20151144 Ver 1_Preservation Report_20150427

PRESERVATION PROJECT AND
BASELINE DOCUMENTATION REPORT

Muddy Creek LWP – UT to Goose Creek (Coats)
McDowell County, North Carolina
EEP Project Identification Number 93876

Catawba River Basin - Cataloging Unit 03050101

Prepared for:

NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

Prepared by:
Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc.
37 Haywood Street, Suite 100
Asheville, NC 28801
September 30, 2013
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report i EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The UT to Goose Creek preservation project on the Coats property is located within the 111 mi2
Muddy Creek watershed in south-central McDowell County, North Carolina. It is within the
larger context of the entire Muddy Creek watershed that preservation of the stream and riparian
resources on the Allen site are important. Over the last 15 years, the Muddy Creek Restoration
Partnership has led an effort to improve water quality, aquatic habitat, and riparian conditions
with the watershed. Over $18 million has been invested to restore, enhance and preserve 27
miles of stream. While most of this effort has focused on restoration and enhancement of
streams, preservation of pristine streams has always been seen as an important component of this
work. Preservation of high quality riparian areas and stable stream channels not only protects the
ecological functions of existing natural resources, but by preventing their degradation the
ecological function of restored downstream reaches, as well as the monetary investment that has
gone into restoring those reaches, is also protected.

The investment in stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation within the Muddy Creek
watershed has led not only to improved ecological function within the watershed, but it has also
benefitted the Catawba River, of which Muddy Creek is a significant tributary. Reducing
pollutants originating from the Muddy Creek watershed, particularly sediment and nutrients, has
not only been beneficial to maintaining the trout fishery within that reach of the Catawba River,
but any improvements in water quality will reduce the City of Morganton’s drinking water
treatment costs.

Preservation on the Coats site includes headwater portions of three unnamed tributaries (UT) that
drain to North Muddy Creek. The 31.06 acres of the property that has been placed into
permanent conservation easements contains 5,452 feet of perennial stream and 926 feet of
intermittent stream. The stream channels are stable and the riparian areas have high ecological
function. These areas show little evidence of land disturbance in the recent past.

Conservation values of the Coats site are significant. It potentially contains a rare liverwort
species, a rare moss species, and two rare vascular plants, as well as two high quality natural
areas. In addition, the site is located less than a mile from a 610 acre protected wilderness and
within 10 miles of numerous Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHAs). The EEP also has
purchased numerous other mitigation sites within the Muddy Creek watershed that include over
15,000 feet of stream preservation.

Based on the justifications described above and following existing preservation mitigation
guidelines, the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program purchased the mitigation assets
of the Coats property.

This preservation report has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title
33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2)
through (c)(14) and 332.3(h); and NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program In-Lieu Fee
Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010.
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report ii EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Site Description

Project Characteristic Characteristic Description or Value
Project Name and EEP Project Number UT to Goose Creek (Coats), EEP Proj. # 93876
County McDowell County
General Location 744 Huntsville Road, Glenwood Township
Basin Catawba River
Physiographic Region Piedmont Province
USGS Hydro Unit 10 digit HUC - 0305010106
NCDWQ Sub-basin No longer in use.
Watershed Planning Information Muddy Creek Watershed
Preservation Mechanism Conservation Easement and Right of Access
Conservation Values
Potential State RTE species occurrences; high
quality natural community type of those found on
nearby SNHAs; closeness to multiple SNHAs;
protect on-site and downstream assets from
development
Option Recordation Date July 20, 2010
Conservation Easement Recordation Date May 5, 2011

Mitigation Assets
Warmwater -Stream Riparian Wetland Non-riparian
Wetland
Linear feet or acres 6,378
Restoration Equivalent
Credits (assume 5:1)
1,276

Totals 1,276

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report iii EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Table of Contents

Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... i
1 PRESERVATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................ 1
2 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................. 2
2.1 General Description.......................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Directions ......................................................................................................................... 2
3 SITE SELECTION ................................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Conservation Values ........................................................................................................ 3
3.2 Threats of Adverse Modification ..................................................................................... 4
4 BASELINE INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 5
4.1 Physical Features .............................................................................................................. 5
4.2 Plant and Wildlife Communities ...................................................................................... 5
4.3 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams.............................................................................. 10
5 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT ................................................................................. 10
5.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary ............................................................................. 10
5.2 Recordation Date ............................................................................................................ 11
5.3 Encumbrances ................................................................................................................ 11
6 DETERMINATION OF MITIGATION CREDITS ............................................................. 11
7 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN .............................................................................. 12
8 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES .............................................................................................. 13
9 OTHER INFORMATION .................................................................................................... 13
9.1 References ...................................................................................................................... 13
9.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure .................................................................................. 14
9.3 Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................. 15
9.4 Watershed Map .............................................................................................................. 16
9.5 Site Map ......................................................................................................................... 17
9.6 Site Photographs ............................................................................................................. 18
9.7 Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument ........................................................................ 19
9.8 Appendix B. Stream and Wetland Forms....................................................................... 28

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 1 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

1 PRESERVATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Project is located in the Muddy Creek Local Watershed
planning area (Muddy Creek Watershed Restoration Plan [MCRP 2003]). The Muddy Creek
watershed includes Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC) 03050101040020, 03050101040010, and a
portion of 03050101030060, which were identified as Targeted Local Watersheds (TLW) in
EEP’s 2009 Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priority (RBRP) Plans (NCEEP 2009a) and
is identified in the Muddy Creek LWP Project Atlas (NCEEP 2009b).

The Muddy Creek Restoration Partnership (MCRP) developed a non-EEP watershed assessment
of the 111 sq. mile Muddy Creek (MCRP 2003) watershed in December 2003. The assessment
included land use analysis, water quality monitoring, and stakeholder input to identify problems
with water quality, habitat, and hydrology. The Muddy Creek watershed was characterized as
being composed of primarily forest and agricultural land and has a history of severe bank
erosion, aquatic habitat degradation, high fecal coliform levels, and degraded biological
communities. Most of the degradation in the watershed has been caused by poor agricultural
practices, particularly livestock access to creeks and commercial land use activities. However,
21 tracts of land were identified as having functioning riparian zones and intact stream channels
worthy of preservation. The Coats tract was one of those areas. In 2008, EEP included the
Muddy Creek watershed as a LWP priority area and, based in the information in that report,
produced a LWP Project Atlas (NCEEP 2009b) in March 2008.

The Muddy Creek assessment identified the following as major stressors within the watershed:
Streambank erosion
Lack of an adequate forested buffer
Stream channelization
Impervious cover
Upland erosion
Livestock access to streams
Urban toxicants
Nutrients
Fecal coliform bacteria

The Muddy Creek Feasability and Restoration Plan (MCRP 2003) set forth the following
objectives:
Improve water quality in the Muddy Creek watershed to the degree that is promotes a
trophy tailrace trout fishery in the Catawba River below Lake James
Achieve a State of North Carolina fully supporting [use] designation for all water courses
in the watershed.

The UT to Goose Creek (Coats) site was identified in the LWP Project Atlas as a stream
preservation opportunity to prevent future impacts to downstream restoration sites from
sedimentation caused by land development within the Muddy Creek watershed.

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 2 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

According to the 2010 North Carolina Division of Water Quality Catawba River Basinwide
Water Quality Plan (NCDWQ 2010) all streams within the Muddy Creek watershed, with the
exception of Corpening Creek (Youngs Fork), were achieving their designated uses.
2 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 General Description
The 31.06 acre Conservation Easement described in this report encompasses a portion of an
Unnamed Tributary of Goose Creek. It is on a 266± acre tract of land owned by Donald Fred
Coats and wife, Elizabeth P. Coats as described in McDowell County Deed Book 675 on Page
734 and identified in the McDowell County Tax Office as PIN – 1619-80-1305. The center
point of the tract is located at the following latitude/longitude coordinate - 35.61, -81.959. The
easement area being preserved encompasses three areas, 3.94 acres (Reach 1), 15.98 acres
(Reach 2), and 11.14 acres (Reach 3) in size. These areas are known to have been forested since
the 1990s. Uses of land adjacent to the conservation easement include agriculture and pasture to
the west; otherwise the remainder of the tract surrounding the easement is forested. There are no
expectations that surrounding property uses will change in the foreseeable future. The
conservation easement area contains high quality stream channels and forested riparian areas and
was purchased to preserve those areas in perpetuity.

A Baseline Documentation Report is incorporated into this document as a requirement of the
closeout process.

The property can be accessed from Huntsville Drive
2.2 Directions
The UT to Goose Creek (Coats) project site is located approximately 5.7 miles southeast of
Marion, directly to the east of the small community of Glenwood. From Raleigh, take I-40 West
through Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Statesville, and Hickory to Exit 86 (Marion/Shelby). At
the end of the exit ramp, turn left onto NC 226 South towards Shelby. Follow NC 226 South for
1.1 miles. Turn right onto Old Glenwood Road (SR 1794) and travel 2.7 miles to Glenwood
Drive (SR 1766). Turn left onto Glenwood Drive and after crossing the railroad tracks
immediately turn right onto Huntsville Drive (SR 1790). Travel for approximately 0.7 mile on
Huntsville Drive and the Coats project site will be on the left. See maps in Sections 9.3, 9.4, and
9.5

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 3 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

3 SITE SELECTION
The UT to Goose Creek (Coats) site was selected to meet mitigation needs as required by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for unavoidable impacts to streams and wetlands
associated with highway construction and development. It was chosen because the site contains
an ecologically important and undisturbed stream channel as described in the USACE Stream
Mitigation Guidelines document (USACE 2003). It is also located within an undisturbed
headwater catchment of the Muddy Creek watershed. Such catchments were identified as high
priority for protection in the Muddy Creek Feasibility Report (MCRP 2003). Headwaters
protections were recognized as being necessary to protect the benefits of downstream restoration
projects. Development of headwater catchments could nullify the ecological improvements of
the downstream restored areas. The conservation easement at the Coats site consists of a buffer
averaging more than 100 feet wide on both sides of the stream channel except in Reach 3 where
a small portion of the buffer on one side is less than 30 feet in width. The buffer generally
includes the entire floodplain and contains a high quality riparian natural area composed of
native vegetation. As such, it meets the NCEEP’s original Preservation Guidance Criteria
(2004).
3.1 Conservation Values
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) collects and stores data on rare,
threatened or endangered (RTE) plant and animal species as well as rare natural community
types. Many of these are identified on sites known as Significant Natural Heritage Areas
(SNHAs). The datasets contain records of RTE species observations, known as Element
Occurrences (EO), recorded by NCNHP field biologists. These EOs would provide added
conservation value if present on the easement. The following is a list of EOs known to occur
within a 3-mile radius of the Coats property as of July 2013. It also includes a list of important
natural communities present on the property.

Table 1: Potentially-Occurring Rare Species and Natural Communities
Taxonomic
Group Scientific Name Common Name
Element
Occurrence
Status
Accuracy State
Status1
Federal
Status2
State
Rank
Global
Rank
Liverwort Aneura sharpii A Liverwort Current 3 -
Medium SR-T S1 G1G2
Moss Oxyrrhynchium
pringlei
Pringle's Water
Feather Moss Current 3 -
Medium SR-D S1 G2G3
Vascular
Plant Monotropsis odorata Sweet Pinesap Current 3 -
Medium SC-V FSC S3 G3
Vascular
Plant Thermopsis mollis Appalachian
Golden-banner Current 3 -
Medium SC-V S2 G3G4
Natural
Community
Chestnut Oak Forest
(Dry Heath Subtype) Current 3 -
Medium S5 G5
Natural
Community
Montane Oak--
Hickory Forest
(Acidic Subtype) Current 3 -
Medium S4S5 G4G5
1State status definitions: SR – Significantly Rare, D = Disjunct, T = Throughout; SC – Special Concern, V = Vulnerable
2Federal status definitions: FSC – Federal Species of Concern

While there is no designated critical habitat or dedicated nature preserve near the Coats property,
it is less than one mile from the 610 acre Bobs Creek Pocket Wilderness, a regionally Significant
Natural Heritage Area according to the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP 2005). There
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 4 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

are numerous other SNHAs within 10 miles of the Coats property; EEP also has two other
managed preservation sites within 1.5 miles of the Coats site (Figure 2). The Allen preservation
site encompasses 5,950 feet of stream within 34 acres of land in a conservation easement,
whereas the Haney site encompasses 18 acres of land in a conservation easement, with an as yet
undetermined amount of stream channel. Within the Muddy Creek watershed EEP has numerous
other mitigation sites composed of various amounts of restoration, enhancement, and
preservation. All of these sites have permanent conservation easements; over 15,000 feet of high
quality stream with ecologically functioning riparian areas are preserved at these sites.

Goose Creek, North Muddy Creek, and the unnamed tributaries flowing from the Coats property
have a DWQ water quality classification of C. This classification is designed to protect the best
uses of the stream. Uses protected under the C classification include fishing, wildlife, fish
consumption, aquatic life, including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological
integrity, agriculture, and secondary recreation. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating,
and other uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an
infrequent, unorganized or incidental manner.

According to NCDWQ, benthos in North Muddy Creek was rated good/fair in 2002 and 2007,
whereas the fish community was rated as excellent in 2007 and 2012 (NCDWQ 2013).

Conservation of this tract will preserve the quality of water within the catchment and within the
Muddy Creek watershed as a whole. While all catchments within the Muddy Creek watershed,
except the Corpening Creek subwatershed are meeting their intended uses, preservation of this
area will prevent the area from being developed. This, combined with other restoration projects
within the Muddy Creek watershed will result in reduced volumes of sediment reaching the
Catawba River. Reduced sediment levels will improve water quality conditions for the tailrace
trout fishery that has evolved in the Catawba River downstream of its confluence with Muddy
Creek. In addition, reduced sediment levels will lead to reduced costs of treating water for
Morganton’s residents.
3.2 Threats of Adverse Modification
Approximately 80% of the Coats Property contains a mature, second growth mixed hardwood
forest that has been undisturbed for an extended period of time. The most significant threat to
the property is the likelihood of development into a residential community or clearing to support
agricultural activities. The property is close to Interstate 40, is adjacent to the Glenwood
community with an elementary school, and is within easy driving distance of the Marion and
Rutherfordton/Spindale/Forest City urban areas. These characteristics make the property highly
desirable for other uses. Without the protection of a conservation easement, the remaining
unprotected property could be sold for residential development or other land disturbing activity.
Reaches 2 and 3 are surrounded by significant additional forested areas. Portions of the northern
boundary of Reach 1 is in pasture, while a grain bin, two storage buildings, a barn, a shed, and a
garage are adjacent to the western boundary. These structures were constructed sometime
between 1998 and 2005. Older structures present in this area include a kennel, a garage, and a
mobile home space.

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 5 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

4 BASELINE INFORMATION
4.1 Physical Features
In general, the Coats property consists of steep upland topography with very narrow ravines,
long swaths of exposed bedrock along streams, and an increasing amount of exposed bedrock at
higher elevations. Some areas along the stream are nearly impassable due to the narrow profile
of the drainage combined with slick, exposed rock, and the presence of groundwater seepage that
is evident in riparian zones throughout most of the Property. Ridges and drainages are sharply
defined. There are relic logging roads and also a network of 4x4 trails on the land to the east that
intersects the easement at certain points. Water from the project streams drains to Goose Creek,
a tributary of North Muddy Creek.
4.2 Plant and Wildlife Communities
Natural Communities
The Coats Property consists mainly of very high-quality, minimally-disturbed second growth
forest communities in Reaches 2 and 3, the two easternmost easement areas. Reach 1, the
westernmost easement area is bordered to the north by a grassy field and farm road; the forest
community has been modified due to past logging. Riparian communities are high-quality and
intact, and there are extensive areas of bedrock cascades and waterfalls along streams throughout
the Property. There also are several small low elevation seeps present within Reach 1.

Several transitional upland communities exist on the Coats Property (Schafale and Weakly
1990). Both Acidic Cove and Rich Cove forests are abundant on the easement; the former is
prevalent in narrow ravines in riparian zones along Reach 1, while the latter occurs at lower
elevations in coves surrounding streams. Also important are Mixed Mesic Forests, which occur
in coves at lower elevations. Mesic Oak-Hickory forests, which occur along the slopes and
ridges at higher elevations, extend into, but make up a smaller component of the easements.
Small areas of circumneutral or basic soil at upper elevations in the northernmost portion of
Reach 2 support Basic Mesic Forests, a somewhat uncommon community type in the low
mountains. There are also small portions of good-quality Pine-Oak/Heath present at the highest
elevations on the Property. In general, the age and size of canopy trees within upland
communities indicate that logging has not occurred within the past 75 years. A brief description
of each of the observed natural communities on the site is listed below:

Chestnut Oak Forest (S5/G5)

Topographic Setting: This community occurs over shallow, rocky, and acidic soils
primarily on more exposed slopes and ridgetops at moderate elevations in the
Southern Blue Ridge and upper Piedmont physiographic regions.

Soils: Rocky, acidic, upland soils. Series include Ashe, Chestnut, Edneyville, and
Chandler (all Typic Dystrochrepts).

Vegetation Composition: Chestnut Oak forests are still in transition following the
loss of the American chestnut. In many areas, chestnuts have been replaced by early
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 6 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

successional understory trees, including black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), yellow
poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red maple (Acer rubrum var. rubrum), and several
pine species (Pinus sp.). While chestnut oak often co-dominates with northern red
oak (Quercus rubra var. rubra) in this community type, characteristic canopy species
on the Property also include black oak (Quercus velutina), white oak (Quercus alba),
sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), Frasier magnolia (Magnolia fraseri), sassafras
(Sassafras albidium), and white pine (Pinus strobus).

Acidic Cove Forest (S5/G5)

Topographic Setting: This community type typically occurs on narrow, sheltered
sites, steep ravines, and low ridges with cool aspects at low to moderate elevations.
Acidic Cove Forests occur in linear patches along stream bottoms and in steep draws
and ravines on the Property.

Soils: Rocky, acidic. Series include Tusquitee (Humic Hapludult) and Ashe (Typic
Dystrochrept).

Vegetation Composition: The canopy of Acidic Cove Forests is relatively closed,
consisting of acid tolerant mesophytic trees, primarily yellow poplar, sweet birch
(Betula lenta), red oak , American beech (Fagus grandifolia), and occasionally
Canada hemlock (Tsuga canadensis). Sourwood is a common component as are
saplings from mesophytic canopy trees. The shrub layer includes heath shrubs such
as rhododendron (Rhododendron sp.) and mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia) along the
creek bottoms and lower slopes. The herb layer includes species such as the downy
rattlesnake orchid (Goodyera pubscens), galax (Galax urceolata), trailing arbutus
(Epigaea repens), yellow-root (Xanthorhizza simplicissima), and water leaf
(Hydrophyllum virginianum).

Montane Oak-Hickory Forest - (S5/G5)

Topographic Setting: In general, montane oak-hickory forests occupy intermediate
positions along major environmental gradients such as soil moisture, soil fertility, and
elevation. They occur along the highest elevations on the conservation easement
area.

Soils: Soils are mostly acidic and are derived from igneous and sedimentary parent
material. Probably generally Ultisols or Dystrochrepts. Series include Porters
(Umbric Dystrochrept), Ashe (Typic Dystrochrept), Chandler, and Watauga (Typic
Hapludults).

Vegetation Composition: The overstory is diverse, and includes white oak, chestnut
oak, Northern red oak, sweet birch, magnolias (Magnolia acuminata and M. fraseri),
sourwood, hickories (Carya spp.), red maple, tulip-poplar, and white pine. The
understory contains a substantial component of heaths, mainly great laurel, but also
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 7 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

contain many non-ericaceous species such as witch-hazel (Hamamelis virginiana),
buffalo-nut (Pyrularia pubera), and hazelnuts (Corylus spp.). The herbaceous
component is relatively diverse, but often patchy and composed of both acid-loving
and rich species, including New York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis), galax,
Indian cucumber-root (Medeola virginiana), squawroot (Conopholis americana),
halberd-leaved yellow violet (Viola hastata), white clintonia (Clintonia umbellata),
and devil's-bit (Chamaelirium luteum).

Rich Cove Forest (S5, G5)

Topographic Setting: This community type is typically found on sheltered, mesic,
low to moderate elevation sites on broad coves and lower slopes.

Soils: Rich, generally circumneutral. May be quite rocky but generally deep. Series
mapped include Ashe (Typic Dystrochrept), Porters (Umbric Dystrochrept), and
Tusquitee (Humic Hapludult).

Vegetation Composition: The forest canopy is dense with a mixture of mesophytic
hardwood species such as tulip poplar, American basswood (Tilia americana var.
heterophylla), sweet birch (Betula lenta), blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica), and Canada
hemlock. The understory consists of flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), pawpaw
(Asimina triloba) and Eastern red maple (Acer rubrum). Typical herbs include, but
are not limited to marginal wood fern (Dryopteris marginalis), yellowroot
(Xanthorhiza simplicissima), northern maidenhair fern (Adiantum pedatum), Indian
cucumber-root, foamflower (Tiarella cordifolia), and can contain American ginseng
(Panax quinquefolius). Acidic Cove Forests, which may occur in similar sites, are
dominated by the more acid tolerant subset of the rich cove species, and have
undergrowth dominated by heath shrubs rather than herbs. Like Acidic Cove Forests,
Rich Cove Forests grade upward into Chestnut Oak and Oak-Hickory Forests.

Pine-Oak/Heath Forest (S4/G5)

Topographic Setting: This community type occurs in open canopy woodlands of
sharp ridges and dry slopes.

Soils: Generally thin and rocky, extremely acidic soils. Most are probably Porters
(Umbric Dystrochrept) or Cleveland (Lithic Dystrochrept). Pine-Oak/Heath forests
are fire-dependent and are among driest and most exposed communities to lightning.

Vegetation Composition: The relatively closed canopy consists of Pitch Pine (Pinus
rigida), Sourwood, Chestnut Oak, Sassafras (Sassafras albidium), and Eastern Red
Maple. Because this system is fire-dependent, several pines require fire for
reproduction and regeneration. It is distinguished from Chestnut Oak Forest by
having less than 50% of the canopy consisting of hardwoods; this particular
community is mature, with pines and oaks reaching heights of approximately 70 feet
and diameters of up to 30 inches. The shrub layer is relatively dense, dominated by
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 8 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Ericaceous (heath) species, including mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), rosebay
rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium
angustifolium), and herbs like trailing arbutus and galax in the ground layer. Also,
there are multiple large boulders scattered throughout the community.

Low Elevation Seep (S3/G4)

Topographic Setting: Seepages and springs at bases of slopes or edges of floodplains.

Soils: Saturated, usually mucky, soils. Occurrences are too small to be distinguished
in soil surveys.

Vegetation Composition: These areas are very small, and are partially shaded by
canopies of American beech in the adjacent Rich Cove community. Wetland trees
such as Eastern Red Maple and American ash are rooted at the margins of the seeps.
Shrubs include Northern Spicebush, Eastern sweetshrub (Calycanthus floridus),
Northern Wild Raisin (Viburnum cassinoides), and Southern Wild Raisin (V. nudum
). A variety of wetland herbs occur, including Lizard's-tail (Saururus cernuus),
Orange Jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), Cinnamon Fern (Osmundastrum
cinnamomeum), Royal Fern (Osmunda regalis), False-nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica),
Hooked Buttercup (Ranunculus recurvatus), White Turtlehead (Chelone glabra),
Sedges (Carex spp.), rush (Juncus sp.), and Virginia Bugleweed (Lycopus virginicus).

Mixed Mesic Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype) (S5/G5)

Topographic Setting: Forests in this group occupy mesic uplands, ravines, lower
slopes, and well-drained "flatwoods".

Soils: Deep, well-drained, somewhat acidic soils. Series include Cecil, Georgeville,
Pacolet, Tatum, Wedowee (Typic Hapludults), Tallapoosa (Ochreptic Hapludult), and
Louisburg (Ruptic-Ultic Dystrochrept)..

Vegetation Composition: The most typical overstories contain mixtures of American
beech, various oaks (white being most dominant), tulip-poplar, and hickories (Carya
spp.), but a wide variety of hardwood associates occur. American hornbeam, pawpaw,
Northern spicebush, Eastern sweetshrub, flowering dogwood, American strawberry-
bush (Euonymus americanus) and American holly (Ilex opaca) are prominent
understory plants. These communities lack the lush herbaceous layers of Basic Mesic
Forests, although species such as Christmas fern, New York fern, and white wood
aster (Eurybia divaricata) may form moderately dense populations. Along with
Christmas fern, cankerweed (Prenanthes serpentaria), downy rattlesnake-plantain
(Goodyera pubescens), Virginia heartleaf (Hexastylis virginica), and partridge-berry
(Mitchella repens) are frequent evergreen herbs.

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 9 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Basic Mesic Forest (Piedmont Subtype)

Topographic Setting: Lower slopes, north-facing slopes, ravines, and occasionally
well-drained small stream bottoms, with basic or circumneutral soils.

Soils: Deep, well-drained soils with circumneutral or higher pH. Series include Tatum
(Typic Hapludult),Wilkes (Typic Hapludalf), and Louisburg (Ruptic-Ultic
Hapludalf).

Vegetation Composition: Canopy dominated by mesophytic trees, primarily tulip
poplar, American beech, Southern sugar maple, white oak and Northern red oak.
Trees typical of better drained bottomland sites, such as black walnut (Juglans nigra),
and sugarberry (Celtis laevigata), may be present. Understory includes Eastern
redbud (Cercis canadensis), flowering dogwood, ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana),
paw-paw, and slippery elm (Ulmus rubra). Shrubs may include viburnums
(Viburnum spp.), Northern spicebush (Lindera benzoin), bigleaf snowbell (Styrax
grandifolia), wild hydrangea (Hydrangea arborescens), hearts-a-bursting
(Eunoymous atropurpurea), eastern sweetshrub, and painted buckeye (Aesculus
sylvatica). The herb layer is generally dense and very diverse, with species such as
Christmas fern, wild ginger (Asarum canadense), doll’s eyes (Actaea pachypoda),
moonseed (Menispermum canadense), liverleaf (Hepatica americana), bloodroot,
black cohosh, yellow lady’s slipper (Cypripedium pubescens [calceolus]), American
ginseng (Panax quinquefolius), maidenhair fern, mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum),
foamflower (Tiarella cordifolia var. cordifolia), Viola spp., eastern green violet
(Hybanthus concolor), Dutchman’s breeches (Dicentra cucullaria), dwarf larkspur
(Delphinium tricorne), sweet Betsy (Trillium cuneatum), veiny pea (Lathyrus
venosus), and yellow fumewort (Corydalis flavula).

Potentially-Occurring Rare Species
A liverwort, a moss, and two vascular plant species considered rare, threatened, endangered, or
of special concern (RTE) may occur on the Coats site. In addition, two important natural
community types are known occur within a three-mile radius of the Coats Property (Table 1).
This information was used during the natural resource field analysis to assist in confirming the
presence or absence of those RTE species on the property. None of the listed species were
observed during the time of the field visit, but fluctuations in phenology and seasonal presence
are restrictive, and the species may still be present on the Property despite a lack of direct
observation. Additionally, several of the listed species are non-vascular plants which can be
extremely difficult to identify and often times require the confirmation of a scientific authority.
It is recommended that an experienced bryologist perform a search to identify any RTE non -
vascular plants on site.

Invasive Exotic Plant Species
There are several invasive exotic plant species that occur on the Coats Property. The most
prevalent is tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima). It occurs in several medium-sized patches no
greater than 1,000 ft2 within canopy disruptions on the northernmost portion Reach 2; stems are
of varying maturity, and past seed production is evident. There is also an infestation of kudzu
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 10 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

(Pueraria montana var. lobata) and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) occurring on the
northern edge of the Reach 1, the westernmost easement area and where the boundary abuts a
cleared field. This infestation most likely started via seed dispersal from other infestations along
the field’s edge. Several small stems of kudzu were observed in the woods due south of the
infestation, so the potential for future infestation apparent. Additionally, there are several
occurrences of multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) in the understory adjacent to the kudzu
infestation.

The threat of adverse modification of the natural forest structure by invasive exotic plants is a
concern at this site. Although EEP has contracted out to control infestations of multiflora rose,
kudzu, honeysuckle and tree of heaven, plans to control Japanese honeysuckle do not exist at this
time. Controlling these plants will ensure the health and survival of the natural communities on
the Coats Property.
4.3 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams
A total of 6,378 feet of stream were delineated on the Coats property. Of that, 926 feet were
identified as being intermittent, whereas 5,452 feet were determined to be perennial. No riparian
wetlands were documented within the easement areas.

Streams on the Coats property have no special water quality classification. All are considered
Class C streams and are considered to contain warmwater fish and aquatic invertebrate
communities.

Buffer widths on all stream channels along Reaches 2 and 3 average more than 100 feet. Buffer
width along 200 feet of one side of stream in Reach 1 is less than 30 feet. Where buffers are less
than 100 feet, it is due to the presence of a farm road or where the stream channel crosses the
easement boundary at less than a 90 degree angle.
5 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
5.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary
The land required for stewardship of this mitigation project includes portions of the following
parcel. A copy of the land protection instrument is included in Appendix A.

Parcel
Number Landowner PIN County
Site
Protection
Instrument
Deed Book
and Page
Number
Date
Option
Signed
Date
Deed
Signed
Acreage
protected
1
Coats, Donald
F. & Elizabeth
P.
1619-
80-
1305
McDowell Conservation
Easement
Book:
CRP 1045

Pages:
620-630
July 20,
2010
May 5,
2011
Area A:
17.30
Area B:
4.09
Area C:
11.14
Total: 32.53

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 11 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

All site protection instruments require 60-day advance notification to the Corps and the State
prior to any action to void, amend, or modify the document. No such action shall take place
unless approved by the State.

5.2 Recordation Date
The Conservation Easement Option Agreement signed on July 20, 2010 and was recorded with
the McDowell County, North Carolina Register of Deeds Office on August 30, 2010 in Deed
Book CRP 1027 Pages 500-507.

The Conservation Easement and Right of Access document was signed and recorded at the
McDowell County, North Carolina Register of Deeds Office on May 5, 2011 in Book CRP 1045
Pages 620-630.

5.3 Encumbrances
As stated in the Section VI of the Site Protection Instrument, the Conservation Easement is free
from encumbrances. It does not contain any roads, trails, or public utilit y rights-of-way,
including electric, sewer, greenway or other trails that would compromise the integrity of the
intended purposes of the easement.
6 DETERMINATION OF MITIGATION CREDITS
Project mitigation assets were assessed through GIS analysis, including aerial photography,
followed by field reconnaissance with Global Positioning Systems to validate perennial and
intermittent stream lengths and/or jurisdictional wetland acreages.

Because the option to purchase the conservation easement at the Coats site was acquired prior to
July 28, 2010, all credits are released. The project service area will be in compliance with the
EEP In-Lieu Fee Instrument

UT to Goose Creek (Coats), McDowell County,
Catawba River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03050101
EEP Project Number 93876
Mitigation Credits*
Warm
Stream
Riparian
Wetland
Non-riparian
Wetland Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient
Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient
Offset
Type R RE R RE R RE
Totals NA 1,276 NA NA NA NA NA
*Compensatory mitigation credits are calculated by dividing the stream footage or wetland acreage by 5
unless otherwise indicated in the notes below.

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 12 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Component Summation
Preservation
Components
Warm Stream
(linear feet)
Riparian Wetland
(acres)
Non-riparian
Wetland
(acres)
Buffer
(square feet)
Upland
(acres)
Riverine Non-
Riverine
Stream Reach 1 1,327
Stream Reach 2 2,692
Stream Reach 3 2,359
Notes
Standard credit determination: GPS stream centerline and divide by 5. Delineate hydric soils for wetland credits.
Do not cut out fingers or hummocks from credits. Include stream thermal regime.

Jurisdictional Stream Characteristics
Stream
Component
Type
Perennial/Intermittent
Drainage
Area
(acres)
NCDWQ Form Scores1
Perennial/Intermittent
Length
(linear Feet)
Perennial/Intermittent
Reach 1 Perennial & Intermittent 19 30+/19.4+ 943/384
Reach 2 Perennial 77 +/na 2,692/0
Reach 3 Perennial & Intermittent 96 36.3/23.5 1,817/542

Total 5,452/926
1NCDWQ Form scores (NCDWQ 2010b) are taken from the field sheets in Appendix B; where more than one score was calculated for a reach, the
scores were averaged. The average score does not include those locations where the perennial stream determination was made using only
NCDWQ Criterion 3 (presence of obligate macroinvertebrates); a + sign in the table indicates that such a determination was made within a reach.

No jurisdictional wetlands are present on the Coats mitigation site.

Jurisdictional Wetland Characteristics
Wetland
Component
Type (Riparian, non-
Riparian, etc.)
Description
(Floodplain depression, seepage
slope, etc.)
Acreage

Total
7 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon approval for close-out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred
to the NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation Stewardship Program.
This party shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions
required in the conservation easement or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld.

The NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation’s Stewardship Program
currently houses EEP stewardship endowments within the non-reverting, interest-bearing
Conservation Lands Stewardship Endowment Account. The use of funds from the Endowment
Account is governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A-232(d)(3). Interest gained by
the endowment fund may be used only for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 13 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable. The NCDENR Stewardship Program
intends to manage the account as a non-wasting endowment. Only interest generated from the
endowment funds will be used to steward the compensatory mitigation sites. Interest funds not
used for those purposes will be re-invested in the Endowment Account to offset losses due to
inflation.
8 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Ecosystem Enhancement Program's In-Lieu
Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources has provided the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal
commitment to fund projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by EEP. This
commitment provides financial assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the
program.
9 OTHER INFORMATION
9.1 References
MCRP (Muddy Creek Restoration Partners). 2003. Feasibility Report and Restoration Plan for
The Muddy Creek Watershed. Report prepared by Equinox Environmental Consultation
& Design, Inc. for the Muddy Creek Restoration Partners.

NCDWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2010. Catawba River Basinwide Water
Quality Plan. Raleigh.

NCDWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2013. Biological Assessment Unit –
Benthos and Fisheries Data. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq; access July 11, 2013.

NCEEP (North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program). 2004. Preservation Guidance
Criteria, Updated March 9, 2004.

NCEEP (North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program). 2009a. Upper Catawba River
Basin Restoration Priorities 2009. Raleigh.

NCEEP (North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program). 2009b. Technical Memorandum:
Evaluation and Update of Mitigation Opportunities 2008 Muddy Creek Mitigation
Search. Report prepared by Equinox Environmental Consultation & Design, Inc. for
NCEEP. Raleigh.

Schafale, M.P. and Weakley, A. S. (1990), Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation, NC Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC

USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. US Army
Corps of Engineers Wilmington District

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 14 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

9.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 15 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

9.3 Vicinity Map

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 16 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

9.4 Watershed Map

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 17 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

9.5 Site Map

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 18 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

9.6 Site Photographs
Typical conditions within Pine-Oak /Heath
community type, occurring at the uppermost
elevations of Reach 3; July 11, 2013.
Typical sharp, narrow intermittent drainages
along upper portions of Reach 3; also indicative
of typical conditions within Acidic Cove Forests
throughout the easement areas: July 11, 2013.
View of rock cascades that are prevalent within
stream channels along Reaches 2 and 3; July 11,
2013.
View of Low Elevation Seep community type
occurring along Reach 1; July 11, 2013.
Typical conditions within Mixed Mesic Forest
communities throughout the easement areas; July
11, 2013.
View looking from cleared field edge into Reach
1 easement area; July 11, 2013.
UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 19 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

9.7 Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument
Parcel 1. Coats Property Recorded Conservation Easement and Right of Access

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 20 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 21 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 22 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 23 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 24 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 25 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 26 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 27 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 28 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

9.8 Appendix B. Stream and Wetland Forms
The following table summarizes the stream reach determination field form scores for the Coats
Preservation site. Project reach corresponds to those reaches shown in Figure 4 in Section 9.5.
Stream sub-reaches are field designations only. Mean reach scores shown in the Jurisdictional
Stream Characteristics table in Section 6 were calculated by averaging only those locations at
which a numerical score was determined. The average score does not include those locations
where the determination was made using NCDWQ Criterion 3 (presence of obligate
macroinvertebrates).

Project
Reach
Stream
Sub-Reach
Determination
Perennial/Intermittent
NCDWQ
Reach
Score
NCDWQ
Criterion 3
(Obligate
Macroinvertebrates)
1 01 Intermittent 19.5 NA
1 02 Intermittent 16.5 NA
1 03 Intermittent 21.5 NA
1 04 Perennial 30 NA
1 05 Intermittent 20 NA
1 131 Perennial X
2 131 Perennial X
3 06 Perennial 41 NA
3 07 Intermittent 28 NA
3 08a Perennial 32 NA
3 08b Intermittent 24.5 NA
3 09 Intermittent 21 NA
3 10 Intermittent 23 NA
3 11 Perennial 36 NA
3 12 Intermittent 21 NA
1Determination at stream sub-reach 13 was applied to both project Reach 1 and 2.

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 29 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 1

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 30 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 2

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 31 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 3

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 32 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 4

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 33 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 5

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 34 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 6

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 35 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 7

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 36 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 8a

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 37 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 8b

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 38 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 9

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 39 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 10

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 40 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 11

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 41 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 12

UT to Goose Creek (Coats) Closeout Report 42 EEP Project No. 93876
September 30, 2013

Intermittent and Perennial Stream Determination Form – Reach 13

Mitigation Project Name UT to Goose Creek (Coats)
EEP IMS ID 93876
River Basin CATAWBA
Cataloging Unit 03050101
Applied Credit Ratios:1:1 1.5:1 2.5:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1
St
r
e
a
m

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
St
r
e
a
m

En
h
a
n
c
m
e
n
t

I
St
r
e
a
m

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t

I
I
St
r
e
a
m

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Ri
p
a
r
i
a
n

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
No
n
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Cr
e
a
t
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

En
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Co
a
s
t
a
l

M
a
r
s
h

Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Beginning Balance (feet and acres)6,378.00
Beginning Balance (mitigation credits)1,275.60
NCDOT Pre-EEP Debits (feet and acres):Not Applicable
EEP Debits (feet and acres):
DWQ Permit No USACE Action IDs Impact Project Name
2011-01151
NCDOT TIP B-4061 -
Replace Bridge 90 on SR
1727, Catawba Co 1,490.00
2011-01197
SR 1486 Improvements -
Division 12 375.00
2011-0844 2006-32042
NCDOT TIP U-2211B -
SR 1001 Improvements,
Caldwell Co 4,513.00
Remaining Balance (feet and acres)0.00
Remaining Balance (mitigation credits)0.000
Information from EEP Debit Ledger dated 04/20/2015