20180180 Ver 2_WLS_Hollowell AMP 2024_20240528

Adaptive Management Plan
Hollowell Buffer Mitigation & Nutrient Offset Project

Private Commercial Mitigation Bank for
Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Credits
Neuse River Basin (CU 03020201)
DWR Project # 2018-0180v2
USACE Action ID Number: SAW-2017-00159
Wayne County, NC
Data Collection Period: April 2024
Submission Date: May 2024

Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
512 N. Salisbury Street,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27620

Prepared by:

1
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A Background Figures
Figure 1a-1b Adaptive Management Study Areas
Figure 2a-2b Proposed Adaptive Management Areas

Attachment B Site Investigation Data Findings
Random Vegetation Transects Summary Table
Photo Log
Soil Testing Results

Attachment C DWR Site Visit Meeting Minutes

2
Hollowell MY5 Vegetation Adaptive Management Plan
Background
During the DWR MY4 report (buffer and nutrient) site visit on April 17, 2024, five areas of vegetation
concern were identified by DWR staff (Figure 1 and meeting minutes). The primary observations were
low stem height/vigor and low stem density along UT2-R2, UT2-R3, and the area between the ditch and
UT2A. WLS and DWR agreed that deer browsing has been an issue for stem height in these areas. DWR
was also concerned that soil conditions may be affecting tree vigor and herbaceous cover. After the site
visit, it was determined that WLS would submit an Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) following
additional data collection (random vegetation transects and soil testing). The data collection results and
AMP recommendations are provided below and in the attachments.
Data Collection and Results
Nine random vegetation transects (50m x 2m) were done to evaluate the vegetation on site. Transect
locations were chosen randomly near areas of concern. Only species from the approved planting list
were counted towards success criteria, including volunteers. Low stem density in this instance refers to
the final DWR vegetation success criteria of the survival of at least four native hardwood tree species
(including bald cypress), where no one species is greater than 50 percent of the established stems,
established at a density of at least 260 planted trees per acre at the end of Year 5. This equates to six
stems or less in a 100-meter plot to be not passing success criteria. Figure 1 provides the locations of
referenced study areas and random vegetation transects. A summary table of the random transect data
is in in Attachment B.
Area 1- Two random transects were done in Area 1 along UT1-R2 near Vegetation Plot (VP) 29, both
having 12 total stems and average stem heights of 6.8 feet and 6.4 feet, respectively. Herbaceous
vegetation was uniformly over 98 percent cover. Area 1 is trending toward meeting final success criteria.
Area 2 - One random transect was done in Area 2 near VP 25, with 11 total stems and an average stem
height of 5.0 feet. Further visual observation indicated that a smaller area within Area 2 (approximately
0.8 acres) has low stem density and low tree height. Herbaceous vegetation was uniformly over 98
percent cover.
Area 3 - One random transect was done in Area 3 within the March 2024 replant area at the
downstream end of UT2-R3, with 11 total stems and an average stem height of 4.4 feet. Stem density is
meeting success criteria due to supplemental planting of 350 containerized trees on March 5, 2024. This
area was replanted due to heavy deer browse and feral hogs rooting in this area. Existing stems present
prior to replanting have low tree height and survivability. Herbaceous vegetation was uniformly over 98
percent cover.
Area 4 - Two random transects were done in Area 4 along the left bank of UT2-R2, one with eight total
stems and an average stem height of 4.3 feet. The second transect had 11 total stems with an average
stem height of 4.2 feet. This area has low stem vigor and tree height, with an approximately 1.5-acre
section between VP 21 and 46 with low stem density. Herbaceous vegetation was uniformly over 98
percent cover.
3
Area 5 - Three random transects were done in Area 5 between UT2A and the ditch. Stem totals and
average stem heights were 7, 6, 10 stems, and 3.3 feet, 3.1 feet, 4.1 feet, respectively. The eastern two-
thirds (approximately 2.5 acres) of the area has low stem density and tree height. Herbaceous cover was
also lower closer to the farm road. At the time of the field investigations, herbaceous cover was
estimated to be at 85 percent near the farm road.
Soil Testing - Soil samples were taken in each of the five areas and sent to the N.C. Cooperative
Extension for testing. Overall, the soils were found to be favorable for tree growth. Soils are mildly acidic
(5.7-6.4 pH) with only minor fertilizer recommendations. All five areas have a general recommendation
of 80-120 lbs/acre of nitrogen and varying amounts of potash (10-50 lbs/acre). Area 2 also had a
recommendation of 10 lbs/acre of phosphorus. The full soil report is in Attachment B.
Proposed Adaptive Management
Figure 2 shows the areas included in the proposed AMP. These areas will be monitored in MY5, and
monitoring for DWR vegetation plots will be extended one year (MY6) to ensure vegetation meets final
DWR success criteria. Specific proposed adaptive management for each area is described below and
includes supplemental planting and/or fertilizer spikes (Tables 1 and 2).
Area 1 – Area 1 was documented as trending toward meeting DWR success criteria, and no adaptive
management is proposed. This will be used as a reference for the areas receiving adaptive management.
In MY5 and MY6, two random transects will be done in Area 1.
Area 2 - Supplemental planting is proposed in a portion of Area 2 (0.8 acres) with 3-gallon trees. All
planting will occur during the upcoming dormant season (Fall/Winter 2024). Planting density will be
approximately 100 trees/acre within Area 2. This planting density will raise the low stem density area to
meet or exceed DWR final success criteria.
Area 3 – Area 3 is trending toward meeting DWR success criteria despite deer browse and low tree
height. This area was already replanted in March 2024. One-time tree fertilizer spikes are proposed
within Area 3 for planted trees between two and five feet tall. This will specifically target fertilizer to low
vigor trees. Spikes will be a standard tree and shrub fertilizer with 12/5/7 or similar
Nitrogen/Phosphorous/Potassium (NPK) ratio. Only existing stems within Area 3 will be targeted (no
replanted trees).
Area 4 – Supplemental planting is proposed in part of Area 4 (1.0 acre) with 3-gallon tree species. All
planting will occur during the upcoming dormant season (Fall/Winter 2024). Planting density will be
approximately 75 trees per acre in Area 4 re-plant area. This planting will raise the low stem density area
to meet or exceed DWR final success criteria. One-time tree fertilizer spikes are also proposed within the
entire Area 4 (4.9 acres) for planted trees between two and five feet tall. This will specifically target
fertilizer to viable low vigor trees. Spikes will be a standard tree and shrub fertilizer with 12/5/7 or
similar NPK ratio.
Area 5 - Supplemental planting is proposed in Area 5 (2.5 acres) with 3-gallon tree species. All planting
will occur during the upcoming dormant season (Fall/Winter 2024). Planting densities will be
approximately 100 trees per acre in the eastern portion of Area 5 (closer to the farm road) and 75 trees
per acre in the western portion of Area 5 (closer to VP 33). These planting densities will raise the low
stem density area to meet or exceed DWR final success criteria. One-time tree fertilizer spikes are also
4
proposed within the entire Area 5 (3.5 acres) for previously planted trees between two and five feet tall.
This will specifically target fertilizer to viable low vigor trees. Spikes will be a standard tree and shrub
fertilizer with 12/5/7 or similar NPK ratio.
Table 1. Proposed Adaptive Management Plan
Area Supplemental Planting Planting Density Fertilizer Spikes
1 No - No
2 Yes 100 trees/acre No
3 No - Yes
4 Yes 75 trees/acre Yes
5 Yes 100 trees/acre (eastern portion)
75 trees/acre (western portion) Yes

Table 2. Proposed Species List and Stem Totals
Scientific Name Common Name Number of Stems
Quercus phellos Willow oak 50
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 50
Betula nigra River birch 75
Quercus nigra Water oak 50
Carpinus caroliniana Ironwood 50
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore 75
Taxodium distichum Bald cypress 50

Attachment A:
Background Figures

Figures 1a-1b: Adaptive Management Study Areas
Figures 2a-2b: Proposed Adaptive Management Areas

Access: 35.354770, -78.127019
UT1-R2
Culvert
W4
W4a
W3a
W3
UT1-R1
DitchEnd of CoastalHeadwater Stream
Potential AMP Area 1
Potential AMP Area 2
R9
R1
R23
2
7
9
6
4
8
40
29
26
39
27
25
41
30
31
28
Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE1aHollowell Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer ProjectWayne County, North Carolina NAD 1983 2011 State PlaneNorth Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
0 250 500Feet
±
Conservation Easement
Adaptive Management Study Areas
Wetland
Top of Bank
Stream
Preservation Buffer, 0'-50'
Preservation Buffer, 51'-100'
Restoration Buffer, 0'-50'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 0'-100'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 101'-200'
Nutrient Offset, 0'-50'
Nutrient Offset, 51'-200'
Culvert
Vegetation Plot
Success Criteria Met (MY4)
Success Criteria Not Met (MY4)
AMP Random Transect (2024)
DWR Project #2018-0180v2 MY4
Adaptive ManagementStudy Areas
Access: 35.354368, -78.114349
W2a
W2
UT2-R1 (Upper)
UT2A
Culvert
Culvert
UT2-R1 (Lower)
UT2-R2
UT2B
UT2-R3
Ditch
End of CoastalHeadwater Stream
W1
45
42
32
17
16
44
43
34
33
18
19
35
46
20
21
36
45
22
37 23
38
24
Potential AMP Area 5
Potential AMP Area 4
Replanting area (March 2024)
Potential AMP Area 3
R8
R7
R6
R5
R4
R3
Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE
NAD 1983 2011 State PlaneNorth Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
0 250 500Feet
±
Conservation Easement
Replanting Area (March 2024)
Adaptive Management Study Areas
Top of Bank
Stream
Wetland
Preservation Buffer, 0'-50'
Preservation Buffer, 51'-100'
Restoration Buffer, 0'-50'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 0'-100'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 101'-200'
Nutrient Offset, 0'-50'
Nutrient Offset, 51'-200'
Non-Subject Stream Preservation Buffer
Water Quality Feature
Culvert
Vegetation Plot
Success Criteria Met (MY4)
Success Criteria Not Met (MY4)
AMP Random Transect (2024)
Hollowell Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer ProjectWayne County, North Carolina
DWR Project #2018-0180v2 MY4 1bAdaptive ManagementStudy Areas
Access: 35.354770, -78.127019
UT1-R2
Culvert
W4
W4a
W3a
W3
UT1-R1
DitchEnd of CoastalHeadwater Stream
Area 1, no AMP (2.9 ac)
Area 2 (0.8 ac)
R9
R1
R23
2
7
9
6
4
8
40
29
26
39
27
25
41
30
31
28
Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE2aHollowell Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer ProjectWayne County, North Carolina NAD 1983 2011 State PlaneNorth Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
0 240 480Feet
±
Conservation Easement
Proposed Adaptive Management AreaSupplemental Planting
Area 1 (reference), no AMP
Wetland
Top of Bank
Stream
Preservation Buffer, 0'-50'
Preservation Buffer, 51'-100'
Restoration Buffer, 0'-50'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 0'-100'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 101'-200'
Nutrient Offset, 0'-50'
Nutrient Offset, 51'-200'
Culvert
Vegetation Plot
Success Criteria Met (MY4)
Success Criteria Not Met (MY4)
AMP Random Transect (2024)
DWR Project #2018-0180v2 MY4
Proposed AdaptiveManagement Areas
Access: 35.354368, -78.114349
W2a
W2
UT2-R1 (Upper)
UT2A
Culvert
Culvert
UT2-R1 (Lower)
UT2-R2
UT2B
UT2-R3
Ditch
End of CoastalHeadwater Stream
W1
45
42
32
17
16
44
43
34
33
18
19
35
46
20
21
36
45
22
37 23
38
24
Area 5 (3.5 ac total)Area 4 (4.9 ac total)
Replanting area (March 2024)
Area 3 (4.1 ac)
R8
R7
R6
R5
R4
R3Area 5 (3.5 ac total)
Area 5Combo (2.5 ac)Area 4 Combo (1.0 ac)
Area 4 (4.9 ac total)Area 4 (4.9 ac total)
Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE
NAD 1983 2011 State PlaneNorth Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
0 250 500Feet
±
Conservation Easement
Replanting Area (March 2024)
Proposed Adaptive Management AreaFertilizer Spikes
Proposed Adaptive Management Area ComboSupplemental Planting and Fertilizer Spikes
Top of Bank
Stream
Wetland
Preservation Buffer, 0'-50'
Preservation Buffer, 51'-100'
Restoration Buffer, 0'-50'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 0'-100'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 101'-200'
Nutrient Offset, 0'-50'
Nutrient Offset, 51'-200'
Non-Subject Stream Preservation Buffer
Water Quality Feature
Culvert
Vegetation Plot
Success Criteria Met (MY4)
Success Criteria Not Met (MY4)
AMP Random Transect (2024)
Hollowell Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer ProjectWayne County, North Carolina
DWR Project #2018-0180v2 MY4 2bProposed AdaptiveManagement Areas

Attachment B:
Site Investigation Data Findings

Random Vegetation Transects Summary Table
Photo Log
Soil Testing Results

Area 1: Random Transect 1 (Southwest)Area 1: Random Transect 1 (Northeast)
Area 2: Random Transect 2 (North)Area 2: Random Transect 2 (South)
Area 3: Random Transect 3 (Southeast)Area 3: Random Transect 3 (Northwest)
Area 4: Random Transect 4 (North)Area 4: Random Transect 4 (South)
Area 4: Random Transect 5 (West)Area 4: Random Transect 5 (East)
Area 5: Random Transect 6 (Northeast)Area 5: Random Transect 6 (Southwest)
Area 5: Random Transect 7 (Northwest)Area 5: Random Transect 7 (Southeast)
Area 5: Random Transect 8 (North)Area 5: Random Transect 8 (South)
View of Area 5 from road looking west Herbaceous cover near road in Area 5
NCDA&CS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Website: www.ncagr.gov/Divisions/Agronomic-Services Report No.FY24-SL031295
Mehlich-3 Extraction
Completed: Received:Sampled:
Soil Report
Farm:
Client:
Soil Testing Section
Advisor:
Hollowell05/10/202405/02/202404/30/2024
Predictive
Alyssa Davis
7721 Six Forks Rd. Suite
130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Alyssa Davis
7721 Six Forks Rd. Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Sampled County : Wayne
555459 555459Client ID: Advisor ID:
Lime History:
Sample ID: More
Information
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm ; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm ; NO3-N in mg/dm ]: Soil Class:
Ca%NO3-NSS-IESPNaCu-IZn-AIZn-IMn-AI2Mn-AI1Mn-IS-IMg%K-IP-IpHAcBS%CECW/VHM%
2 -
1 -
Crop
Recommendations:Lime
BCuZnMnSMgK2OP2O5N
Mineral
Hardwood, M
Hardwood, M
0.0
0.0
HW100
80-120
80-120
0
0
33746.01.4827.71.030.66 1751365432
0
0
10
10
Note: 11
Note: 11
136
(tons/acre)
333
0
0
61 19
Nutrients (lb/acre)
0.1
0
0
0
0
Lime History:
Sample ID: More
Information
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm ; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm ; NO3-N in mg/dm ]: Soil Class:
Ca%NO3-NSS-IESPNaCu-IZn-AIZn-IMn-AI2Mn-AI1Mn-IS-IMg%K-IP-IpHAcBS%CECW/VHM%
2 -
1 -
Crop
Recommendations:Lime
BCuZnMnSMgK2OP2O5N
Mineral
Hardwood, M
Hardwood, M
0.0
0.0
HW200
80-120
80-120
0
0
36355.71.2744.81.220.36 1091199031
10
10
10
10
Note: 11
Note: 11
119
(tons/acre)
333
0
0
51 20
Nutrients (lb/acre)
0.0
0
0
0
0
Thank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
Reprogramming of the laboratory-information-management system that makes this report possible is being funded
- Steve Troxler, Commissioner of Agriculture
NCDA&CS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Website: www.ncagr.gov/Divisions/Agronomic-Services Report No.FY24-SL031295
Page 2 of 3Alyssa Davis
Lime History:
Sample ID: More
Information
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm ; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm ; NO3-N in mg/dm ]: Soil Class:
Ca%NO3-NSS-IESPNaCu-IZn-AIZn-IMn-AI2Mn-AI1Mn-IS-IMg%K-IP-IpHAcBS%CECW/VHM%
2 -
1 -
Crop
Recommendations:Lime
BCuZnMnSMgK2OP2O5N
Mineral
Hardwood, M
Hardwood, M
0.0
0.0
HW300
80-120
80-120
0
0
282106.40.7875.11.240.22 11817510421
0
0
20
20
Note: 11
Note: 11
175
(tons/acre)
333
0
0
62 22
Nutrients (lb/acre)
0.0
0
0
0
0
Lime History:
Sample ID: More
Information
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm ; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm ; NO3-N in mg/dm ]: Soil Class:
Ca%NO3-NSS-IESPNaCu-IZn-AIZn-IMn-AI2Mn-AI1Mn-IS-IMg%K-IP-IpHAcBS%CECW/VHM%
2 -
1 -
Crop
Recommendations:Lime
BCuZnMnSMgK2OP2O5N
Mineral
Hardwood, M
Hardwood, M
0.0
0.0
HW400
80-120
80-120
0
0
321345.71.3724.81.230.60 1031364522
0
0
20
20
Note: 11
Note: 11
136
(tons/acre)
333
0
0
51 18
Nutrients (lb/acre)
0.0
0
0
0
0
Lime History:
Sample ID: More
Information
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm ; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm ; NO3-N in mg/dm ]: Soil Class:
Ca%NO3-NSS-IESPNaCu-IZn-AIZn-IMn-AI2Mn-AI1Mn-IS-IMg%K-IP-IpHAcBS%CECW/VHM%
2 -
1 -
Crop
Recommendations:Lime
BCuZnMnSMgK2OP2O5N
Mineral
Hardwood, M
Hardwood, M
0.0
0.0
HW500
80-120
80-120
0
0
141116.01.0856.91.191.19 1664187218
0
0
50
50
Note: 11
Note: 11
418
(tons/acre)
333
0
0
69 15
Nutrients (lb/acre)
0.0
0
0
0
0
NCDA&CS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Website: www.ncagr.gov/Divisions/Agronomic-Services Report No.FY24-SL031295
Page 3 of 3Alyssa Davis
Recommendations
Lime
If testing finds that soil pH is too low for the crop(s) indicated, a lime recommendation will be given in units of either
ton/acre or lb/1000 sq ft. For best results, mix the lime into the top 6 to 8 inches of soil several months before planting.
For no-till or established plantings where this is not possible, apply no more than 1 to 1.5 ton/acre (50 to 75 lb/1000 sq ft)
at one time, even if the report recommends more. You can apply the rest in similar increments every six months until the
full rate is applied. If Mg is recommended and lime is needed, use dolomitic lime.
Fertilizer
Each nutrient recommendation for field crops or other large areas are listed separately in units of lb/acre unless
otherwise specified. Recommendations for N (and sometimes for B) are based on research/field studies for the crop
being grown, not on soil test results. Recommendations for K and P will depend on K-I and P-I soil test results and the
crop to be grown. Generally, at K-I and P-I values > 50, recommendations will be minimal. If Mg is needed and no lime is
recommended, 0-0-22 (11.5% Mg) is an excellent source; 175 to 250 lb/acre alone or in a fertilizer blend will usually
satisfy crop needs. Soluble salt levels (SS-I) appear only on reports for diagnostic/problem samples.
Farmers and other commercial producers should pay special attention to micronutrient levels. If $, pH$, $pH, C or Z
notations appear on the soil report in the recommendation section, refer to NCDA&CS
. Various NCDA&CS also address lime and fertilizer needs.
Recommendations for small areas, such as home lawns/gardens, are listed in units of lb/1000 sq ft. If you cannot find
the exact fertilizer grade recommended on the report, visit NCDA&CS to find information that may
help you choose a comparable alternate. For more information, read NCSU publication,
In general, homeowners do not need to be concerned about micronutrients.
Test Results
The first seven parameters [soil class, HM%, W/V, CEC, BS%, Ac and pH] describe the soil and its degree of acidity.
The remaining 16 parameters [P-I, K-I, Ca%, Mg%, Mn-I, Mn-AI1, Mn-AI2, Zn-I, Zn-AI, Cu-I, S-I, SS-I, Na, ESP, SS-I,
NO3-N (not routinely available)] indicate levels of plant nutrients or other fertility measurement. Visit NCDA&CS
for more information.
Report Abbreviations
Ac exchangeable acidity
B boron
BS% % CEC occupied by basic
cations
Ca%% CEC occupied by calcium
CEC cation exchange capacity
Cu-I copper index
ESP exchangeable sodium percent
HM%percent humic matter
K-I potassium index
K2O potash
Mg%% CEC occupied by magnesium
MIN mineral soil class
Mn manganese
Mn-Al1 Mn-availability index for crop 1
Mn-AI2 Mn-availability index for crop 2
Mn-I manganese index
M-O mineral-organic soil class
N nitrogen
Na sodium
NO3-N nitrate nitrogen
ORG organic soil class
pH current soil pH
P-I phosphorus index
P2O5 phosphate
S-I sulfur index
SS-I soluble salt index
W/V weight per volume
Zn-AI zinc availability index
Understanding the Soil Report: explanation of measurements, abbreviations and units
$Note: Secondary Nutrients and Micronutrients
Fertilizer Substitutions
A Homeowner's Guide to Fertilizer.
Understand Your Report
crop notes

Attachment C:
DWR Site Visit Meeting Minutes

[phone] • [e-mail]
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615, United States
www.waterlandsolutions.com

Meeting Minutes

Hollowell Mitigation Project, DWR ID #2018-0180v2

Subject: NC DWR MY4 Site Visit
Date Prepared: April 19, 2024
Meeting Date and Time: April 17, 2024, at 12:00 pm – 3:00 pm
Meeting Location: 35.345739, -78.115471 (Wayne County, NC)
Attendees: NCDEQ DWR: Katie Merritt, Andrew Friedman-Herring
WLS: Cara Conder, Alyssa Davis

These meeting minutes document notes and discussion points from the NCDEQ DWR Monitoring Year 4
(MY4) Site Meeting for the Hollowell Mitigation Project (Neuse River Basin, CU 03020201). The site is in
Wayne County, North Carolina and is a stream/wetland and nutrient/buffer site. The meeting began at
12:00 pm with a brief project overview and discussion of site issues documented in the MY4 report. After
the discussion, attendees toured the site to observe current conditions. In general, the project site review
notes are presented below in the order they were discussed/visited. This site visit is during MY5, but the
focus of the visit was areas noted in the MY4 report.

General
• Group parked on the crossing between UT2-R1 and UT2-R2
• The group went over the CCPV map to locate the areas that had failing vegetation plots in the
MY4 report.
• DWR noted that height in the report was generally low.
• WLS located on the CCPV where the supplemental planting was done this winter 2024 on the
lower end of UT2-R2.
• WLS noted that this site was planted with trees and shrubs, however the shrubs don’t count
towards the DWR success criteria, resulting in lower stem density for some plots.

Left bank/buffer of UT2-R2 & UT2-R3
• Group started the walk outside of the easement area of UT2-R2 to visually assess conditions.
• Group walked to Vegetation Plots 46, 21, and 36. These plots were passing success criteria in
MY4. The entire left buffer bank area has been heavily browsed by deer, as all the browsed
stems are the same height.
• DWR noted that the tree height is low for MY4 and was concerned about some of the tree health.
• DWR stated that while these areas passed the MY4 success criteria, the stem density visually
looks low between the plots and the trees are small. WLS will conduct transects in this area to
verify the stem density.

[phone] • [e-mail]
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615, United States
www.waterlandsolutions.com
• Group then walked to Plots 22, 37, and 23. Plot 37 was not passing at MY4, and this general
area was supplementally planted on March 5, 2024. The supplementally planted trees are doing
well and DWR approved of the replant area.
• For the entire left bank buffer area of UT2-R2 and UT2-R3, except the recently replanted area,
DWR requested an Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) due to the deer browsing, tree heights,
and vigor of some of the trees. The AMP could include items like planting deer resistant trees,
deer repellant, soil testing, planting additional 3-gallon trees where stem density is low, and root
stimulator and/or lime as needed.
• WLS will submit an AMP to DWR for review based on additional due diligence including random
vegetation transects and soil testing. The recent replant area on lower UT2-R3 does not need to
be included in the AMP.

Area between Ditch and UT2A
• Group quickly visually assessed this area and tree density was low and tree height was low. The
herbaceous layer isn’t performing well either. WLS needs to assess this area and include in the
AMP.

Area between Ditch and UT1-R1
• Group visually assessed this area near Plot 25 that was failing in MY4. Tree density is low and
tree height was low. WLS needs to assess this area and include in the AMP.

Left bank/buffer of upper UT1-R2
• Group started the walk outside of the easement area of UT1-R2 to visually assess conditions.
• Group walked to Vegetation Plots 41 and 29 that did not pass success criteria in MY4. WLS had
conducted transects between the plots and vegetation was meeting criteria.
• DWR noted that this side of the project is visually performing better with increased tree density,
height, and herbaceous layer.
• Group walked to Plot 28 and vegetation is doing well.
• WLS will assess this area and propose in AMP if needed. This area might only need some
supplemental planting near the failing plots.

Summary
• WLS will provide an Adaptive Management Plan to DWR after investigations are complete.
• Once the AMP is approved by DWR, WLS will send to the USACE also.
• WLS has provided a map of areas visited during the site visit and potential AMP areas.
• WLS will need to monitor for at least one additional year and this will be proposed in the AMP.

The above minutes represent Water & Land Solutions’ interpretation and understanding of the meeting
discussion and actions. If recipients of these minutes should find any information contained in these

[phone] • [e-mail]
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615, United States
www.waterlandsolutions.com
minutes to be in error, incomplete, please notify the author with appropriate corrections and/or additions
within five business days to allow adequate time for correction and redistribution.
Access: 35.354770, -78.127019
UT1-R2
Culvert
W4
W4a
W3a
W3
UT1-R1
DitchEnd of CoastalHeadwater Stream
Potential AMP areato be assessed
Potential AMP areato be assessed
3
2
7
9
6
4
8
40
29
26
39
27
25
41
30
31
28
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
FIGUREAHollowell Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer ProjectWayne County, North Carolina NAD 1983 2011 State PlaneNorth Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
0 240 480Feet
±
Conservation Easement
Potential Adaptive Management Plan Assessment Area
Wetland
Top of Bank
Stream
Preservation Buffer, 0'-50'
Preservation Buffer, 51'-100'
Restoration Buffer, 0'-50'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 0'-100'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 101'-200'
Nutrient Offset, 0'-50'
Nutrient Offset, 51'-200'
Culvert
Vegetation Plot
Success Criteria Met
Success Criteria Not Met
DWR Project #2018-0180v2 MY4
Potential AdaptiveManagementAssessment Areas
Access: 35.354368, -78.114349
W2a
W2
UT2-R1 (Upper)
UT2A
Culvert
CulvertUT2-R1 (Lower)UT2-R2
UT2B
UT2-R3
Ditch
End of CoastalHeadwater Stream
W1
45
42
32
17
16
44
43
34
33
18
19
35
46
20
21
36
45
22
37 23
38
24
Potential AMP areato be assessed
Potential AMP areato be assessed
Replanting area
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE
NAD 1983 2011 State PlaneNorth Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
0 250 500Feet
±
Conservation Easement
Replanting Area
Potential Adaptive Management Plan Assessment Area
Top of Bank
Stream
Wetland
Preservation Buffer, 0'-50'
Preservation Buffer, 51'-100'
Restoration Buffer, 0'-50'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 0'-100'
Coastal Headwater Restoration Buffer, 101'-200'
Nutrient Offset, 0'-50'
Nutrient Offset, 51'-200'
Non-Subject Stream Preservation Buffer
Water Quality Feature
Culvert
Vegetation Plot
Success Criteria Met
Success Criteria Not Met
Hollowell Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer ProjectWayne County, North Carolina
DWR Project #2018-0180v2 MY4
Potential AdaptiveManagementAssessment Areas B