.3 6.7 40 4
3 Quercus phellos 1.4 8.9 78 4
3 Platanus occidentalis 0 6.3 35 4
4 Platanus occidentalis 1.4 1.3 63 4
4 Platanus occidentalis 4.3 1.5 49 4
4 Platanus occidentalis 7.1 1.8 33 4
4 Platanus occidentalis 9.6 2.3 53 4
4 Quercus phellos 6.6 6.3 69 4
4 Quercus phellos 9.7 9.4 69 4
4 Quercus phellos 9 6.7 51 4
4 Quercus phellos 7.4 9 51 4
4 Quercus shumardii 3.4 6.2 61 4
4 Quercus nigra 0.9 6 36 4
4 Platanus occidentalis 1.6 3.6 33 4
4 Platanus occidentalis 4.2 3.9 45 4
4 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.7 3.6 25 4
4 Liriodendron tulipifera 9.3 3.9 40 4
5 Quercus michauxii 0.4 0.3 62 4
5 Quercus nigra 3.3 0.6 52 4
5 Quercus shumardii 1.7 3 52 4
5 Quercus nigra 4.1 3.3 40 4
5 Quercus shumardii 6.4 3.3 62 4
5 Quercus michauxii 8.7 3.3 60 4
5 Quercus 6.2 0.2 69 4
5 Ulmus americana 8.7 0.6 50 4
5 Quercus 9.5 0.5 69 4
5 Betula nigra 9.5 6.4 38 4
5 Quercus michauxii 6.1 6.1 40 4
5 Platanus occidentalis 8.4 9.1 60 4
5 Carya alba 5.8 9.2 49 4
5 Salix nigra 2.8 8.7 61 4
5 Salix nigra 0.2 8.1 60 4
5 Betula nigra 2.9 5.9 33 4
4.0 48.4
4.0 53.6
3.8 46.2
3.8 55.3
4.0 53.0
Table 6. Vegetation Height and Vigor Data
Plot Scientific Name X Y Height (cm) DBH Vigor Plot Average Vigor Plot Average Height (cm)
6 Quercus phellos 0.9 0.8 69 4
6 Liriodendron tulipifera 0.9 2.4 33 4
6 Liriodendron tulipifera 3.5 2.1 21 4
6 Ulmus americana 5.8 1.5 42 4
6 Liriodendron tulipifera 5.7 6.6 20 4
6 Quercus shumardii 7.8 6.3 50 4
6 Morus rubra 8.5 8.5 20 4
6 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.1 9.3 8 4
6 Quercus 0.2 7.7 62 4
6 Platanus occidentalis 2.8 7.2 22 4
6 Quercus 1.4 5.1 12 4
6 Platanus occidentalis 3.4 9.9 18 4
7 Quercus 1.9 1 52 4
7 Betula nigra 5 1.2 40 4
7 Quercus phellos 1.5 3.8 52 4
7 Liriodendron tulipifera 3.9 3.9 20 4
7 Quercus 6.5 4.2 60 4
7 Quercus 7.7 1.1 52 4
7 Quercus 8.6 4.4 72 4
7 Liriodendron tulipifera 2.7 3.7 40 4
7 Liriodendron tulipifera 0.3 6.2 37 2
7 Platanus occidentalis 0.7 8.6 38 4
7 Quercus phellos 2.7 8.7 51 3
7 Platanus occidentalis 6.3 9.6 33 2
7 Quercus phellos 8.6 9.3 55 2
7 Quercus michauxii 9.8 9.3 60 2
7 Quercus michauxii 9.6 7.3 71 2
7 Quercus michauxii 6.9 6.7 73 2
8 Quercus phellos 2.2 0.6 30 4
8 Quercus 5 0.5 53 4
8 Quercus nigra 2.5 3.5 39 4
8 Platanus occidentalis 5.6 3.7 72 4
8 Quercus phellos 8.1 0.9 65 4
8 Quercus 8.8 4.4 18 4
8 Liriodendron tulipifera 7.3 7.2 28 1
8 Liriodendron tulipifera 9.6 7.6 28 4
8 Platanus occidentalis 5.1 9.5 60 4
8 Liriodendron tulipifera 4.8 6.6 40 4
8 Liriodendron tulipifera 2.4 6.4 22 4
8 Platanus occidentalis 2.5 9.2 79 4
8 Platanus occidentalis 0 8.8 42 4
8 Liriodendron tulipifera 0.1 5.9 20 4
9 Ulmus americana 1.1 0.1 40 4
9 Carya alba 3.5 0.4 49 4
9 Betula nigra 2.74 2.8 31 4
9 Betula nigra 5.4 3.1 32 4
9 Quercus shumardii 5.8 0.5 50 4
9 Quercus 8.4 0.9 61 4
9 Betula nigra 9.7 3.5 30 4
9 Betula nigra 7.6 3.3 20 4
9 Platanus occidentalis 6 5.3 50 4
9 Morus rubra 8.5 5.4 40 4
9 Quercus 8.3 7.5 52 4
9 Platanus occidentalis 5.6 8.2 50 4
9 Quercus phellos 9.6 9.9 52 4
9 Platanus occidentalis 2.3 8.5 39 4
9 Platanus occidentalis 1.1 5.4 62 4
9 Platanus occidentalis 3.7 5.3 40 4
10 Platanus occidentalis 0.3 0.3 62 4
10 Quercus 8 4.7 20 4
10 Betula nigra 5.5 8.9 32 4
10 Betula nigra 7.9 7.6 32 4
10 Carya alba 0.4 9 8 4
10 Carya alba 2 8 6 4
10 Carya alba 2.4 4.7 3 4
10 Quercus 8.6 2 7 4
10 Carya alba 4.4 3.8 8 4
10 Carya alba 4.4 0.5 8 4
10 Carya alba 2.4 1.5 8 4
10 Carya alba 0.4 3 8 4
Table 6. Vegetation Height and Vigor Data (continued)
4.0 16.8
31.4
3.2 50.4
3.8 42.6
4.0
4.0 43.6
Plot Scientific Name X Y Height (cm) DBH Vigor Plot Average Vigor Plot Average Height (cm)
11 Ulmus americana 0.5 0.3 51 4
11 Ulmus americana 1.5 3.23 48 4
11 Quercus nigra 4.7 3.8 65 4
11 Morus rubra 4 1.3 31 4
11 Ulmus americana 9.3 1.8 88 4
11 Quercus phellos 5.6 6.3 82 4
11 Platanus occidentalis 6.3 9.2 32 4
11 Ulmus americana 2.7 6.3 31 4
11 Quercus 0.9 8.9 71 4
11 Platanus occidentalis 7.1 0.4 58 4
11 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.9 2.8 40 4
11 Liriodendron tulipifera 8.8 4.7 38 4
11 Quercus michauxii 9 8.7 100 4
11 Quercus 3.3 8.8 65 4
12 Morus rubra 1.3 1 10 4
12 Liriodendron tulipifera 0 3.3 10 4
12 Platanus occidentalis 2.1 3.7 50 4
12 Betula nigra 3.6 4.5 42 4
12 Betula nigra 7 3.6 38 4
12 Morus rubra 8.5 0.8 30 4
12 Ulmus americana 9.7 3.3 30 4
12 Quercus phellos 8.4 6.2 71 4
12 Quercus 4.9 6.2 41 4
12 Quercus nigra 8.9 8.7 36 4
12 Quercus phellos 0.7 8.9 10 4
12 Betula nigra 0.8 6.3 28 4
13 Quercus phellos 2.6 0.8 40 4
13 Quercus nigra 2.1 3.5 62 4
13 Quercus phellos 4.8 0.1 60 4
13 Quercus phellos 2.7 4.5 71 4
13 Quercus nigra 4.4 4.7 60 4
13 Betula nigra 7.4 1.9 28 4
13 Morus rubra 9.8 1.7 47 4
13 Liriodendron tulipifera 9.9 3.1 20 4
13 Liriodendron tulipifera 7.1 4.2 10 4
13 Ulmus americana 6.8 6.8 30 4
13 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.9 9.2 8 2
13 Carya alba 9.3 8 18 4
13 Quercus phellos 4.3 7.4 30 4
13 Quercus shumardii 4.3 10 60 4
14 Betula nigra 2.8 0.8 52 4
14 Quercus phellos 1.1 3 55 4
14 Platanus occidentalis 4.6 3.3 55 4
14 Quercus nigra 6.3 1 69 4
14 Carya alba 9.1 1.6 48 4
14 Carya alba 7 3.7 35 4
14 Quercus nigra 9.1 6.6 69 4
14 Quercus phellos 7 3.7 35 4
14 Quercus shumardii 6 8.7 81 4
14 Ulmus americana 4 6.1 43 4
14 Quercus michauxii 0.4 5.5 85 4
14 Morus rubra 0.3 8.5 30 4
14 Ulmus americana 4.3 8.5 32 4
14 Carya alba 9.8 3.5 30 4
15 Betula nigra 4.8 2 41 4
15 Liriodendron tulipifera 1.1 3.5 41 1
15 Platanus occidentalis 7.5 1.9 46 4
15 Platanus occidentalis 6.6 4.5 41 4
15 Quercus shumardii 9.3 5.6 90 4
15 Quercus michauxii 9.8 2.6 58 4
15 Platanus occidentalis 8.3 8.3 45 4
15 Betula nigra 2.1 9.4 40 4
15 Betula nigra 3.1 7.1 45 4
15 Platanus occidentalis 3.9 4.6 28 4
15 Quercus nigra 5 9.1 20 4
15 Platanus occidentalis 1.1 2.3 28 4
4.0
Table 6. Vegetation Height and Vigor Data (continued)
4.0 57.1
3.8 43.6
33.0
3.9 38.9
4.0 51.4
Plot Scientific Name X Y Height (cm) DBH Vigor Plot Average Vigor Plot Average Height (cm)
16 Quercus nigra 0.7 0.5 79 4
16 Salix nigra 3.6 0.6 56 4
16 Salix nigra 3.3 2.7 53 4
16 Salix nigra 3.3 4.8 59 4
16 Quercus phellos 0 2.4 48 4
16 Quercus nigra 0.3 4.9 35 4
16 Betula nigra 6 5 39 4
16 Betula nigra 6.3 2 39 4
16 Morus rubra 8.7 2.3 25 4
16 Quercus nigra 8.5 5 25 1
16 Betula nigra 8.4 7.6 42 3
16 Quercus michauxii 5.1 8.3 69 4
16 Salix nigra 3.3 6.8 51 4
16 Salix nigra 3 9.1 62 4
16 Betula nigra 0 9.7 50 4
16 Quercus shumardii 0.3 7.3 25 4
17 Quercus nigra 0.5 0.2 31 4
17 Salix nigra 0.6 0.9 69 4
17 Quercus phellos 2.7 1.3 95 4
17 Quercus phellos 2.4 3.6 62 4
17 Betula nigra 5.7 0.6 45 4
17 Quercus nigra 5.2 3.8 55 4
17 Quercus michauxii 8.6 0.4 69 4
17 Quercus nigra 9 6.3 8 3
17 Quercus phellos 6.4 6.9 105 4
17 Quercus nigra 8.6 9.1 49 4
17 Quercus michauxii 6.2 8.9 55 4
17 Quercus phellos 2 6.6 57 4
17 Quercus nigra 3.9 1.2 87 4
18 Liriodendron tulipifera 0.2 0.9 110 4
18 Quercus alba 7.1 1.2 850 10 4
18 Carya alba 2.2 2.3 20 4
18 Carya alba 5.9 5.3 1000 15 4
18 Liriodendron tulipifera 7.9 7.3 157 1 4
18 Platanus occidentalis 3.1 6.2 190 1.1 4
18 Liriodendron tulipifera 0.7 7.6 135 4
18 Morus rubra 4 9.8 62 4
18 Quercus 9.3 9 71 2
18 Quercus michauxii 1 9 70 1
18 Quercus phellos 1.8 3.9 72 1
18 Carya 2.3 3 10 3
18 Liriodendron tulipifera 9.2 5.2 121 3
19 Carya alba 1.7 0.9 1400 12 4
19 Carya alba 1.5 3.8 15 3
19 Quercus rubra 4.1 3 5 4
19 Quercus rubra 7 3.4 2000 30 4
19 Carya carolinae‐septentriona 9 1.8 700 5 4
19 Carya alba 9.6 1 10 3
19 Quercus rubra 8.1 0.1 10 3
19 Carya alba 9.3 2.3 15 3
19 Carya alba 8.6 5.3 1200 18 4
19 Liriodendron tulipifera 5 9.9 1400 35 4
19 Carya alba 7.6 7.7 15 4
19 Quercus shumardii 3.6 6.6 8 4
19 Quercus shumardii 3.6 6.7 5 4
19 Quercus shumardii 3.6 7 10 4
3.2
Table 6. Vegetation Height and Vigor Data (continued)
220.6
3.7 485.2
3.8 47.3
3.9 60.5
As-Built and Baseline Monitoring Report Appendices
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024

APPENDIX D
NCDWR AS-BUILT CORRESPONDENCE AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN

EMH As-Built Walk-Through Notes Correspondence
2023 Adaptive Management Plan with Planting Plan

From:Merritt, Katie
To:Kenan Jernigan
Cc:Kevin Yates; Hartshorn, Blake
Subject:RE: [External] EMH Farm As-Built Walk Notes
Date:Wednesday, June 7, 2023 10:27:56 AM
Attachments:EMH_AsbuiltWalkThru_Notes (002).pdf
Hey Kenan,
Thank you for providing the notes. I edited one of the notes in the attached Map to state that if the
transects revealed it necessary, that supplemental planting would be provided in the low density
areas. Please see attached.

It was also discussed onsite, that Kevin would submit an Adaptive Management Plan with the As-
Built Report, documenting the As-Built Walk notes and necessary remedial work/supplemental
planting necessary. The AMP would need to acknowledge the expectation to perform transects and
include that data in the Year 1 Monitoring Report along with the monitoring plot data. The AMP
should be attached to the As-Built Report as either an Appendix to the report or included within the
text for review and approval by DWR. A timeline and planting plan needs to also be included.

Kevin also mentioned that any supplemental planting deemed necessary, would all be done in the
Fall/Winter 2023 and documentation confirming that planting effort will be included in the Year 1
Monitoring Report, including the data taken from the transects.

Thanks again for your cooperation,
Katie

From: Kenan Jernigan <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2023 8:58 AM
To: Merritt, Katie <[e-mail]>; Hartshorn, Blake <[e-mail]>
Cc: Kevin Yates <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] EMH Farm As-Built Walk Notes

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the
Report Message button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.

Katie and Blake,

It was nice walking around with you on Monday. See attached figure for our notes from the site visit.
Please review and let us know if you have any edits or additional comments.

Thanks,
Kenan

Kenan R. Jernigan
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
[e-mail]
[phone]

Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties by an authorized state official.
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
7
6
9
5
2
1
3
4
8
19
11
14
10
15
16
13
17
12
18
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
1:2000
22-033
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Guilford County, NC
2
³
0 300 600150Feet
Legend
EMH Farms Easement = 26.69 ac
Riparian Restoration, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Restoration on Ephemeral Channel, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Restoration, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Restoration on Ephemeral Channel, 101-200 Feet
Riparian Enhancement, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Enhancement, 101-200 Feet
Riparian Enhancement, 20-29 Feet
Riparian Preservation, TOB-100 Feet
Riparian Preservation, 101-200 Feet
Riparian Preservation, 20-29 Feet
Intermittent/Perennial Stream Channel Top of Bank
Ephemeral Channel Top of Bank
CVS Plot Locations
Top of Bank to 20-Feet
Top of Bank to 30-Feet
Top of Bank to 50-Feet
!!Top of Bank to 100-Feet
! !Top of Bank to 200-Feet
Observed Low Stem Density Areas
NOTES FROMJUNE 5, 2023ASBUILT SITE WALK
JUN 2023
EMH FARMBUFFERMITIGATIONBANK PARCELUT 1
UT 3
E 2
E 1
UT 2
Low stem density confirmed during
NCDWR asbuilt Site walk. Very few
stems observed within first ~25 ft from
easement boundary. Supplemental
planting in this area will be required
for full credit release. The supplemental
planting will NOT include sycamore.
Difficult to confirm stem density during
NCDWR asbuilt Site walk. Few stems were
observed within these areas due
to dense herbaceous layer. Vegetation Transects will be performed in these areas to determine if supplemental planting is necessary
Text
TextText
NCDWR noted that herbaceous
vegetation has not yet established
along areas of bank work and
culvert removal. These areas will be
monitored and re-seeded if necessary.
Text
NCDWR requested that additional easement
signage be added along the boundary in the
wooded portion of the easement. 4 additional
signs were installed June 5, 2023.
As-Built and Baseline Monitoring Report Appendices
EMH Farm Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Guilford County, North Carolina February 2024

Adaptive Management Plan – Planting Plan

During a June 5, 2023 as-built site walk-through with NCDWR, three areas with visibly low stem
density were delineated (Figure 2, Appendix A; NCDWR Correspondence, Appendix D). One area
along the northwestern easement boundary was determined to have been missed during Site
planting efforts and will require a supplemental planting effort. The other two areas, one along
the easement boundary just north of feature E 2 and another along the right bank of UT 1, were
characterized by dense herbaceous vegetation, making it difficult to assess stem density.
Clearwater intended to replant all three areas prior to MY1 monitoring, however, during the Fall
of 2023 and MY1, several additional areas of planted stem mortality were observed on-site. As
such, Clearwater elected to hold off replanting until after MY1 measurements to use the MY1
data to pinpoint additional areas of planted stem mortality, likely due to the planting period and
subsequent drought conditions. Supplemental planting is proposed for Q1 2024 that includes
planting 6,070 bare-root stems across 10.55 acres. Vegetation transects will be performed in
planted areas during MY2 monitoring to document sufficient planting.

A figure is included on the following plage, depicting the supplemental planting areas totaling
10.55-acres and a plant species table is depicted below. 24” – 36” bare-roots are proposed to be
planted which will allow for these trees to get above the fescue and increase survivability. Due
to the size of the area proposed for supplemental planting (10.55 acres) Sycamores are proposed
within the planting list at percentages comparable to originally approved BPDP, however efforts
will be made to ensure Sycamores are not planted within the three transect areas noted, and
efforts can be made to limit the number of Sycamores planted within the remaining areas.
Additionally, efforts will be made to not plant Willow Oaks near Plot 2.

Common Name * Scientific Name # of Planted Stems % of Total Planted Trees Canopy Type
River birch Betula nigra 980 17.6 Canopy
Tulip Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 560 10 Canopy
Red mulberry Morus rubra 280 5 Midstory
Black willow Salix nigra 750 5 Midstory
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 980 17.6 Canopy
Mockernut hickory Carya tomentosa 280 5 Canopy
Swamp chestnut oak Quercus michauxii 560 10 Canopy
Water oak Quercus nigra 560 10 Canopy
Willow oak Quercus phellos 560 10 Canopy
Shumard oak Quercus shumardii 280 5 Canopy
American elm Ulmus americana 280 5 Canopy
Total 6,070 100
* 24-36” premium bare roots are proposed to increase survivability.
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
1
2
3
7
6
9
5
2
1
3
4
8
19
11
14
10
15
16
13
17
12
18
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
1:2000
22-033
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Guilford County, N C
2
³
0 30 0 60 0150Fe e t
Lege nd
EM H F a rm E a se me n t = 2 6.8 1 a c
Su b je ct P a rce l B ou n d a rie s
Rip a ria n R e sto ra tio n , T OB -1 0 0 F e e t
Rip a ria n R e sto ra tio n o n E p h e m e ra l C h a n n e l, TO B -1 0 0 F e et
Rip a ria n R e sto ra tio n , T OB -1 0 0 F e e t
Rip a ria n R e sto ra tio n o n E p h e m e ra l C h a n n e l, 1 0 1 -2 0 0 F e e t
Rip a ria n E n h a n ce me n t, TO B -1 0 0 F e e t
Rip a ria n E n h a n ce me n t, 1 0 1 -2 0 0 F ee t
Rip a ria n E n h a n ce me n t, 2 0 -2 9 F e e t
Rip a ria n P re se rvatio n , TO B -1 0 0 F e e t
Rip a ria n P re se rvatio n , 1 0 1 -2 0 0 F e et
Rip a ria n P re se rvatio n , 2 0 -2 9 F e e t
In te rm itte n t/P e re nn ia l S tre a m C h a nn e l To p o f Ba n k
Ep h e m e ra l C h a n ne l To p o f B an k
Pe rm e n e n t Ve g e tatio n P lo ts
50 m x 2 m Ve g e ta tio n Tra n se cts
To p o f B a n k to 2 0 -F e e t
To p o f B a n k to 3 0 -F e e t
To p o f B a n k to 5 0 -F e e t
!!To p o f B a n k to 1 0 0-F e e t
!!To p o f B a n k to 2 0 0-F e e t
Q1 2 0 2 4 P ro p o se d S u p p le m e n ta l P la n tin g A re a
Curr ent ConditionsPlan View
Dec 2023
EMH FA RMBUFFERMITIGATIONBANK PAR CEL
U T 1
U T 3
E 2
E 1
U T 2