Wildlands Lower Catawba_Bootstrap _Final Mit Plan_Report

FINAL MITIGATION PLAN

September 10, 2024

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site
Gaston County, NC

Catawba River Basin
HUC 03050102
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2021-02691
NCDWR # 2022-0073

PREPARED BY:

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]

FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site

Gaston County, NC
Catawba River Basin
HUC 03050102
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2021-02691

PREPARED BY:

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]

Contributing Staff:
Eric Neuhaus, PE Bank Project Manager and Principal in Charge
Abigail Vieira, PE Site Project Manager and Engineer
Aaron Earley, PE, CFM, Lead Quality Assurance
Suri Solis, Designer
Sawyer Winfield, Designer and Construction Documents
Jess Waller, Lead Scientist and Wetland Delineations
Dominic Dixon, Land Stewardship

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page i September 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 Basin Characterization and Site Selection .................................................................................. 1
3.0 Baseline and Existing Conditions ............................................................................................... 2
3.1 Watershed Conditions .................................................................................................................. 2
3.2 Landscape Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 3
3.3 Project Resources - Streams ......................................................................................................... 3
3.4 Project Resources - Wetlands ..................................................................................................... 10
3.5 Existing Vegetation ..................................................................................................................... 13
3.6 Overall Functional Uplift Potential ............................................................................................. 14
3.7 Site Constraints to Functional Uplift ........................................................................................... 14
4.0 Regulatory Considerations ...................................................................................................... 15
4.1 401/404 ...................................................................................................................................... 15
4.2 Threatened and Endangered Species ......................................................................................... 15
4.3 Cultural Resources / Conservation Lands / Natural Heritage Areas ........................................... 16
4.4 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass ............................................................. 16
5.0 Mitigation Site Goals and Objectives ....................................................................................... 16
6.0 Design Approach and Mitigation Work Plan ............................................................................ 17
6.1 Stream Design Approach Overview ............................................................................................ 17
6.2 Stream Design Implementation .................................................................................................. 26
6.3 Wetland Design Approach Overview .......................................................................................... 28
6.4 Wetland Design Implementation ............................................................................................... 29
6.5 Vegetation and Planting Plan ..................................................................................................... 30
6.6 Land Management ...................................................................................................................... 31
6.7 Project Risk and Uncertainties .................................................................................................... 31
7.0 Determination of Credits ......................................................................................................... 32
8.0 Performance Standards ........................................................................................................... 35
9.0 Monitoring Plan ...................................................................................................................... 38
10.0 Long-Term Management Plan ................................................................................................. 41
Ownership and Long-term Manager .......................................................................................... 41
Long-Term Management Activities ............................................................................................ 41
Funding Mechanism ................................................................................................................... 42
Contingency Plan ........................................................................................................................ 43
11.0 Adaptive Management Plan .................................................................................................... 43
12.0 Financial Assurances ............................................................................................................... 44
13.0 References .............................................................................................................................. 45

TABLES
Table 1: Project Attribute Table Part 1 ......................................................................................................... 1
Table 2: Project Attribute Table Part 2 ......................................................................................................... 2
Table 3: Summary of Stream Resources ....................................................................................................... 9
Table 4: Existing Wetlands Summary .......................................................................................................... 11
Table 5: Summary of Site Easement Crossings and Breaks ........................................................................ 14
Table 6: Project Attribute Table Part 3 ....................................................................................................... 15
Table 7: Listed Threatened and Endangered Species in Gaston County, NC .............................................. 16
Table 8: Mitigation Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................... 16
Table 9: Functional Impairments and Restoration Approach ..................................................................... 18
Table 10: Stream Reference Data Used in Development of Design Parameters ........................................ 18

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page ii September 2024
Table 11: Summary of Design Discharge Analysis ....................................................................................... 19
Table 12: Summary of Morphological Parameters for C-Type Streams ..................................................... 21
Table 13: Summary of Morphological Parameters for B-Type Streams ..................................................... 23
Table 14: Summary of Morphological Parameters for Bc-Type Streams .................................................... 24
Table 15: Results of Competence Analysis ................................................................................................. 25
Table 16: Groundwater Gage Summary ..................................................................................................... 29
Table 17: Project Assets and Credits ........................................................................................................... 33
Table 18: Project Credits ............................................................................................................................. 35
Table 19: Summary of Performance Standards .......................................................................................... 36
Table 20: Monitoring Components ............................................................................................................. 39
Table 21: Long-Term Management Plan ..................................................................................................... 42
Table 22: Management Funding ................................................................................................................. 43
Table 23: Financial Assurances Table .......................................................................................................... 44

FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Service Area Map
Figure 3 Existing Conditions Map
Figure 4 NCDOT Current STIP FY 2024-2033 Map
Figure 5 Watershed Map
Figure 6 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 7 Soils Map
Figure 8 Concept Design Map
Figure 9 Concept Design Map with LiDAR
Figure 10 FEMA Map
Figure 11 Reference Reach Map
Figure 12 Design Discharge Summary
Figure 13A Monitoring Overview Map
Figure 13B Monitoring North Map
Figure 13C Monitoring South Map

APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Site Protection Instrument
Appendix 2 Preliminary JD and Supporting USACE Forms
Appendix 3 NC SAM, NC WAM and NC DWQ Stream ID Forms
Appendix 4 Data, Analysis, and Supplementary Information
Appendix 5 Regulatory Correspondence
Appendix 6 Adaptive Management Plan
Appendix 7 Credit Release Schedule
Appendix 8 Financial Assurance
Appendix 9 Preliminary Plan Sheets
Appendix 10 Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 1 September 2024
1.0 Introduction
Wildlands Holdings IX, LLC (Sponsor) proposes to develop the Bootstrap Mitigation Site (Site) under the
Wildlands Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank (Bank). Wildlands Holdings IX, LLC is managed by
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) and was developed for the sole purpose of holding mitigation
banks.
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the Federal rule of compensatory mitigation
project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3
Chapter 2 §332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(2xi).
The Site is located in Gaston County approximately four miles north of Bessemer City (Figure 1). The Site
is within the 14-digit HUC 03050102070020 and the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR) Subbasin 03-08-36. The Site will provide stream and wetland mitigation credits in the
Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050102 (Catawba 02) (Figure 2). If the official service areas of the
Catawba River Basin are changed in the future, the service area of this Site will automatically be
adjusted to match the new service area. The project involves the restoration and enhancement of Black
Bear Creek and eight of its tributaries (Figure 3). Furthermore, the project will reestablish and
rehabilitate 2.0 acres of wetlands and create and enhance 0.5 acres of wetlands. The restoration and
enhancement of these project streams and wetlands will provide 7,703.030 warm stream credits and
2.107 wetland credits. The Site will be protected by a 40.6-acre conservation easement. The Site
Protection Instrument detailing the easement is included in Appendix 1.
Table 1: Project Attribute Table Part 1
Project Information
Project Name Bootstrap Mitigation Site
County Gaston
Project Area (acres) 40.6
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude) 35°20'34.8"N 81°18'05.5"W (Concord Church Road);
35°20'14.4"N 81°17'41.6"W (Dameron Road)
Planted Acreage (acres of woody stems
planted) 30.8
2.0 Basin Characterization and Site Selection
The Site is in the Catawba 02 Basin, the DWR subbasin 03-08-36, and the 03050102070020 14-digit
Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC). Onsite streams flow to Long Creek, which in turn flows into South Fork
Catawba River. The Catawba 02 Basin, as described in the NCDEQ River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) (amended July 2013) and the NCDWR Plan (July 2013) watershed planning documents, is mostly
forested (53%) with areas of agriculture (29%) and developed land (18%). The Catawba 02 Basin, as
described in NCDEQ RBRP, lists broad restoration goals including protection of drinking water supplies,
restoration of biologically impaired creeks impacted by stormwater runoff, protection of important
species and significant natural and cultural resources, and improvement of non-point source pollution
impacts from agricultural practices. More specifically, the watershed is facing stressors due to improper
management practices on cattle farms and stormwater runoff.
Examples of impacts referenced in the RBRP can be seen throughout the Site. Streams exhibit impacts
from livestock and/or farm equipment. Bank trampling and animal waste can be seen within the

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 2 September 2024
streams. Additionally, Site streams have non-forested buffers or a narrow buffer width. As a result of
these impacts, incision, and erosion can be observed throughout the Site.
The 2010 NCDWR Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan notes that the basin has stable benthic
communities, but lacks habitat, which prevents re-establishment of sensitive benthic communities. The
plan notes the need for agricultural BMPs in the watershed.
Developing a mitigation bank will allow unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States to be
mitigated appropriately and provide a means for economic growth of this region to continue while
ensuring aquatic resources and water quality are maintained. The expected customers for the bank
credits include a combination of private enterprises and public entities including NC Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) and the various municipalities located in the Catawba 02 (HUC 03050102) and
in the extended service area Catawba 03 (HUC 03050103). Figure 4 depicts the potential projects set
forth by NCDOT for fiscal year 2024-2033 in the region.
3.0 Baseline and Existing Conditions
3.1 Watershed Conditions
The Site watershed (Table 2 and Figure 5) is situated in Gaston County approximately four miles north of
Bessemer City and is within the Long Creek (west) targeted local watershed (TLW).
Table 2: Project Attribute Table Part 2
Project Watershed Information
Physiographic Province Piedmont
Ecoregion Southern Outer Piedmont
River Basin Catawba
USGS HUC (8-digit, 14 digit) 03050102; 03050102070020
NCDWR Sub-basin 03-08-36
Project Drainage Area (acres) 1,477
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 2.3%
CGIA Land Use Classification
43.5% Cultivated Crops/Hay, 30% Forested, 11.5%
Grassland, 7.5% Developed, 5% Shrubland, 2.5%
Open Water
The Site topography, as indicated on the Bessemer City USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle, shows
the valley of Black Bear Creek as broad and moderately sloped, typical of streams in the Piedmont
(Figure 6). Most of the tributaries to Black Bear Creek are headwater streams in slightly steeper valleys
that range from moderately confined to confined. Land uses draining to the project reaches are mostly a
mix of forested and agricultural pasture/hay fields with some herbaceous and developed land.
A review of historic aerials from 1950 to 2016 shows that the adjacent floodplains of the site have been
in agricultural production since at least 1950 with very little change in the stream configuration and
location. Historic aerial photos are provided for review in Appendix 4.
Immediately west of the Site is a Martin Marietta quarry, which is currently used to produce aggregate
stone. Correspondence with the quarry’s regional manager confirmed that the quarry is still in use and
that only one area at the facility (shown as Lagoon A on google maps) is currently impounding water (J.
Nivens, personal communication, August 23, 2023). This impoundment has a riser barrel discharge
structure and is located just upstream of Black Bear Reach 3. Additionally, a review of the quarry’s 2015
mining permit shows that old settling ponds upstream of Stroup Tributary C are no longer in service and
have been stabilized and seeded (DEQ, 2015). In general, stormwater runoff seems to be well-managed

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 3 September 2024
on the quarry site, and sediment from the quarry does not seem to be causing issues with the Site
streams. It is unlikely that the quarry will cause negative impact to the Site in the future.
The Bennington Estate Phase 4 subdivision is being developed along Plain Field Drive and Harrogate
Drive, off Kiser Road. This subdivision is downstream of the Site, therefore any proposed drainage pipes
for the development will not directly discharge into the Site streams.
A small portion of the Lewis-Brooks RC Airfield drains to Cub Tributary, near the downstream extent of
the Site. The airfield currently sits on the former Biggerstaff Landfill and is regularly used by members of
the Gaston County Remote Control Flying Club. No part of the Biggerstaff Landfill is located within the
project boundary and all grading activities at the Site will occur outside of the landfill. The airfield and
the landfill do not pose a threat to the Site.
The consistency in land use within the project watershed indicates that watershed processes affecting
hydrology, sediment supply, and nutrient and pollutant delivery have not varied widely over time.
Additionally, the Site is located in a rural watershed where the dominant land uses are agriculture,
forest, and silviculture. The land is zoned for low-density residential purposes, therefore, watershed
processes and stressors from outside the project limits are likely to remain consistent throughout the
implementation, monitoring, and closeout of this project.
3.2 Landscape Characteristics
The Site is situated in the Cat Square and Kings Mountain terranes of the Piedmont physiographic
province. The Piedmont is characterized by gently rolling, well‐rounded hills with long low ridges, with
elevations ranging from 300 to 1,500 feet above sea level. The Cat Square terrane is composed of
metamorphic rocks that have been intruded by younger granitic rocks. The Kings Mountain terrane is
composed of metamorphosed sedimentary and volcanic rocks. According to the Geologic Map of North
Carolina (1985), the underlying geology of the Site is mapped as Cambrian to Late Proterozoic age (500
million to 900 million years in age) amphibolite and biotite gneiss (CZab) and sericite schist of the
Blacksburg Formation (CZbl). The amphibolite and biotite gneiss are described as interlayered with
minor layers and lenses of hornblende gneiss, metagabbro, mica schist, and granitic rock. The
Blacksburg Formation is found locally with graphite, phyllite with sericite quartzite, banded marble,
amphibolite, and minor calc-silicate rock. Bedrock outcroppings are located along sections of streambed
at the Site.
A soils investigation was completed remotely using the Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2011). Soils at the Site
range between well drained to poorly drained loam, and the description of these soils do not indicate
that there are weathered bedrock layers within a few feet of ground surface. Worsham loam is the
dominant mapped soil within the floodplain of Black Bear Creek Reach 1 and Stroup Tributaries A and B.
These soils are typically located in depressions and along foot slopes and are poorly drained. Lloyd loam
is mapped along Stroup Tributary C and Black Bear Creek Reach 2 and is classified as well drained and
found on hillslopes and ridges. Chewacla loam is the dominant mapped soil within the floodplain of
Black Bear Creek Reaches 3 and 4, Willow Tributary, and Cub Tributary. Chewacla soils are poorly
drained, frequently flooded, and typically found on floodplains. Vance sandy loam and Winnsboro loam
are found along the Poplar Tributaries. These soils are well drained and found on interfluves. Figure 7
provides a soil map of the Site. Additionally, Wildlands contracted a licensed soils scientist (LSS) to
evaluate the Site. The results of the evaluation and their impact on the wetland mitigation approach are
discussed in Section 6.3.
3.3 Project Resources - Streams
Wildlands investigated on-site jurisdictional waters of the United States (US) within the proposed
project area. Potential jurisdictional areas were delineated using the US Army Corps of Engineers

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 4 September 2024
(USACE) Routine On-Site Determination Method. This method is defined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual and the subsequent Eastern Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Supplement. Streams were classified using NCDWR Classification Forms. Jurisdictional waters of the US
were surveyed for inclusion on plans and figures. Stream and wetland assessment forms are located in
Appendix 2 and 3.
Geomorphic surveys were conducted on Site streams to characterize their existing condition. Existing
streams and cross section locations are illustrated in Figure 3. Reach specific cross sections and
geomorphic summaries are provided in Appendix 4. Table 3 provides a summary of the streams on the
Site.
Black Bear Creek Reach 1
Black Bear Creek Reach 1 enters the northern half of
the Site under Concord Church Road and flows south
through a moderately confined valley. The reach
appears to have been channelized prior to 1950, with
a sinuosity and bank height ratio of 1.04 and 2.0,
respectively. The degree of incision limits floodplain
access during high flow events, which has contributed
to erosion along the reach. A woody buffer ranging
from 50 to 200 feet wide exists along the left
floodplain but has been extensively impacted by cattle
and agricultural practices. The right floodplain is
dominated by pasture grasses, which has contributed
to severe instability and erosion. Cattle have access to the entirety of the reach, with hoof shear and
heavily eroded access points located along the stream. Channel bedform diversity is severely limited.
The reach lacks point bar development or benching. Additionally, pools are poorly formed and tend to
be in-line and shallow due to bank erosion and sediment deposition. The bed material consists of sand
and medium to very coarse gravel. Poor channel bedform, cattle access, lack of large woody debris, and
erosion and fine sediment loads to the reach have greatly reduced instream habitat quality.
Black Bear Creek Reach 2
Black Bear Creek Reach 2 begins at the confluence
with Stroup Tributary C and flows south through a
confined valley to the property line. Similar to Reach
1, Black Bear Reach 2 is incised. The sinuosity and
bank height ratio of Reach 2 are 1.08 and 2.4,
respectively. There is a narrow, forested buffer along
the left bank of the reach, mostly consisting of a single
row of trees. The buffer on the right bank is similarly
narrow for much of the reach but expands near the
downstream end. Outside of the narrow buffers, the
floodplain is actively grazed pasture. Cattle have
access to the entire length of the reach, as evidenced
by the trampled and eroded banks and access points throughout. Channel bedform is somewhat limited
along Reach 2: point bars have begun to form in isolated areas and a few deeper pools are present.
Overall, pool formation is poor, and existing bedform features are made unstable by cattle access and
erosion. The bed material is predominantly sand and large cobble, with some bedrock outcroppings.
Instream habitat is limited by a lack of channel bedform diversity and large woody debris.
Black Bear Creek Reach 1
Black Bear Creek Reach 2

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 5 September 2024
Black Bear Creek Reach 3
Black Bear Creek Reach 3 enters the southern half of
the Site from Dameron Road and flows south through a
valley confined by Dameron Road on the right and a
steep hillslope on the left. Reach 3 is straight and
incised, with a sinuosity and bank height ratio of 1.03
and 2.4, respectively. The degree of incision limits
floodplain access during higher flow events and has
contributed to erosion along the reach. The presence
of bedrock along this reach has likely prevented further
incision. There is a wooded buffer on the right bank
that extends to the overhead utility easement owned
by Rutherford Electric Membership Corporation. The utility line and accompanying easement run along
the length of the right floodplain of Reach 3. The right bank has a sparse buffer comprised mostly of
Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), beyond which is open pasture. Cattle have access to the existing
reach along its entire length, as evidenced by eroded access points along the reach. Channel bedform
diversity is limited. There is minor evidence of point bar development and benching in isolated spots,
however, pools are poorly developed and shallow. The bed material consists of coarse gravel and small
cobble, with bedrock outcroppings. Limited channel bedform, cattle access, and erosion have reduced
instream habitat quality.
Black Bear Creek Reach 4
Black Bear Creek Reach 4 begins immediately
downstream of Reach 3, where the valley changes from
moderately confined to unconfined, and flows
southeast until the property line. The reach appears to
have been channelized, with a sinuosity of 1.06, and is
moderately incised, with a bank height ratio of 1.4.
Coupled with bare banks and cattle trampling, the level
of incision has led to erosion and mass wasting along
its entire length. Apart from a few scattered trees,
there is no wooded buffer along the stream. The left
and right floodplains consist of actively grazed
pastureland, and cattle have access to the entire reach. Channel bedform diversity is severely limited.
There is almost no point bar development, and benching is absent. Pools are poorly formed, tending to
be in-line or shallow due to bank erosion and sediment deposition. The bed material consists of sand
and fine to very coarse gravel. Instream habitat is greatly reduced as a result of poor channel bedform,
cattle access, lack of large woody debris, and erosion and fine sediment loads to the reach.

Black Bear Creek Reach 3
Black Bear Reach 4

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 6 September 2024
Stroup Tributary A Reach 1
Stroup Tributary A Reach 1 is an intermittent tributary
that begins at the property line near the northeastern
extent of the project. It flows southwest through an
existing wetland along the toe of a steep hillslope on
the left and ends just downstream of the wetland.
Cattle have access to the entirety of Reach 1 and its
wooded buffer. The channel is moderately straight,
with a sinuosity of 1.07. The banks show isolated signs
of erosion from cattle trampling, and the channel has
limited bedform.
Stroup Tributary A Reach 2
Stroup Tributary A Reach 2 begins where incision
increases. It continues to flow southwest and ends at
its confluence with Black Bear Creek Reach 1. The
buffer of Reach 2 is similarly wooded as that of Reach
1. The intermittent channel has a low sinuosity of 1.07
and is severely incised, with a bank height ratio of 2.1.
Several headcuts exist along the channel, and the
stream is moderately unstable. Stroup Tributary A
Reach 2 has little to no bedform due to severe cattle
trampling, and the bed material consists mostly of sand
and some medium gravel.
Stroup Tributary B Reach 1
Stroup Tributary B is a perennial tributary that enters
the project from the northeast property line. Stroup
Tributary B Reach 1 flows south through a somewhat
confined valley. The reach is located within the same
sparsely wooded buffer as Stroup Tributary A. Cattle
can access the entire reach; however, bank trampling is
not very severe along Reach 1. The channel is incised,
with a bank height ratio of 1.9. Cattle access, coupled
with the level of incision, has contributed to some
erosion along the channel. Reach 1 has limited pattern,
with a sinuosity of 1.12, which is adequate for the
valley slope. Some bedform diversity is present along
the reach, though pools remain shallow. The bed material is composed of medium to very coarse gravel.
Stroup Tributary B Reach 1
Stroup Tributary A Reach 2
Stroup Tributary A Reach 1

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 7 September 2024
Stroup Tributary B Reach 2
Stroup Tributary B Reach 2 where incision and bank
erosion greatly increase downstream of a 90-degree
bend. Reach 2 flows westward and ends at its
confluence with Black Bear Creek, a few hundred feet
downstream of Stroup Tributary A. The channel is
located in a somewhat confined valley, within the same
sparsely wooded floodplain as Reach 1 and Stroup
Tributary A. Cattle have severely trampled Reach 2 and
caused a loss in channel definition in several locations
along the reach. The reach has a sinuosity of 1.24 and is
incised with a bank height ratio of 2.5. There is little to
no bedform diversity, pool features that have formed are shallow. The bed substrate is composed of
medium to very coarse gravel with fine material. This reach contains an existing culvert crossing, which
provides some grade control to prevent additional incision on the upstream end of the reach. At the
downstream end of the reach, a large headcut has formed below where mature tree roots have grown
in the channel. Due to the level of channel degradation, instream habitat is severely limited.
Stroup Tributary C
Stroup Tributary C enters the northern half of the
project as a perennial stream from a culvert under
Concord Church Road and flows southeast towards its
confluence with Black Bear Creek. Stroup Tributary C is
moderately confined along the upstream end of the
reach but quickly becomes less confined as it enters
the floodplain of Black Bear Creek. The reach lacks
pattern, with a sinuosity of 1.02, and is incised, with a
bank height ratio of 2.4. Along most of the reach, the
buffer on either bank consists of a single row of trees,
beyond which is open, actively grazed pasture. Cattle
have access to the entirety of the reach; as a result, banks are heavily eroded. Channel bedform diversity
is limited, with few shallow, in-line pools. The bed material consists of fine to coarse gravel. Poor
channel bedform, cattle access, lack of large woody debris, and erosion have greatly limited instream
habitat.
Stroup Tributary D
Stroup Tributary D is a small intermittent tributary that
originates at a headcut on the northern half of the Site.
It flows westward and ends at the confluence with
Black Bear Creek. An ephemeral channel extends above
Stroup D and conveys water during large rain events.
The reach is straight with a sinuosity of 1.04 and incised
with a bank height ratio of 4.6. The immediate buffer
has been mostly cleared for pasture with a few mature
trees scattered throughout. Banks are fairly eroded due
to cattle access to the tributary. Bedform diversity is
moderate with short riffles dominated by gravel, pools
dominated by sand, and bedrock outcroppings in some sections. Instream habitat includes small sticks
and leaf packs with short fragments of undercut banks.
Stroup Tributary B Reach 2
Stroup Tributary C
Stroup Tributary D

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 8 September 2024
Poplar Tributary A
Poplar Tributary A originates on the southern half of
the Site and flows west through a moderately confined
valley to its confluence with Black Bear Creek. The first
130 LF of stream is intermittent but becomes perennial
downstream of a headcut. The reach is relatively
straight, with a sinuosity of 1.04. Poplar Tributary A has
a very narrow wooded buffer, outside of which is
grazed pastureland. Cattle have access to the entire
length of the reach, and banks show some evidence of
trampling along the stream. Channel incision increases
at the headcut where the stream becomes perennial.
The bank height ratio is 2.2, likely caused by incision and erosion along the stream. Channel bedform
diversity is limited with short, shallow pools present sporadically along the reach. The bed substrate is
primarily composed of very fine to medium gravel with silt. The reach contains one existing culvert. The
wooded buffer provides some large woody debris inputs to Poplar Tributary A; however, poor channel
bedform diversity and cattle access limit the available instream habitat.
Poplar Tributary B
Poplar Tributary B is a perennial tributary that begins
within the south side of the project at a utility
easement and flows southwest towards its confluence
with Poplar Tributary A. The first hundred feet is
moderately incised, with a bank height ratio of 1.8, and
has no forested buffer. Downstream of a headcut,
Poplar Tributary B becomes severely incised with a
bank height ratio of 2.8 and has a sparsely wooded
buffer on the left and narrow row of trees on the right,
beyond which is pasture. Cattle have access to the
entire length of the stream; however, the steep, tall
banks limit trampling from cattle to a few access points along the short reach. Tributary B lacks well-
defined pools. The channel substrate is comprised of medium to very coarse substrate. The poor
channel bedform diversity, cattle access, and lack of woody debris limits available instream habitat.
Cub Tributary
Cub Tributary is a small intermittent tributary that
originates at a headcut near the southern extent of the
project. The stream flows southwest through a wide,
unconfined valley and ends at its confluence with Black
Bear Creek. The channel is straight and incised, with a
sinuosity and bank height ratio of 1.05 and 2.1,
respectively. The riparian buffer of Cub Tributary has
been cleared and converted to pasture. Cattle have
access to the entire length of the stream, and the
banks and channels show evidence of trampling that
has led to mass wasting and erosion along the reach.
There is very limited channel bedform diversity: existing pools are shallow and not well developed. Bed
Poplar Tributary A
Poplar Tributary B
Cub Tributary

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 9 September 2024
substrate is comprised of fine to coarse gravel with sand. The poor channel bedform, cattle access,
erosion, and lack of woody debris has reduced instream habitat.
Willow Tributary
Willow Tributary is a perennial stream that enters the
Site from a culvert below Dameron Road on the
southern extent of the project. The stream flows east
through an unconfined valley towards its confluence
with Black Bear Creek. Willow Tributary is relatively
straight, with a sinuosity of 1.10. Incision along the
stream varies. Incision is lower on the upstream portion
of the reach and increases farther downstream. The
bank height ratio along the lower half of Willow
Tributary is 1.3. There is a narrow buffer on either side
of the stream, and banks tend to be bare and lack
deep-rooted vegetation. Outside of the narrow buffer is actively grazed pastureland. Cattle have access
to the entire length of the reach. In areas of lower incision, cattle trampling contributes to erosion. In
areas of greater incision, the lack of deep-rooted vegetation and steeper banks exacerbate erosion.
Channel bed diversity is poor: pools are short and shallow. The bed substrate is comprised of fine to
coarse gravel. Instream habitat is reduced as a result of poor channel bedform, cattle access, lack of
large woody debris, and erosion and fine sediment loads to the reach.
Table 3: Summary of Stream Resources
Reach Summary Information
Parameter Black Bear
Reach 1
Black Bear
Reach 2
Black Bear
Reach 3
Black Bear
Reach 4
Stroup
Tributary A
Reach 1
Length of Reach (LF) 1,495 427 511 1,923 402
Valley Confinement (confined,
moderately confined,
unconfined)
Moderately
Confined Confined Moderately
Confined Unconfined Moderately
Confined
Drainage Area (acres) 218 384 1,203 1,477 21
Perennial, Intermittent,
Ephemeral Perennial Perennial Perennial Perennial Intermittent
NCDWR Water Quality
Classification C
Stream Classification (Existing/
Proposed) G4c/C4 E3/C4 B4c/B4c F4/C3 B4/B4
FEMA Classification Not Classified AE Not Classified
NCSAM Overall Score Low Low Low Low Medium

Willow Tributary

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 10 September 2024
Table 3: Summary of Stream Resources (continued)
Reach Summary Information
Parameter
Stroup
Tributary A
R2
Stroup
Tributary B
Reach 1
Stroup
Tributary B
Reach 2
Stroup
Tributary C
Stroup
Tributary D
Length of Reach (LF) 142 220 469 970 48
Valley Confinement (confined,
moderately confined,
unconfined)
Unconfined Moderately
Confined Unconfined Moderately
Confined Unconfined
Drainage Area (acres) 22 37 45 155 5.3
Perennial, Intermittent,
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial Perennial Perennial Intermittent
NCDWR Water Quality
Classification C
Stream Classification (Existing/
Proposed) E4/B4c B5c/C4 F4/B4 B4c/C4 G4/B4
FEMA Classification Not Classified
NCSAM Overall Score Low Low Low Low Low
Reach Summary Information
Parameter Poplar Tributary
A
Poplar Tributary
B Cub Tributary Willow
Tributary
Length of Reach (LF) 556 272 154 643
Valley Confinement (confined,
moderately confined,
unconfined)
Moderately
Confined
Moderately
Confined Unconfined Unconfined
Drainage Area (acres) 45 40 32 199
Perennial, Intermittent,
Ephemeral
Intermittent/
Perennial Perennial Intermittent Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality
Classification C
Stream Classification (Existing/
Proposed) E4/B4 G4/B4 E4/B4c G4/C4
FEMA Classification Not Classified
NCSAM Overall Score Low Low Low Low

3.4 Project Resources - Wetlands
Wildlands delineated wetland and waters of the United States within and immediately adjacent to the
proposed project easement (assessment area) using the USACE Routine On-Site Determination method
presented in the 1987 Corps of Engineers delineation manual and the subsequent Regional Supplement
for the Eastern Mountain and Piedmont Region. The Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (pJD)
package was approved in April 2023. See Appendix 2 for the pJD package, which includes the USACE
Wetland Determination Data Sheets. Existing wetland data is summarized in Table 4.
A total of twenty-nine (29) existing jurisdictional wetland features (Wetlands A-CC) were documented
within the assessment area (Figure 3; Appendix 2). On-site wetland features exhibit indicators of
wetland hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils. Primary and secondary indicators of
wetland hydrology observed in existing wetlands include drift deposits, water-stained leaves, sparsely
vegetated concave surface, drainage patterns, crawfish burrows, surface water, saturation, sediment
deposits, high water table, geomorphic position, and FAC-neutral test. Typical overstory species include
willow oak (Quercus phellos), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), American sweetgum (Liquidambar

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 11 September 2024
styraciflua), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), and black willow (Salix nigra). Common understory species
include Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), winged elm (Ulmus alata), eastern red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana), red maple (Acer rubrum), and American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) saplings. Dominant
herbaceous vegetation observed include Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum), smartweed
(Persicaria sp), sedges (Carex sp), Asian spiderwort (Murdania keisak), and rushes (Juncus sp). Soils
within on-site wetlands exhibit one of the following hydric soil indicators including depleted matrix,
redox dark surface, umbric surface, histic epipedon, black histic, depleted below dark surface, or loamy
gleyed matrix.
Existing wetlands were evaluated using the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM). The
rapid assessment method evaluates field conditions relative to reference condition to generate function
ratings for specific wetland types. Using the NCWAM dichotomous key and best professional judgement,
existing wetlands were classified based on the reference wetland type if the area is not disturbed. Most
on-site wetlands were all classified as riparian wetlands with one classified as a seep. All on-site
wetlands scored as low functioning systems when compared to reference conditions as a result of
impairments to two of the three primary functions (hydrology, water quality, and habitat). Water quality
and habitat functions generally received low scores due to cattle grazing, lack of appropriate vegetative
communities, and poor connectivity to other natural areas. NCWAM field assessment forms and the
rating calculator outputs are included in Appendix 3.
Table 4: Existing Wetlands Summary
Wetland Summary Information
Parameter Wetland A Wetland B Wetland C Wetland D Wetland E
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.693 0.026 0.005 0.006 0.100
Wetland Type Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian
Mapped Soil Series Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Drainage Class Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Source of Hydrology Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
WAM Score Low Low Low Low Low
Wetland Type Headwater
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Wetland Summary Information
Parameter Wetland F Wetland G Wetland H Wetland I Wetland J
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.012 0.007 0.011 0.020 0.188
Wetland Type Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian
Mapped Soil Series Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Worsham
Loam
Drainage Class Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Source of Hydrology Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 12 September 2024
WAM Score Low Low Low Low Low
Wetland Type
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest

Table 4: Existing Wetlands Summary (continued)
Wetland Summary Information
Parameter Wetland K Wetland L Wetland M Wetland N Wetland O
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.058 0.140 0.002 0.003 0.005
Wetland Type Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian
Mapped Soil Series Worsham
Loam Lloyd Loam Lloyd Loam Vance Sandy
Loam
Vance Sandy
Loam
Drainage Class Poorly drained Well drained Well drained Well drained Well drained
Soil Hydric Status Yes No No No No
Source of Hydrology Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
WAM Score Low Low Low Low Low
Wetland Type
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Wetland Summary Information
Parameter Wetland P Wetland Q Wetland R Wetland S Wetland T
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.029 0.008 0.010 0.066 0.050
Wetland Type Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian
Mapped Soil Series Winnsboro
Loam
Worsham
Loam Chewacla Loam Chewacla
Loam
Chewacla
Loam
Drainage Class Well drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly
drained
Poorly
drained
Soil Hydric Status No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Source of Hydrology Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
WAM Score Low Low Low Low Low
Wetland Type
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Wetland Summary Information
Parameter Wetland U Wetland V Wetland W Wetland X Wetland Y

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 13 September 2024
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.082 0.004 0.029 0.001 0.004
Wetland Type Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian
Mapped Soil Series Chewacla Loam Chewacla Loam Chewacla Loam Chewacla
Loam
Chewacla
Loam
Drainage Class Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly
drained
Poorly
drained
Soil Hydric Status Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Source of Hydrology Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
WAM Score Low Low Low Low Low
Wetland Type
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Wetland Summary Information
Parameter Wetland Z Wetland AA Wetland BB Wetland CC
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.002 0.047 0.009 0.006
Wetland Type Riparian Riparian/Seep Riparian Riparian
Mapped Soil Series Chewacla Loam Chewacla Loam Chewacla Loam Chewacla Loam
Drainage Class Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status Yes Yes Yes Yes
Source of Hydrology Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge
Groundwater
discharge Groundwater discharge
WAM Score Low Low Low Low
Wetland Type
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest/Seep
Bottomland
Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
3.5 Existing Vegetation
The existing natural community of the Site is disturbed due to long-term grazing and agricultural use.
The forested sections are primarily composed of deciduous species such as tulip poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera), American sweetgum, American elm (Ulmus americana), red maple (Acer rubrum), black
walnut (Juglans nigra), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana),
American sycamore, water oak (Quercus nigra), and willow oak. Canopy trees currently occupying the
mid-story include American holly (Ilex opaca), black cherry (Prunus serotina), sugarberry (Celtis
laevigata), cottonwood (Populus deltoides), mulberry (Morus alba) slippery elm (Ulmus rubra), smooth
alder (Alnus serrulata), black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), and possum-haw (Viburnum nudum). The
herbaceous layer of the Site contains obligate wetland species such as arrow arum (Peltandra
sagittifolia). Invasives species are interspersed at varying degrees of severity throughout the Site.
Chinese privet populations are found among the shrub layer along with scattered population of
multiflora rose. Sections of the stream have populations of Asian spiderwort. A population of mature
tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) exists near the culvert on the upper portion of the project.
In historically grazed areas pasture grasses such as tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) occur.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 14 September 2024
3.6 Overall Functional Uplift Potential
The primary stressors to Site streams include livestock access, stream incision, active stream erosion,
poor water quality, historic wetlands converted to pasture, and areas of limited or absent bedform
diversity. These stressors led to low NCSAM scores. Without intervention, Black Bear Creek and its
tributaries will continue to erode, contributing more sediment and embedding habitat in receiving
waters.
Functional uplift for the Site is linked to improvement in and maintenance of hydrologic connectivity
between streams, wetlands, and floodplains. Additionally, establishing a riparian buffer will help protect
and enhance this connectivity. Functional uplift for the Site will be achieved through the following:
• Cattle exclusion;
• Restoring degraded stream channels to reduce erosion and reconnecting streams to the
floodplain and riparian wetlands to restore hydrologic connectivity;
• Reducing bank erosion and associated pollutants;
• Planting riparian buffers to shade streams, filter upland runoff, stabilize streambanks with deep-
rooted vegetation, and promote woody debris within the system;
• Planting native vegetation in wetlands to provide riparian habitat, and increase nutrient cycling
in the floodplain;
• Establishing BMPs to provide additional treatment of upland runoff; and
• Protecting the Site with a conservation easement.
These project components are described in Section 5 in terms of goals, objectives, and outcomes for the
project and in greater detail in Section 6 as the Site mitigation plan.
3.7 Site Constraints to Functional Uplift
The following Site constraints have been identified and will be addressed as part of this project.
One internal easement break and two external easement breaks are proposed at the Site (Figure 8).
Crossing 1 is a 50-ft wide internal easement break located on Black Bear Creek Reach 1. One 36-inch
circular corrugated metal pipe (CMP) and two 30-inch circular CMP culverts will be installed within the
break to pass the 5-year storm. Crossing 2 is an external easement break for the landowner’s driveway
off Dameron Road. Crossing 2 is not on a project stream, but there is a small wetland upstream of the
driveway that will be protected by the easement. A new 30-inch circular culvert will be installed to
provide drainage from the wetland to Black Bear Creek. Crossing 3 is a 60-ft wide external easement
break located along Black Bear Creek Reach 3 that will consist of a ford crossing.
The areas in these easement breaks are not proposed for credits. Ford and culvert crossings will be
fenced and gated, if needed, for livestock exclusion. The crossings are summarized and numbered below
in Table 5 and in Figure 8.
Table 5: Summary of Site Easement Crossings and Breaks
No. Location Width (ft) Internal or External Crossing Type
1 Black Bear Creek Reach 1 50 Internal Proposed Culvert Crossing
2 Driveway on David Stroup Parcel 60 External Proposed Culvert Crossing
3 Black Bear Creek Reach 3 60 External Proposed Ford Crossing
Rutherford Electric Membership Corporation owns an overhead utility easement that runs along
Dameron Road as well as upstream of Poplar Tributary B (Figure 8). A narrow easement width (<50 ft)
will be required on the right side of Black Bear Reaches 3 and 4 to accommodate the easement as well
as the Dameron Road right of way. The upper portions of Willow Tributary and Poplar Tributary B fall
within the utility easement and will remain outside of the conservation easement. While stream work is

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 15 September 2024
proposed on these sections, no credit will be generated. The Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit
Calculator was used to calculate credit loss due to reduced buffers in these areas. The calculator is
discussed below in Section 7.0
An abandoned trailer is located between Poplar Tributary A and Poplar Tributary B. This structure will be
removed from the conservation easement prior to or during construction.
The entire easement area can be accessed for construction, monitoring, and long-term stewardship
from Dameron Road and Concord Church Road.
4.0 Regulatory Considerations
Table 6 is a summary of regulatory considerations for the Site. These considerations are expanded upon
in Sections 4.1-4.4.
Table 6: Project Attribute Table Part 3
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Docs?
Water of the United States - Section 404 Yes No PCN1
Water of the United States - Section 401 Yes No PCN1
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Appendix 5
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes Appendix 5
Coastal Zone Management Act No N/A N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes No N/A2
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A
1PJD submitted to USACE on 1/10/2023 and approved 4/12/2023. A PCN will be submitted with the Final Mitigation Plan.
2Wildlands will prepare a Floodplain Development Permit in 2024 and anticipates a No-Rise Certification.
4.1 401/404
Care has been taken to design the streams to remain hydrologically connected to existing wetlands on-
site, while minimizing impacts to those wetlands. The majority of floodplain grading will be considered a
temporary impact to wetlands as hydrologic connectivity is anticipated to improve after channel
restoration, and vegetation will be reestablished. Any wetlands within the conservation easement and
outside of the limits of disturbance will be flagged with safety fence during construction to prevent
unintended impacts. This will be noted in the final construction plans on the Erosion and Sediment
Control Plan and Detail plan sheets, as well as in the project specifications.
Temporary and permanent wetland impacts will be provided in the Pre-Construction Notification (PCN),
after proposed floodplain grading has been completed, and will more accurately quantify these data. A
conservative estimate of potential impacts includes 0.297 acres and 0.075 acres of temporary and
permanent impacts, respectively. Temporary impacts are likely to be caused by floodplain grading, while
permanent impacts will result from conversion to stream channel.
4.2 Threatened and Endangered Species
Wildlands searched the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation
(IPaC) and the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) data explorer for federally listed threatened and
endangered plant and animal species within the project action area. Potential species currently include
one listed threatened species, one listed threatened by similarity of appearance and one proposed
endangered species within the Site (Table 7). Pedestrian surveys conducted in September of 2022

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 16 September 2024
identified suitable habitat for the bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii), and the tricolored bat
(Perimyotis subflavus) (TCB). No individual bog turtles or TCBs were observed and no TCB roosts were
located during the pedestrian survey. Additionally, there are no known occurrences of either species
within the project area or within 3-miles of the project area per the NHP. No suitable habitat or
individuals were observed for the dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora). In anticipation of the
final TCB ruling, Wildlands will continue to monitor the listing status for TCB. If project construction
activities are not complete once the listing becomes finalized, the project team will re-initiate
consultation with USFWS, as appropriate, to ensure Endangered Species Act, Section 7 compliance.
Refer to Appendix 5 for additional information associated with threatened and endangered species
within the Site.
Table 7: Listed Threatened and Endangered Species in Gaston County, NC
Species Federal Status Common Name Scientific Name
Flowering Plant
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf Hexastylis naniflora Threatened
Reptiles
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii Similarity of Appearance (Threatened)
Mammal
Tricolored bat Perimyotis subflavus Proposed Endangered

4.3 Cultural Resources / Conservation Lands / Natural Heritage Areas
The Site is not located near any entries listed on the National Register with the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO). SHPO reviewed the project prospectus and responded in a letter dated
March 3, 2023 that they are “aware of no historic resources which would be affected by the project.”
4.4 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass
The Site is represented on the Gaston County Flood Map 370093518J. The very downstream end of
Black Bear Creek (Long Creek Tributary 6A) is mapped as FEMA Zone AE and has an associated limited
detailed model (Figure 10). Wildlands will coordinate with the Gaston County floodplain administrator
to obtain a floodplain development permit and meet permit requirements. The project will also obtain a
FEMA no-rise certification for the downstream extents to maintain regulatory floodplain and floodway
elevations. Furthermore, the project will be designed to avoid hydrologic trespass on adjacent
properties or local roadways.
5.0 Mitigation Site Goals and Objectives
The overall goal of the project is to improve stream and riparian wetland function through stream
restoration and riparian buffer re-vegetation. Project goals have been set in order to achieve the
functional uplift outlined in Section 3.5 and alleviate the watershed stressors. The project goals and
related objectives are described in Table 8.
Table 8: Mitigation Goals and Objectives
Goal Objective Expected Outcomes
Exclude livestock from
stream channels and
riparian wetlands.
Install livestock fencing as needed to exclude
livestock from stream channels and riparian
areas or remove livestock from adjacent
fields.
Reduce nutrient and sediment inputs
to watershed.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 17 September 2024
Goal Objective Expected Outcomes
Reduce sediment and
nutrient input from
eroding stream
channels and improve
the stability of stream
channels.
Construct stream channels that will maintain
stable cross-sections, patterns, and profiles
over time. Add bank revetments and
instream structures to protect
restored/enhanced streams.
Reduce sediment inputs from bank
erosion. Reduce shear stress on
channel boundary.
Reconnect channels
with floodplains and
riparian wetland to
allow a natural
flooding regime.
Reconstruct stream channels with bankfull
dimensions and depth based on reference
reach data.
Allow more frequent flood flows to
disperse on the floodplain and in
riparian wetlands.
Restore and enhance
wetland function and
hydrology.
Restore and enhance wetlands through re-
establishment of hydrology. Remove the
drainage effects of agricultural ditching and
maintenance.
Protection and enhancement of
natural resources within the
watershed.
Restore, enhance, and
supplement native
floodplain, wetland,
and streambank
vegetation.
Plant native trees and understory species in
riparian zones, and plant native shrub and
herbaceous species on streambanks. Treat
invasive species within project area.
Reduce sediment inputs from bank
erosion and runoff. Increase nutrient
cycling and storage in floodplain.
Provide riparian habitat. Add a source
of LWD and organic material to
stream.
Treat upland runoff
before it enters
restored streams.
Install a stormwater BMP in an area of
concentrated pasture runoff and eroded
gully to treat runoff before it enters the
stream channel and to prevent future
headcut.
Reduce nutrient and sediment inputs
to watershed.
Improve instream
habitat by increasing
bedform diversity.
Establish alternating riffle-pool and/or step-
pool sequences. Install habitat features such
as brush toes, log and rock sills, log vanes,
and j-hooks into restored/enhanced streams
to promote habitat variability and pool
formation. Add woody materials to channel
beds.
Increase and diversify available
habitats for macroinvertebrates, fish,
and amphibians leading to
colonization and increase in
biodiversity over time. Add
complexity, including LWD to the
streams.
Permanently protect
the Site from harmful
uses.
Establish conservation easements on the
Site.
Protect Site from encroachment on
the riparian corridor and direct impact
to streams, wetlands, and buffers.
6.0 Design Approach and Mitigation Work Plan
6.1 Stream Design Approach Overview
The design approach for this Site is developed to meet the goals and objectives described in Section 5
which were formulated based on the potential for uplift described in Section 3.5. The design is also
intended to provide the expected outcomes in Section 5, though these are not tied to performance
criteria.
The design approach for this Site uses a combination of analog and analytical approaches for the
streams and relies on empirical data, prior experiences, and observations. Reference reaches were
identified to serve as an acceptable range for design parameters. Channels were sized based on design
discharge hydrologic analysis, which uses a combination of empirical and analytical data as described
within this report. These design approaches have been used on many successful Piedmont restoration
projects and are appropriate for the goals and objectives for this Site. Table 9 summarizes the primary

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 18 September 2024
stressors, restoration approach, and mitigation activities for the project reaches. Figures 8 and 9 provide
an overview of the proposed mitigation activities on the Site.
Table 9: Functional Impairments and Restoration Approach
Reach Primary Stressors/Impairments Restoration Approach
Black Bear
Creek Reach 1
Moderate channel incision, historic channelization, bank erosion,
lack of buffer, cattle access, low bedform diversity Restoration
Black Bear
Creek Reach 2
Severe channel incision, bank erosion, lack of buffer, cattle
access, low bedform diversity Restoration
Black Bear
Creek Reach 3
Moderate channel incision, historic channelization, bank erosion,
lack of buffer, cattle access, moderate bedform diversity Enhancement I
Black Bear
Creek Reach 4
Moderate channel incision, historic channelization, bank erosion,
lack of buffer, cattle access, low bedform diversity Restoration
Stroup
Tributary A
Moderate channel incision, bank erosion, cattle access, low
bedform diversity, active headcuts
Restoration/Enhancement
II
Stroup
Tributary B
Moderate channel incision, bank erosion, cattle access, poor
buffer quality, low bedform diversity
Restoration/Enhancement
II
Stroup
Tributary C
Severe channel incision, bank erosion, lack of buffer, severely
cattle trampled, low bedform diversity Restoration
Stroup
Tributary D
Severe channel incision, bank erosion, lack of buffer, cattle
access, low bedform diversity, Restoration
Poplar
Tributary A
Severe channel incision, bank erosion, poor buffer quality, cattle
access, low bedform diversity Restoration
Poplar
Tributary B
Severe channel incision, bank erosion, lack of buffer, cattle
access, low bedform diversity Enhancement I
Cub Tributary Severe channel incision, bank erosion, lack of buffer, cattle
access, low bedform diversity Restoration
Willow
Tributary
Mild channel incision, bank erosion, lack of buffer, cattle access,
low bedform diversity Enhancement I
6.1.1 Reference Streams
Eight reference reaches were identified for this Site and used to support the stream design (Figure 11).
These reference reaches were chosen because of their similarities to the Site streams including drainage
area, valley slope, morphology, and bed material. Reference reach information is provided in Table 10.
Geomorphic parameters for these reference reaches are summarized in Appendix 4. One additional
reference reach was used along with those in Table 10 to create the reference reach regional curve for
the discharge analysis discussed below in Section 6.3.
Table 10: Stream Reference Data Used in Development of Design Parameters
Design Stream
Black Bear Creek Stroup
Tributary
A R2
Stroup
Tributary
B R2
Stroup
Tributary
C
Stroup
Tributary
D
Reaches
1 and 2
Reaches
3 and 4
Reference Stream Stream
Type C3 C3 C4 C4 C4 B4
Long Branch C4/E4 X
Foust Upstream C4 X
Pilot Mountain
Tributary B4 X
Reedy Creek Nature
Preserve – South Fork B4c X X X

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 19 September 2024
Design Stream
Black Bear Creek Stroup
Tributary
A R2
Stroup
Tributary
B R2
Stroup
Tributary
C
Stroup
Tributary
D
Reaches
1 and 2
Reaches
3 and 4
Reference Stream Stream
Type C3 C3 C4 C4 C4 B4
UT to Varnals C4/E4 X X X X
UT to South Crowders E4 X
UT to Sandy Run E4 X
UT to Rocky Creek E4b X X X
Timber Tributary B4 X

Table 10: Stream Reference Data Used in Development of Design Parameters (continued)
Design Stream
Poplar
Tributary
A
Poplar
Tributary
B
Cub
Tributary
Willow
Tributary
Reference Stream Stream
Type B4 B4 C4 C4
Pilot Mountain
Tributary B4 X X
UT to Varnals C4/E4 X X
UT to South Crowders E4 X X
UT to Sandy Run E4 X X
Timber Tributary B4 X X
6.1.2 Design Bankfull Discharge Analysis
Multiple methods were used to estimate bankfull discharges for restoration reaches including regional
curve data (Harman et al 1999), a regional flood frequency analysis using U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
gage sites, and reference reach data. The methods were compared, and a design discharge was selected
based on the results of the different methods. Results of each method and the final design discharges
are shown in Table 11 and illustrated in Figure 12. The results of the discharge analysis provided a range
of discharge values, with the most concurrence found between values for the Wildlands regional flood
frequency analysis 1.2-year storm and the site-specific reference reach curve.
Table 11: Summary of Design Discharge Analysis
Black Bear Creek Stroup
Tributary
A R2
Stroup
Tributary
B R2 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4
DA (acres) 218 384 1,203 1,477 22 45
DA (sq. mi.) 0.34 0.60 1.88 2.31 0.03 0.07
NC Piedmont Regional Curve (cfs) 41 62 140 163 8 13
Wildlands Regional
Flood Frequency
Analysis (cfs)
1.2-year event 35 53 124 144 6 11
1.5-year event 51 76 174 202 9 16
Site Specific Reference Reach Curve 41 57 111 125 11 16
Final Design Q (cfs) 39 56 122 140 8 14

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 20 September 2024

Table 11: Summary of Design Discharge Analysis (continued)
Stroup
Tributary
C
Stroup
Tributary
D
Poplar
Tributary
A
Poplar
Tributary
B
Cub
Tributary
Willow
Tributary
DA (acres) 155 5.3 45 40 32 199
DA (sq. mi.) 0.24 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.31
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve (cfs) 32 4 13 12 10 38
Wildlands Regional
Flood Frequency
Analysis (cfs)
1.2-year event 27 3 11 11 9 33
1.5-year event 39 4 16 15 13 47
Site Specific Reference Reach Curve 34 6 17 15 14 39
Final Design Q (cfs) 31 5 14 13 11 36
6.1.3 Design Channel Morphological Parameters
Reference reach data was the primary source of information used to develop the morphological
parameters for each of the restoration reaches. Ranges of pattern parameters were developed within the
reference range with some exceptions based on best professional judgement and knowledge from
previous projects. Key morphological parameters are summarized in Table 12 - 14. Complete design
morphological parameters are included in Appendix 4.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 21 September 2024
Table 12: Summary of Morphological Parameters for C-Type Streams
Parameter
Existing Parameters Reference Parameters Proposed Parameters
Black Bear
Creek R1
Black Bear
Creek R2
Black Bear
Creek R3
Black Bear
Creek R4
UT to
Varnels
Creek
UT to
South
Crowders
UT to
Sandy Run
Long
Branch
Foust
Upstream
Black Bear
Creek R1
Black Bear
Creek R2
Black Bear
Creek R3
Black Bear
Creek R4
Contributing
Drainage Area
(mi2)
0.34 0.6 1.88 2.31 0.41 0.22 0.15 1.49 1.4 0.34 0.6 1.88 2.31
Channel/
Reach
Classification
G4c B3 G4c C4 C4/E4 E4 E4 C4/E4 C4 C4 C4 C4/3 C4/3
Design
Discharge
Width (ft)
10.6 13.3 13.9 20.0 9.3-10.5 6.1-8.4 7.3-7.8 14.8-
18.6
18.5-
19.4
12.0-
13.5
13.0-
15.0 22.8 26.5
Design
Discharge
Depth (ft)
1.1 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.1-1.2 1-1.1 0.7-0.8 1.3-2.1 1.2-1.3 0.8-1.0 0.9-1.1 1.4 1.6
Design
Discharge
Area (ft2)
12.1 16.1 22.7 32.7 10.3-
12.3 6.4-8.7 5.7-6.2 28.0-
34.6
23.9-
24.1 9.6-13.5 11.8-
15.8 30.9 41.2
Design
Discharge
Velocity (ft/s)
3.2 3.8 5.7 4.4 4.4-5.2 2.5-3.4 3.4 3.6-4.0 4.0 3.1-4.2 3.6-5.0 4.0 3.5
Design
Discharge
(cfs)
39 56 124 144 54 22 20 101-124 95 39 56 124 144
Water Surface
Slope (ft/ft) 0.004 0.009 0.011 0.006 0.017 0.009 0.015 0.004 0.009 0.007-
0.018
0.009-
0.021 0.008 0.005
Sinuosity 1.04 1.08 1.03 1.06 1.2 2.2 1.64 1.30 -- 1.28 1.09 N/A 1.18
Width/ Depth
Ratio 9.3 10.9 8.5 12.2 8.1-9.3 5.8-8 6.6-9.8 7.9-13.8 14.3-
15.7
13.5-
15.0 14.3 16.8 17.1
Bank Height
Ratio 2.0 2.4 2.4 1.4 1 1.4-2.1 1.7-2.6 1.2-1.5 -- 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1
Entrenchment
Ratio 1.9 2.2 2.1 5.0 5.7-10 3.7-4.3 1.6-2.1 >3.4 2.9-5.3 >2.2 >2.2 >2.2 >2.2

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 22 September 2024
Table 12: Summary of Morphological Parameters for C-Type Streams (continued)
Parameter
Existing Parameters Reference Parameters Proposed Parameters
Stroup
Trib A R2
Stroup
Trib C
Cub
Trib
Willow
Trib
UT to
Varnels
Creek
UT to
South
Crowders
UT to
Sandy
Run
Long
Branch
Foust
Upstream
Stroup
Trib A
R2
Stroup
Trib C
Cub
Trib
Willow
Trib
Contributing
Drainage Area
(mi2)
0.03 0.24 0.05 0.31 0.41 0.22 0.15 1.49 1.4 0.03 0.24 0.05 0.31
Channel/ Reach
Classification F4 B4c G4 E4 C4/E4 E4 E4 C4/E4 C4 C4 B4c C4 C4
Design Discharge
Width (ft) 9.3 9.6 3.9 5.9 9.3-10.5 6.1-8.4 7.3-7.8 14.8-
18.6 18.5-19.4 8 9.5-11.0 8.3 13
Design Discharge
Depth (ft) 0.4 0.8 0.7 1.2 1.1-1.2 1-1.1 0.7-0.8 1.3-2.1 1.2-1.3 0.6 0.7-0.8 0.6 0.9
Design Discharge
Area (ft2) 3.6 7.6 2.8 7.3 10.3-
12.3 6.4-8.7 5.7-6.2 28.0-
34.6 23.9-24.1 4.8 6.5-9.2 4.7 12
Design Discharge
Velocity (ft/s) 3.0 4.1 5.2 4.9 4.4-5.2 2.5-3.4 3.4 3.6-4.0 4 2.1 3.3-4.8 3 3
Design Discharge
(cfs) 11 31 14 36 54 22 20 101-124 95 11 31 14 36
Water Surface
Slope (ft/ft) 0.014 0.008 0.023 0.010 0.017 0.009 0.015 0.004 0.009 0.007 0.010-
0.029 0.014 0.008
Sinuosity 1.07 1.02 1.05 1.1 1.2 2.2 1.64 1.3 -- 1.22 1.17 1.10 1.08
Width/ Depth
Ratio 23.7 12.1 5.5 4.7 8.1-9.3 5.8-8 6.6-9.8 7.9-13.8 14.3-15.7 13.4 13.1-
13.9 14.6 14.1
Bank Height Ratio 2.1 2.4 2.1 1.3 1.0 1.4-2.1 1.7-2.6 1.2-1.5 -- 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1
Entrenchment
Ratio 1.8 1.7 1.9 3.8 5.7-10 3.7-4.3 1.6-2.1 >3.4 2.9-5.3 >2.2 >1.4 >2.2 >2.2

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 23 September 2024
Table 13: Summary of Morphological Parameters for B-Type Streams
Parameter
Existing Parameters Reference Parameters Proposed Parameters
Stroup
Trib D
Poplar
Trib A
Poplar
Trib B
Timber
Tributary
Pilot
Mountain
Tributary
Stroup
Trib D
Poplar
Trib A
Poplar
Trib B
Contributing Drainage Area (mi2) 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.27 0.01 0.07 0.06
Channel/ Reach Classification G4 B4 G4 B4 B4 B4 B4 B4
Design Discharge Width (ft) 1.5 4.9 3.7 8.9 8.6 4.5 6.6 6.8
Design Discharge Depth (ft) 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.5
Design Discharge Area (ft2) 1.0 2.8 2.6 4.6 6.0 1.5 3.4 3.3
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s) 5.6 6.2 6.0 3.7 5.3 3.7 5.2 4.7
Design Discharge (cfs) 6 17 15 17 32 6 17 15
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.036 0.049 0.047 0.033 0.038 0.044 0.049 0.043
Sinuosity 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.1 1.1 1.01 1.04 N/A
Width/ Depth Ratio 2.3 8.5 5.4 17.0 12.5 13.5 12.8 14.1
Bank Height Ratio 4.6 2.2 2.8 1.0 1.0 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.5 >1.4 >1.4 >1.4

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 24 September 2024
Table 14: Summary of Morphological Parameters for Bc-Type Streams
Parameter
Existing
Parameters Reference Parameters Proposed
Parameters
Stroup Trib B
R2
UT to
Varnels
Creek
Reedy
Creek
UT to Rocky
Creek
Stroup Trib B
R2
Contributing Drainage Area (mi2) 0.07 0.41 0.23 1.05 0.07
Channel/ Reach Classification F4 C4/E4 B4c E4b B4c
Design Discharge Width (ft) 8.4 9.3-10.5 8.2-11.2 12.2 7.5-8.7
Design Discharge Depth (ft) 0.5 1.1-1.2 1-1.4 1.3 0.6-0.7
Design Discharge Area (ft2) 4.1 10.3-12.3 10.7-11.1 16.3 4.3-5.7
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s) 3.8 4.4-5.2 2.7 5.5 2.7-3.7
Design Discharge (cfs) 16 54 26-32 85 16
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.016 0.017 0.007 0.020 0.010-0.021
Sinuosity 1.24 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.14
Width/ Depth Ratio 17.1 8.1-9.3 6-11.7 9.1 13.0-13.3
Bank Height Ratio 2.5 1.0 1.8-2.1 1.0 1.0-1.1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.5 5.7-10 1.5-1.9 6.0 >1.4

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 25 September 2024
6.1.4 Sediment Transport Analysis
A qualitative assessment of sediment supply and sources in the project watershed was performed based
on visual inspection, review of historic aerial photos, and future county zoning maps. The Site
watersheds have not changed considerably in recent decades. The watersheds’ dominant land uses are
agriculture and forest. The land is zoned for low-density residential purposes and there is no indication
of future development at the Site. Adjacent agricultural practice disturbances provide a source of fine
sediments to the easement. Vegetated buffers are designed to intercept concentrated flow paths and
will filter most fine sediments contributed from the adjacent agricultural fields. Restored streambanks
will be sloped at a gentle 3:1 or lower slope to allow for adjustment of channel sediment transport
efficiency to the incoming flow and sediment load.
A competence analysis was performed for all restoration and enhancement I reaches at the Site using
shear stress as calculated by the Shields (1936) and Andrews (1984) equation described by Rosgen
(2001). The competence analysis is used to guide channel pattern, profile, and material sizing by
comparing shear stresses associated with the design bankfull discharge, proposed channel dimensions,
and proposed channel slopes with the size distribution of the existing bed load. For most Site streams,
results show that the design channels are capable of moving material slightly larger than the maximum
particle size during bankfull flow events, indicating that the design channel will be stable or slightly
degradational (Table 15). To provide grade control and maintain channel stability, riffle material will be
sized so that the largest particle does not move. Stroup Tributary D, Poplar Tributary A, and Poplar
Tributary B show moveable particle sizes much larger than the largest particle size. These streams are
steep, headwater systems with slopes greater than four percent. Log and boulder steps along with deep
scour pools will be constructed to dissipate energy and prevent erosion during bankfull flow events. The
final plans will specify size and mixture of materials required for each reach to ensure stable and diverse
bedforms for all Site streams.
Table 15: Results of Competence Analysis
Bear
Creek R1
Bear
Creek R2
Bear
Creek R3
Bear
Creek R4
Stroup
Trib A R2
Stroup
Trib B R2
Design Abkf (sq ft) 9.6-13.5 11.8-15.8 30.9 41.2 4.8 4.3-5.7
Design Wbkf (ft) 12.0-13.5 13.0-15.0 22.8 26.5 8.0 7.5-8.7
Design Dbkf (ft) 0.8-1.0 1.0-1.1 1.4 1.6 0.6 0.6-0.7
Design Schan (ft/ft) 0.007-
0.018
0.009-
0.021 0.008 0.005 0.007 0.010-
0.021
Design Bankfull Velocity
(fps) 3.1-4.2 3.6-5.0 4.0 3.5 2.1 2.7-3.7
Bankfull Shear Stress, t
(lb/sq ft) 0.43-0.88 0.59-1.15 0.66 0.47 0.24 0.40-0.73
Movable particle size
Shields/Rosgen (mm)
32.6-
68.2/82.2-
138.3
44.6-
90.1/102.5
-168.3
50.7/112.2 35.8/87.8 17.8/53.5
29.6-
56.4/76.8-
120.9
Largest particle from
bar/subpavement
sample (mm)
20.0 30.0 45.0 32.0 20.0 19.0

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 26 September 2024

Table 15: Results of Competence Analysis (continued)
Stroup
Trib C
Stroup
Trib D
Poplar
Trib A
Poplar
Trib B
Willow
Trib Cub Trib
Design Abkf (sq ft) 9.2 1.5 3.4 3.3 12.0 4.7
Design Wbkf (ft) 11.0 4.4 6.7 3.7 13.0 8.3
Design Dbkf (ft) 0.8 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.9
Design Schan (ft/ft) 0.010 0.044 0.049 0.043 0.008 0.014
Design Bankfull Velocity
(fps) 3.3 3.7 5.2 4.7 3.0 3.0
Bankfull Shear Stress, t
(lb/sq ft) 0.52 0.88 1.51 1.26 0.42 0.48
Movable particle size
Shields/Rosgen (mm) 39.7/94.5 68.6/138.9 119.5/205.5 99.6/180.7 31.9/81.0 36.1/88.3
Largest particle from
bar/subpavement
sample (mm)
34.0 50.0 18.0 2.0 30.0 21.0

6.2 Stream Design Implementation
Priority 1 restoration will be implemented on most Site streams by raising channel beds to reconnect
them with existing floodplains. Priority 2 restoration will only be used in transition areas and to avoid
hydrologic trespass within the FEMA mapped zone on Black Bear Creek Reach 4. Priority 1.5, where the
streambed is raised as much as possible to minimize but not eliminate floodplain excavation, will be
used along steep, confined tributaries. Restoration reaches have been designed to create stable,
functional stream channels based on reference reach parameters, design discharge analysis, and
sediment transport analysis. Dimension, pattern, and profile have been designed for all restoration
reaches to allow for frequent overbank flooding, hydrologic connection to riparian wetlands, a stable
bed with variable bedforms, and stable bank slopes. Improved vertical and lateral stability will reduce
stream channel erosion. Diverse bedforms will be established using in-stream structures appropriate for
the geomorphic settings. These structures will provide grade control to prevent incision and serve as
habitat features. Pools will have varied depths to increase habitat diversity and mimic natural streams.
In-stream structures for all reaches will include constructed riffles, rock sills, log sills, log or rock steps,
log or rock j-hooks, log vanes, brush toe, and soil lifts. Constructed riffles will be built from excavated
on-site rock or quarry stone if an on-site source cannot be found. Constructed riffles will incorporate
woody material and logs, which will provide varied pore spaces within the riffles to benefit hyporheic
exchange processes and habitat formation. The diverse range of constructed riffle types will provide
grade control, diversity of habitat, and will create varied flow vectors. Log j-hooks and log vanes will
deflect flow vectors away from banks while adding to habitat diversity. Log and rock steps will be used
to allow for small grade drops across pools. Brush toe will be constructed at selected meander bends to
reduce erosion potential, encourage pool maintenance, and provide pool habitat variability. Coir fiber
matting will be used to provide bank protection.
6.2.1 Black Bear Creek
Black Bear Creek Reaches 1 and 2 will be restored using a Priority 1 restoration approach in which the
channel bed is raised and realigned to meander through the existing floodplain. Reach 1 will begin at the
existing culvert on Concord Church Road where rock pipe outlet protection will be installed to dissipate
energy during higher flows and help prevent erosion. Downstream of the outlet, the channel will be

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 27 September 2024
relocated to meander through the right floodplain where wetland re-establishment is proposed (Section
6.3). Bankfull elevations will maintain floodplain connections and hydrate the riparian wetland. Reach 2
begins at Black Bear Creek’s confluence with Stroup Tributary C. The reach meanders through a
moderately confined valley for approximately 360 ft before beginning a series of step pools to tie into
existing grade at the property line.
Black Bear Creek Reach 3 will consist of Enhancement I. Beginning at Dameron Road and extending to
just downstream of its confluence with Poplar Tributary A, the streambanks will be graded at stable
slopes, invasive species will be treated, and banks will be planted with native vegetation. This section of
stream exhibits suitable bedform. Along the remainder of this reach, the streambed will be raised to
reduce incision and allow a Priority 1 restoration approach downstream. Where possible, a bankfull
bench will be constructed to provide relief during high flows. Streambanks will be graded to provide
stable dimensions, and structures will be added to provide grade control and dissipate energy as well as
improve bedform and aquatic habitat.
Black Bear Creek Reach 4 will be restored using a Priority 1 restoration approach and transition to a
Priority 2 approach at the downstream extent. Upstream of its confluence with Cub Tributary, the
channel will be relocated and meandered along the existing floodplain, restoring pattern and profile to
the previously straightened and incised stream. Downstream of its confluence with Cub Tributary, the
channel will transition to a Priority 2 approach where a floodplain bench will be constructed. Reach 4
ends at the property line.
6.2.2 Stroup Tributary A
Stroup Tributary A Reach 1 will consist of Enhancement II. This section exhibits stable banks and
appropriate channel dimensions. However, cattle have access to the entirety of the stream.
Enhancement work will consist of installing several constructed riffles to add bedform diversity to the
channel, fencing out the cattle, and partial planting of the left floodplain.
Stroup Tributary A Reach 2 is a short, transitional reach that will be relocated and meandered within the
floodplain. Constructed riffles and bank revetments will be installed to diversify bedform and add
habitat while also providing grade control.
6.2.3 Stroup Tributary B
Stroup Tributary B Reach 1 will be addressed with enhancement II work. Eroded banks will be graded
and stabilized, and structures will be added to provide grade control and diversify bedform. Mid-channel
bars and concentrated flow paths in the floodplain will be removed.
Restoration will be implemented on Reach 2. A new channel will be constructed within the floodplain,
restoring a stable pattern and profile. Downstream of the meandering section, a series of step pools will
drop Stroup Tributary B down to the confluence with Black Bear Creek Reach 1. Structures will be added
throughout the restored reach to provide grade control and diversify bedform.
6.2.4 Stroup Tributary C
Stroup Tributary C will be restored using a Priority 1 restoration approach. The channel will be relocated
and meandered within the floodplain, restoring pattern and profile to the previously straightened and
incised stream. A log sill will be placed at grade at the upstream end of the project to provide grade
control as the tributary enters the project area. Structures will be added to provide grade control and
diversify bedform.
6.2.5 Stroup Tributary D
Stroup Tributary D will be restored using a Priority 1.5 approach where the streambed will be partially
raised to minimize floodplain excavation. A series of step pools will allow the channel to quickly drop

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 28 September 2024
grade as it flows towards its confluence with Black Bear Creek Reach 2. Two pocket wetlands will be
constructed upstream of the tributary to treat runoff from the surrounding cattle pasture.
6.2.6 Poplar Tributary A
Poplar Tributary A will be restored using a Priority 1.5 approach. The new channel will be constructed
within the confines of the existing channel, and the streambed will be raised to restore dimension and
profile. Stream pattern will be improved where appropriate, and where absent, a bankfull bench will be
excavated to provide relief during high flows. Structures will be added to provide grade control and
diversify bedform. Upstream of the jurisdictional limit of Poplar Tributary A, swale stabilization will be
implemented to capture concentrated runoff and convey flows to the restored stream in a stable
fashion.
6.2.7 Poplar Tributary B
Poplar Tributary B is proposed for enhancement I. The streambed will be raised within the existing
alignment and streambanks will be graded to improve dimension and profile. A bankfull bench will be
excavated to provide relief during high flows. Structures will be added to provide grade control and
diversify bedform.
6.2.8 Willow Tributary
Willow Tributary is proposed for enhancement I credit and will consist of enhancement II work and
restoration. Enhancement II will begin downstream of the culvert under Dameron Road where rock pipe
outlet protection will be installed to dissipate energy during higher flows and help prevent
erosion.Stream banks will be graded back at 3:1 slopes and constructed riffles installed to provide
stability and diversify bedform. As the stream enters the broad floodplain of Black Bear Creek, Willow
Tributary will be restored using a Priority 1 approach until its confluence with Black Bear Creek.
6.2.9 Cub Tributary
Cub Tributary will be restored using a Priority 1.5 approach. Appropriate pattern and profile will be
reestablished, and structures will be added to provide both grade control and habitat. Immediately
upstream of the jurisdictional limit of Cub Tributary, swale stabilization will be implemented to capture
surface runoff and convey flows to the channel.
6.3 Wetland Design Approach Overview
The proposed design includes the re-establishment of 1.83-acres, the rehabilitation of 0.20-acres, and
the enhancement of 0.13-acres of historically altered wetlands and the creation of 0.31-acres of wetland
through the bottomland floodplain of Black Bear Creek Reach 1 and Reach 2. Wildlands performed a
multilevel analysis of the proposed wetland area to holistically understand the farming and
anthropogenic effects, current and proposed hydrologic conditions, and current and potential hydric soil
development in the proposed wetland areas. Hydric soil investigations, along with site observations and
existing groundwater gage data, were used to guide proposed wetland grading and design. Areas
proposed for wetland re-establishment contain evidence of relic hydric soils which indicate these areas
were previously wetlands prior to agricultural and hydrologic manipulation. Wetland rehabilitation areas
are existing jurisdictional wetlands that are currently lacking some function due to current hydrologic or
vegetation alterations.
6.3.1 Hydric Soils Investigation
An LSS evaluated the Site on July 15, 2021 to assess the extent and depth of hydric soil indictors within
areas proposed for wetland restoration. Areas containing hydric soils but lacking a contemporary
wetland hydrologic regime were likely functional wetlands prior to manipulation of the Site for
agricultural purposes. Thirty-five soil borings were taken at the Site: 22 along Black Bear Creek Reaches 1
and 2 and 13 along Black Bear Creek Reach 4. Overall, hydric soils and hydric soil indicators were absent

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 29 September 2024
along the floodplain of Black Bear Creek Reach 4; therefore, wetland mitigation is not proposed along
this reach. Along Black Bear Creek Reaches 1 and 2, all soil borings met the F3 (depleted matrix)
indicator within 10 inches of the surface. Additionally, three borings that met the F19 (piedmont
floodplain soils) indicator also had an F3 indicator within an inch or two below 10 inches. The soils
investigation observed predominately Wehadkee soil series in the proposed wetland re-establishment
and rehabilitation areas, as opposed to the Worsham and Chewacla soil series found in the NRCS web
soil survey. A complete copy of the hydric soils investigation report can be found in Appendix 4
6.3.2 Hydrologic Monitoring and Evaluation
Seven groundwater gages (GWG) were installed at the Site to monitor existing hydrology in proposed
wetland areas (Figure 3). GWGs 1 through 5 are in areas proposed for wetland re-establishment or
channel restoration. GWG 6 is in an existing wetland on the left floodplain of Black Bear Creek Reach 2,
which is proposed for wetland rehabilitation. Lastly, GWG 7 is in an existing wetland adjacent to Stroup
Tributary A on the left floodplain of Black Bear Creek Reach 1, an area which is not proposed for wetland
credit.
Groundwater data was collected at the Site from June 1, 2022 to September 28, 2023. GWGs 1 through
5 are located in relic hydric areas and have recorded hydroperiods ranging from 0.0% to 7.2% of the
growing season, suggesting that the adjacent incised channel has drained these areas. GWG 6 and GWG
7 are located in existing wetlands and have the highest hydroperiods of 80.4% and 18.9%, respectively.
Overall, the gage data shows that groundwater within the proposed wetland restoration areas is shallow
and that adequate hydrology to support wetland processes is possible with Site manipulation. Table 16
shows an evaluation of saturation periods from the existing gages and full hydrologic data for each gage
can be found in Appendix 4.
Table 16: Groundwater Gage Summary
Gage
Consecutive Days in
Growing Season Wells
Met Groundwater
Depth Criterion (Days)
Consecutive
Percent Growing
Season Wells Met
Groundwater
Depth Criterion (%)
Evaluated Dates Proposed Wetland
Approach
2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023
1 1 19 0.4 7.2
6/1/2022
–
12/31/2023
1/1/2023
–
9/28/2023
Re-establishment
2 2 6 0.8 2.3 N/A1
3 2 7 0.8 2.6 Re-establishment
4 0 1 0.0 0.4 Re-establishment
5 0 1 0.0 0.4 N/A1
6 172 213 64.9 80.4 Rehabilitation
7 0 50 0.0 18.9 N/A2
1Groundwater gages 2 and 5 are located within the proposed stream channel alignment
2Groundwater gage 7 is located in Wetland A, which is not proposed for wetland credit

6.4 Wetland Design Implementation
Jurisdictionally delineated wetlands located on the right floodplain of Black Bear Creek Reaches 1 and 2
are slated for rehabilitation. Existing hydrology within these areas will be improved by filling existing
incised wetland outlets to decrease drainage and roughening the surface of these wetlands to promote
increased retention times. The restoration of existing incised streams will raise overall water table
elevations within the existing wetland areas which will help to improve hydrologic function.
Rehabilitation areas which are dominated with pasture grasses and grazed will be planted with
appropriate woody species to establish a forested wetland system. Invasives will be treated if present.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 30 September 2024
Cattle will also be excluded from wetland areas, eliminating wallow areas which are currently acting as
nutrient and sediment sources for the project’s receiving waters.
Relic wetland areas will be reestablished on the Site
through hydrologic uplift, establishment of forested
wetland plant communities, cattle exclusion, and
roughening to promote increased retention times.
Hydrology within proposed wetland re-establishment
areas has been altered by agricultural ditching and
drainage effects of incised channels. Restoration of
the adjacent stream channels will raise hydrology and
increase overbank events. Minor grading (<6”) will be
conducted in these areas to remove non-hydric
overburden material that has been deposited since
the initial clearing and conversion of the wetlands
and surrounding hillslopes for agriculture. Areas of 6-12” of cut are proposed along the existing Black
Bear Creek to remove spoil piles on the floodplain. Vegetation within wetland re-establishment areas
has been maintained as pasture and grazed by cattle. Increased roughness from vegetation will reduce
surface drainage effects within the wetland and allow for development of facultative herbaceous and
woody species.
Grading within the proposed wetland restoration areas is focused on restoring stream and floodplain
connectivity as well as a natural flooding regime. Wetland restoration through re-establishment is
proposed on 2.14-acres along Black Bear Creek Reaches 1 and 2 (Figure 8). Re-establishment will begin
no less than five feet from the edge of the proposed stream’s top of bank to compensate for the natural
drawdown that occurs between wetlands and streams. All wetlands will be disked and roughened to
reduce soil compaction, and invasive species will be mechanically removed. On average, hydric soils
were observed between 6 and 10 inches below the surface. Detailed wetland grading plans are included
in the provided plans in Appendix 9.
6.5 Vegetation and Planting Plan
The purpose of the planting plan is to establish a robust and diverse selection of native trees, shrubs,
and herbaceous vegetation indicative of Piedmont Bottomland Forest (Typic Low Subtype) and Alluvial
Forest community types. While historical land uses have drastically altered the plant composition across
this site, the Site’s goal is to establish vegetation that will mature into a stratified hardwood forest
appropriate for the Site’s physiographic characteristics. The species composition to be planted is based
on the community type, occurrence of species in riparian buffers adjacent to the Site, best professional
judgement on species establishment, and anticipated Site conditions in the early years following project
implementation. Based on existing species composition observed along Site streams, the Piedmont
Bottomland Forest (Typic Low Subtype) defined by Schafale (2012) is the target community. The canopy,
subcanopy and shrub layers will be restored through planting a mixture of bare root trees and shrubs
appropriate to the target community. An existing conditions floristic inventory found portions of the
easement in pasture or forest to be largely devoid of a developed herbaceous layer. The herbaceous
layer will be restored by seeding the disturbed area with a native seed mix. Species chosen for planting
are listed on Sheet 4.0 of the draft plans located in Appendix 9. The limits of the various planting zones
are located on Sheets 4.1-4.3 of the draft plans.
Streambanks will be planted with a combination of appropriate live stakes, herbaceous plugs, and
permanent native seed mix. Herbaceous plugs and live stakes will be planted throughout the Site’s
streams in combination with instream structures to add toe-of-slope protection for the streambanks.
Area Proposed for Wetland Re-establishment

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 31 September 2024
The proposed buffer planting zone (approximately 30.8 acres) will be planted with trees and shrubs
primarily composed of facultative species of bare root seedlings indicative of Piedmont Bottomland
(Typic Low Subtype) Forests. Species selected for this zone are intended to create a stratified forest that
is composed of early successional to late successional species.
The partially forested buffer zone (approximately .9 acres) will be supplementally planted with native
tree and shrub tubelings intended to diversify the existing canopy. Species have been selected for shade
tolerance that are indicative of the target natural community type.
The wetland planting zone (approximately 3 acres) will be planted with trees and shrubs primarily
composed of obligate to facultative wetland bare root seedlings. Species selected for this zone are
intended to create a stratified forest that is composed of early successional to late successional species.
Additionally, live stakes will be incorporated as needed to help stabilize areas where substantial flows
can occur during rain events.
The buffer preservation zone (approximately 5.3 acres) of the Site will be monitored for invasive species
and treated as necessary through the life of the project. These forested sections have an existing healthy
target community with mature populations and do not require replanting. Any disturbance caused by
nearby construction in these areas will be limited and replanted as necessary.
Invasive vegetation within the easement will be treated and/or mechanically removed during
construction, but additional treatment is expected. Invasive species’ presence will be monitored and
treated as necessary throughout the monitoring period. Additional monitoring and management issues
regarding vegetation are included in Sections 9 and Appendix 6.
6.6 Land Management
The primary purpose of land management prior to construction is to effectively treat invasive plant
populations and to assess soil quality. As detailed below, populations of invasive plants on the Site will
be treated before and during construction. The most prominent invasive species are scattered
populations of multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), and marsh
dewflower (Murdannia keisak). Post construction land management will fall under the Adaptive
Management Plan, which is further described in Section 11 and Appendix 6.
6.7 Project Risk and Uncertainties
In general, this project has low risk. The landowners live in the immediate area and are active on the
property. They will be able to repair damaged fences and/or remove stray livestock from the easement
quickly. Upon completion of construction, the conservation easement will be delineated with fence,
witness posts, and signage as outlined in NC DMS 2018 guidance document to discourage accidental
encroachment. If signs of encroachment are present or an area is deemed high risk for encroachment,
the easement marker’s visibility will be enhanced.
There is little to no risk of hydraulic trespass from the project due to the current and designed channel
slopes of the project streams and the restoration approaches. Grading into the banks will occur on small
areas of Priority 2 restoration and slopes will be graded at a maximum of 3:1 to reduce the risk of
erosion during the vegetation establishment and stabilization period.
The Priority 2 restoration sections can face risk of stunted vegetation growth and floodplain erosion
during initial stabilization. These risks will be managed through topsoil salvage and application to the
floodplain, soil amendments, and an active stabilization plan during construction.
There is one internal easement break and two external breaks designated for agricultural or residential
access. The internal easement break is proposed to be a culvert crossing and is located on Black Bear

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 32 September 2024
Creek Reach 1. One external easement break is a proposed ford crossing on Black Bear Creek Reach 3.
The second external break is located along the landowner’s driveway and involves replacement of an
existing culvert crossing that connects wetlands.
There is potential for utility maintenance where existing utility easements cross the project. One utility
pole is located just upstream of Poplar Tributary B, and the guide wire for another pole crosses into the
easement on Black Bear Reach 3. It is expected that impacts will most likely be limited to vegetation,
however there is a chance more complex utility line maintenance could occur. Should utility
maintenance occur in the future and encroach within the conservation easement, Wildlands will follow
the Maintenance Plan (Appendix 6) to repair disturbed signage, damaged stream and/or riparian
vegetation.
All stream projects have some risk for beaver colonization. There is no on-site evidence of current or
past beaver activity within the project limits. If beaver move into the project areas, Wildlands will follow
the Maintenance Plan to address this issue.
7.0 Determination of Credits
The final stream and wetland credits associated with the Site are listed in Tables 17 and 18. Steam
Restoration (R) is proposed at a ratio of 1:1 and Stream Enhancement Level I (EI) is proposed at a ratio of
1.5:1, while Enhancement Level II (EII) is proposed at ratios of 2.5:1 and 4:1. Willow Tributary is
comprised of a mixture of R and EII treatments and is proposed for credit as EI at 1.5:1. Wetland re-
establishment is proposed at a ratio of 1:1; wetland rehabilitation is proposed at a credit ratio of 1.5:1;
wetland enhancement is proposed at a credit of 2:1; and wetland creation is proposed at a credit of 3:1.
No direct credit is sought for BMPs. The credit release schedule is located in Appendix 7. All riparian
buffers are the required minimum of 50 feet, excluding areas limited due to existing utility easements,
crossings, or property lines. The sum of these areas exceeds the 5% threshold allowed by the NCIRT
mitigation guidance; subsequently, proposed credits were reduced using the issued Wilmington District
Stream Buffer Credit Calculator. Results and mapping from the analysis are included in Appendix 10 and
results from the GIS analysis are included with submitted digital files.
An additional 2% stream credit is proposed on Black Bear Creek where benthic macroinvertebrate
monitoring will be conducted. Benthic monitoring credit is tied to completion of the proposed
monitoring activities and is not tied to success criteria.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 33 September 2024
Table 17: Project Assets and Credits
Project
Segment
Existing
Length
(LF or
Ac)
Mitigation
Plan
Footage or
Acreage
Mitigation
Category
Restoration
Level
Priority
Level
Mitigation
Ratio (X:1)
Stream
Credits

Benthic
Credits Comments
Black Bear
Creek R1 1,922
1,481 Warm R 1 1 1,481.00 29.620 Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Black Bear
Creek R2 635 Warm R 1 1 635.000 12.700 Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Black Bear
Creek R3 2,434
477 Warm EI N/A 1.5 318.000 6.360
Bank grading, raising of streambed,
structure placement, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Black Bear
Creek R4 2,131 Warm R 1 1 2,131.00 42.620 Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Stroup
Tributary A R1 544
403 Warm EII N/A 4 100.750 N/A Structure placement, cattle exclusion
Stroup
Tributary A R2 180 Warm R 1 1 180.000 N/A Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Stroup
Tributary B R1 689
221 Warm EII N/A 2.5 88.400 N/A Bank grading, structure placement, planted
buffer, cattle exclusion
Stroup
Tributary B R2 496 Warm R 1 1 496.000 N/A Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Stroup
Tributary C 970 859 Warm R 1 1 859.000 N/A Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Stroup
Tributary D 48 47 Warm R 1 1 47.000 N/A Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion, BMP to treat agricultural runoff
Poplar Tributary
A 556 528 Warm R 1.5 1 528.000 N/A Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Poplar Tributary
B 272 273 Warm EI N/A 1.5 182.000 N/A
Bank grading, raising of streambed,
structure placement, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Cub Tributary 154 202 Warm R 1.5 1 202.000 N/A Channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion
Willow
Tributary 643 423 Warm EI N/A 1.5 282.000 N/A
Bank grading, structure placement,
channel restoration, planted buffer, cattle
exclusion

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 34 September 2024
Project
Segment
Existing
Length
(LF or
Ac)
Mitigation
Plan
Footage or
Acreage
Mitigation
Category
Restoration
Level
Priority
Level
Mitigation
Ratio (X:1)
Stream
Credits

Benthic
Credits Comments
Wetland Re-
establishment 0.000 1.826 Riparian R N/A 1 1.826 N/A
Raise streambed to improve hydrology,
remove overburden material, surface
roughening, native vegetation planting,
cattle exclusion
Wetland
Rehabilitation 0.203 0.203 Riparian RH N/A 1.5 0.135 N/A
Raise streambed to improve hydrology,
surface roughening, native vegetation
planting, cattle exclusion
Wetland
Enhancement 0.127 0.127 Riparian E N/A 2 0.064 N/A Native vegetation planting, cattle exclusion
Wetland
Creation 0.000 0.309 Riparian C N/A 3 0.103 N/A Raise streambed to improve hydrology,
native vegetation planting, cattle exclusion

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 35 September 2024
Table 18: Project Credits
Restoration Level
Stream Riparian Wetland Non-Rip Coastal
Warm Cool Cold Riverine Non-Riv Wetland Marsh
Restoration 6,559.000
Re-establishment (1:1) 1.826
Rehabilitation (1.5:1) 0.135
Enhancement (2:1) 0.103
Enhancement I 782.000
Enhancement II 189.150
Creation (3:1) 0.064
Preservation
Additional Credit from
Extended Buffers1 81.580

Additional Credit from
Macroinvertebrate
Monitoring and Water
Quality Samplings2
91.300

TOTAL 7,703.030 2.128
1Detailed calculations are included in Appendix 10.
2Additional credit for proposed macroinvertebrate and water quality sampling equal to 2% of the baseline stream
credit for each project stream.
8.0 Performance Standards
The stream and wetland performance standards for the project will follow approved performance
standards presented in the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update
issued October 2016 by the USACE and NCIRT. Annual monitoring and routine site visits will be
conducted by a qualified scientist to assess the condition of the finished project. Specific performance
standards components that apply to this project are for vegetation, water quality and
macroinvertebrate, stream morphology and hydrology as described in the 2016 Compensatory
Mitigation Update including Vegetation (Section V, B, Items 1 through 3) and Stream Channel Stability
and Stream Hydrology Performance Standards (Section VI, B, Items 1 through 7), Stream Water Quality
and Macroinvertebrate Criteria (Section VII, A, Items 1 through 5; and B, Items 1 through 5), and
Wetland Hydrologic Performance Criteria (Section IX, C, Items 1 through 3). Table 19 summarizes the
performance standards and links the standards to the project goals and objections discussed in Section
5.0.
The growing season based on the Gaston County WETS table for a 50% probability of soil temperature
greater than 28 degrees Fahrenheit is March 14th through November 24th, which represents a 255-day
growing season (USDA-NRCS 2023). However, Wildlands proposes a growing season from March 1st
through November 20th (265 days) based on soil temperature observations and bud burst occurring
prior to or near March 1 at several nearby mitigation sites within and adjacent to Gaston County. The
Gaston County WETS table suggests an end to growing season that extends beyond USACE standards
therefore Wildlands will instead employ the maximum November 20th date as the end of the growing
season (USACE 2016). Photo documentation of soil temperature data, WETS table, and bud burst are
included in Appendix 4.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 36 September 2024
Additionally, the results of the hydric soil investigation (Section 6.3.1) indicate that Wehadkee soils are
predominant in the wetland mitigation areas at the Site. Therefore, the hydroperiod criterion for
Wehadkee soils is proposed for these wetland mitigation areas. Table 1 in the Wilmington District
Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update (2016) indicates a hydroperiod criterion for
Wehadkee soils is 12-16%. Based on this, the proposed hydroperiod criterion is 12% (32 consecutive
days of water table within 12 inches of the ground surface).
Table 19: Summary of Performance Standards
Goal Objective Performance Criteria1,2,3 Measurement
Exclude livestock
from stream
channels.
Install livestock fencing as
needed to exclude
livestock from stream
channels and riparian
areas or remove livestock
from adjacent fields.
Prevent easement
encroachment from
livestock.
Visually inspect the perimeter
of the Site to ensure no
easement encroachments are
occurring.
Reduce sediment and
nutrient input from
eroding stream
channels and
improve the stability
of stream channels.
Construct stream
channels that will
maintain stable cross-
sections, patterns, and
profiles over time. Add
bank revetments and
instream structures to
protect
restored/enhanced
streams.
ER over 1.4 for B‐type and
2.2 for C‐type channels
and
BHR below 1.2 with visual
assessments showing
progression towards
stability.
Cross‐sections will
be assessed during MY1,
MY2, MY3, MY5, and MY7
and visual inspections to
document any signs of
instability will be documented
annually.
Reconnect channels
with floodplains and
allow a natural
flooding regime.
Reconstruct stream
channels with bankfull
dimensions and depth
based on reference reach
data.
Four bankfull events in
separate years within the
7‐year monitoring period.
Continuous flow (30
consecutive days)
documented for
intermittent stream with R
or EI restoration levels.
Crest gauges and/or pressure
transducers recording flow
elevations.
Restore and enhance
wetland function and
hydrology.
Restore and enhance
wetlands through re-
establishment of
hydrology. Remove the
drainage effects of
agricultural ditching and
maintenance.
Water table within 12
inches of the soil surface
for a consecutive 12% (32
days) of the growing
season. Proposed growing
season dates are March 1
through November 20.
Groundwater gages will be
installed in wetland re-
establishment and
rehabilitation areas and
monitored annually.
Restore, enhance,
and supplement
native floodplain and
streambank
vegetation.
Plant native trees and
understory species in
riparian zones, and plant
native woody and
herbaceous species on
streambanks. Treat
invasive species within
project area.
In open buffer and
wetland planted areas of
the Site, Survival rate of
320 stems per acre at
MY3, 260 planted stems
per acre at MY5, and 210
stems per acre at MY7. For
the open buffer areas, the
average height of 7 feet in
each plot at MY5 and 10
feet in each plot at MY7
for planted stems. For
Permanent and mobile
vegetation plots measuring
100 square meters are
established on 2% of the
planted area. A vegetation
transect will be used to
monitor planted stem survival
in partially forested planted
areas. All vegetative areas are
monitored during MY1, MY2,
MY3, MY5, and MY7. Invasive

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 37 September 2024
Goal Objective Performance Criteria1,2,3 Measurement
wetland planted areas,
plots should average
heights of 6 feet at MY5
and 8 feet in each plot at
MY7. Shrub and sub‐
canopy species are
excluded from the height
requirement. No
performance criteria
required for partially
planted buffer areas and
buffer preservation areas
species coverage will be
visually assessed annually.
Treat upland runoff
before it enters
restored streams.
Install stormwater BMPs
in areas of concentrated
pasture runoff and/or
eroded gullies to treat
runoff before it enters
the stream channel and
to prevent future
headcuts.
There is no required
performance standard for
this metric.
N/A
Improve instream
habitat by increasing
bedform diversity.
Establish alternating
riffle-pool and/or step-
pool sequences. Install
habitat features such as
brush toes, log and rock
sills, log vanes, and j-
hooks into
restored/enhanced
streams to promote
habitat variability and
pool formation. Add
woody materials to
channel beds.
There is no required
performance standard for
this metric.
Visual assessment.
Improve biological
function.
Improve conditions for
aquatic organisms and
reestablish biological
connection between
riparian and aquatic
ecosystems.
There is no required
performance standard for
this metric.
Benthic macroinvertebrate
and single event water quality
sampling will occur pre‐
construction, MY3, MY5, and
MY7.
Permanently protect
the site from harmful
uses.
Establish conservation
easements on the Site,
including headwater
streams.
Prevent easement
encroachment.
Visually inspect the
perimeter of the Site to
ensure no easement
encroachment is occurring.

1. BHR = bank height ratio, ER = entrenchment ratio
2. The tributaries are designed to incise as they approach the main streams, so this would not be considered a trend towards
instability. Riffles may fine over the course of monitoring due to the stabilization of contributing watershed sediment sources.
3. Vegetation performance will be evaluated in the permanent and mobile plots within planting areas. Low growing trees and
shrubs are excluded from height requirements. No single planted or volunteer species shall comprise more than 50% of the
total stem density within any plot at year 3, 5 or 7. No performance criteria are required for the partially planted buffer areas
and buffer preservation areas.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 38 September 2024
9.0 Monitoring Plan
The Site monitoring plan has been developed to ensure that the required performance standards are
met, and project goals and objectives are achieved. Annual monitoring will consist of collecting
geomorphic, vegetative, single event water quality (pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and
conductivity), macroinvertebrate samples, and hydrologic data to assess project success based on the
restoration goals, previously outlined in Section 8.0. Annual monitoring data will be reported in
accordance with Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 08‐03. The monitoring period will extend seven years
beyond the completion of construction or until performance criteria have been met. All survey data will
be georeferenced to North Carolina State Plane coordinates.
Using the RGL 08‐03, a baseline monitoring document and as‐built record drawings of the project, to
include red‐line notation, will be developed within 90 days of the planting completion and monitoring
device installation on the restored Site. Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of
monitoring and submitted to USACE no later than April 1 of the year following monitoring. Full
monitoring reports will be submitted in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Abbreviated monitoring
reports will be submitted in monitoring years 4 and 6. Closeout will occur seven years beyond
completion of construction or until performance standards have been met.
Project monitoring components are listed in more detail in Table 20Table 21. Approximate locations of
the proposed monitoring components are illustrated in Figures 13A - C.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 39 September 2024
Table 20: Monitoring Components
Parameter Monitoring
Feature
Quantity/Length by Reach
Frequency Notes Black Bear Creek Stroup Trib A Stroup Trib B Stroup
Trib C
Stroup
Trib D Reach
1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 1 Reach 2
Dimension
Riffle Cross-
sections 3 1 1 3 N/A 0 N/A 1 2 0 Year 1, 2,
3, 5, & 7 1 Pool Cross-
sections 2 1 1 2 N/A 0 N/A 0 2 0
Substrate,
Pattern, & Profile
Pebble
Counts,
Pattern, and
Longitudinal
Profile
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2
Stream Hydrology
Crest Gage
(CG) and/or
Stream Gage
(SG)
1 CG 1 CG 1 SG 0 CG N/A N/A 1 CG 1 SG Semi-
Annual 3
Wetland
Hydrology
Groundwater
Gage 5 GWG (Sitewide) Semi-
Annual 4
Vegetation
Total Plots
(Permanent
/Mobile /
Transect)
23 Total Riparian (17 Permanent / 5 Mobile / 1 Transect)
3 Total Wetland (2 Permanent / 1 Mobile /0 Transect)
Year 1, 2,
3, 5, & 7 5
Visual Assessment Y Semi-
Annual
Benthic Macro-
Invertebrates/
Water Quality
Qual 4
Sampling 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Pre-Con,
Year 3, 5,
& 7
6
Exotic & Nuisance
Vegetation

Semi-
Annual 7
Project Boundary Semi-
Annual 8
Reference Photos Photographs 8 1 4 6 1 1 1 1 3 2 Annual

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 40 September 2024
Table 20: Monitoring Components (continued)
Parameter Monitoring Feature Quantity/Length by Reach Frequency Notes Poplar Trib A Poplar Trib B Cub Trib Willow Trib
Dimension Riffle Cross-sections 1 0 0 0 Year 1, 2, 3, 5, & 7 1 Pool Cross-sections 0 0 0 0
Substrate, Pattern & Profile Pebble Counts, Pattern, and
Longitudinal Profile N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2
Stream Hydrology Crest Gage (CG) and/or
Stream Gage (SG) 1 SG 0 CG 1 SG 0 CG Semi-Annual 3
Wetland Hydrology Ground Water Gage (GWG) Semi-Annual 4
Vegetation Total Plots
(Permanent/Mobile/Transect) Year 1, 2, 3, 5, & 7 5
Visual Assessment Semi-Annual
Benthic Macro-
Invertebrates/ Water Quality Qual 4 Sampling N/A N/A N/A N/A Pre-Con, Year 3, 5, & 7 6
Exotic & Nuisance
Vegetation Semi-Annual 7
Project Boundary Semi-Annual 8
Reference Photos Photographs 1 1 1 2 Annual
1. Cross-sections will be permanently marked with rebar to establish location. Surveys will include points measured at all breaks in s lope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg.
2. Substrate, pattern, and profile will be assessed visually during semi-annual site visits. Longitudinal profile will be collected during as-built baseline monitoring survey only, unless observations indicate
widespread lack of vertical stability (greater than 10% of reach is affected) and profile survey is warranted in additional years to monitor adjustments or survey repair work.
3. Pressure transducers will be used to measure bankfull events and stream flow. Crest gages (CG) refer to bankfull events, a nd stream gages (SG) refer to stream flow documentation. Stream flow will
measure intermittent flow and be used as a hydrologic measurement for restored "A" and "B" type channels, since floodplain interaction on these types of channels is less concerning a s a function
hydrologic measurement. Transducers will be inspected and downloaded quarterly or semi-annually, evidence of bankfull events will be documented with a photo when possible. Transducers will be set
to record stage once every 2 - 4 hours based on the reported data.
4. Vegetative indicators, including bud burst and leaf drop, will also be recorded during biannual Site visits. Soil profile descriptions will be recorded at each bore location where a gage is installed
during as-built monitoring feature installation. The profile descriptions will present a record of the soil horizons, color, texture, and redoximorphic features.
5. Both mobile and permanent vegetation plots will be utilized to evaluate the vegetation performance for 2% of the open, planted riparian and wetland zones, and the partially forested planting zone
will be evaluated by visual assessment and permanent vegetative transects. Permanent and mobile vegetation monitoring plot assessments will follow the 2016 NC IRT Wilmington Dis trict Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update to document the number of planted stems and species, while the vegetative transects will document the species and their vigor based on survivability
(excellent, good, fair, unlikely to survive, or dead) and will not be held to vegetative performance standards. All plots and transects will use either a circular or 100 m2 square/rectangular plot and are
placed randomly throughout the planting zones. Vegetative transect locations may be adjusted within the partially forested zones during the as‐built baseline monitoring phase to ensure that a
representative population of planted stems are captured for monitoring. Number indicates the total number of plots/transects for the entire Site.
6. Benthic and water quality sampling will follow Standard Operating Procedures for the Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (NCDWR, 2016). Sampling will not be tied to performance
standards or success criteria. The 2% adjustment will be added to the total credit amount and released according to the standard release schedule.
7. Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be mapped.
8. Locations of vegetation damage, boundary encroachments, etc. will be mapped.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 41 September 2024
10.0 Long-Term Management Plan
Ownership and Long-term Manager
The Site will remain in private ownership, protected in its entirety, and managed under the terms
detailed in the conservation easement. Unique Places to Save (UP2Save) will serve as the Grantee and
long-term manager and will be the party responsible for long-term management. The conservation
easement will be transferred to UP2Save prior to the initial credit release.
UP2Save is a 501c3 non-profit organization that is committed to land conservation through sustainable
planning and management. UP2Save has the ability, both logistically and financially, to monitor and
enforce the provisions of the conservation easement and long-term management plan. The organization
operates in a sustainable manner to facilitate operations well into the future. UP2Save has been
approved to serve as the easement holder and long-term manager on several mitigation banks in North
Carolina, including Falling Creek, Dudley Pond, Critcher Brothers, White Buffalo, and Plantation Branch
projects. Additional qualifications and UP2Save’s annual report can be provided upon request.
Long-Term Management Activities
Prior to the initial credit release and following authorization of the Mitigation Banking Instrument, the
Site will be protected in perpetuity with a conservation easement. Following the issuance of the close-
out letter (i.e., final determination of success), long-term management activities will be conducted to
ensure the Site remains perpetually monitored. The long-term manager will be responsible for
inspecting the Site annually, conducting the long-term management activities described below, and
rectifying identified deficiencies as necessary. The restrictions and long-term management
responsibilities will convey with the land, should the property be transferred in the future. The long-
term manager will be responsible for periodic inspection of the Site to ensure that the restrictions
documented in the recorded easement are upheld.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 42 September 2024
Table 21: Long-Term Management Plan
Long-Term Management
Activity Long-Term Manager Responsibility Landowner Responsibility
Signage will be installed and
maintained along the Site
boundary to denote the
area protected by the
recorded conservation
easement.
The long-term steward will be
responsible for inspecting the Site
boundary and for maintaining or
replacing signage to ensure that the
conservation easement area is
clearly marked.
The landowner shall report damaged or
missing signs to the long-term manager,
as well as contact the long-term manager
if a boundary needs to be marked, or
clarification is needed regarding a
boundary location. If land use changes in
future and fencing is required to protect
the easement, the landowner is
responsible for installing appropriate
approved fencing.
Where livestock are
present, a fence will be
installed and maintained
along the conservation
easement boundary to
prevent livestock from
accessing the Site.
The long‐term steward (or
manager) will be responsible for
inspecting for and reporting
livestock intrusion to the
landowner(s).
The landowner(s) will be responsible
for inspecting and maintaining the
fence and excluding livestock from the
conservation easement area.
The Site will be protected in
its entirety and managed
under the terms outlined in
the recorded conservation
easement.
The long-term manager will be
responsible for conducting annual
inspections and for undertaking
actions that are reasonably
calculated to swiftly correct the
conditions constituting a breach.
The USACE, and their authorized
agents, shall have the right to enter
and inspect the Site and to take
actions necessary to verify
compliance with the conservation
easement.
The landowner shall contact the long-term
manager if clarification is needed
regarding the restrictions associated with
the recorded conservation easement.
Funding Mechanism
Anticipated long-term management activities and their associated annual cost are listed in Table 22
below. Wildlands will fund a stewardship endowment that will be managed by UP2Save. UP2Save’s
endowment is designated to provide on-going revenue to support long-term management activities. The
stewardship endowment is invested to provide recurring revenue to cover the cost of anticipated annual
activities, easement defense, and violation resolution.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 43 September 2024
Table 22: Management Funding
Management Activity Units Hours Cost/Unit Frequency Annual Cost
Annual Monitoring
Staff time for annual planning 40.7 ac 11 $65.00 Annual $715.00
Staff time to address minor violations or issues N/A 10 $650.00 Once per 10 years $65.00
Mileage 332 N/A $0.655 Annual $217.46
Lodging costs 0 N/A $0 Annual $0.00
Meal costs 2 N/A $20.00 Annual $40.00
Sign replacement costs 10 N/A $2.00 Annual $20.00
Insurance N/A N/A $100.00 N/A $100.00
Total Annual Funding $1,157.46
Capitalization Rate 3.50%
Monitoring Endowment $33,070.29
Accepting and Defending Easement in Perpetuity
Staff time for major violations N/A 80 $65.00 N/A $5,200.00
Legal Counsel N/A N/A N/A N/A $10,000.00
Other Incidentals N/A N/A N/A N/A $5,000.00
Stewardship Complexities N/A N/A N/A N/A $3000.00
Monitoring Endowment $23,200.00
Total Monitoring and Legal
Defense Endowment $56,270.29
Rounded $56,270
Contingency Plan
Should UP2Save be unable to fulfill the long-term management responsibilities, a plan to transfer the
responsibilities and stewardship endowment will be presented to the USACE. Long-term management
responsibilities will not be transferred unless the long-term manager receives written authorization
from the USACE.
11.0 Adaptive Management Plan
Upon completion of Site construction, Wildlands will implement the post-construction monitoring
protocols and minor remedial actions (routine maintenance) will be performed as needed for the
duration of the monitoring period. Wildlands, as the Sponsor, will notify the USACE immediately if
monitoring results or visual observations suggest a trend towards instability, major remedial actions are
needed, or that performance standards cannot be achieved. Should major remedial measures be
required, the Sponsor will submit a Corrective Action Plan and coordinate with the USACE until
authorization is secured to conduct the adaptive management activities. The NCIRT Adaptive
Management Plan Guidance, issued September 2021, will be used to guide all adaptive management
activities. The Bank Sponsor is responsible for funding and/or providing the services necessary to secure
any required permits to support the proposed major remedial adaptive management actions, to
implement the corrective action plan, and to deliver record drawings that depict the extent and nature
of the work performed. If the USACE determines that the Bank is not meeting performance standards or
the Sponsor is not complying with the terms of the instrument, the USACE may take appropriate actions,
including but not limited to: suspending credit sales, utilizing financial assurances, and/or terminating
the instrument.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 44 September 2024
12.0 Financial Assurances
Financial assurances will be provided in the form of a Performance Bond for the activities specified in
this plan. The Performance Bond will assure the construction to restore, enhance and/or preserve the
projected aquatic resources. The bond amount will be based on Table 23 below.
Wildlands Holdings IX, LLC will serve as the Principal, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
(Travelers) will serve as the Surety, and Unique Places to Save (UP2Save) will serve as the Obligee. As
stipulated in the Performance Bond, Wildlands Holdings IX, LLC shall promptly and faithfully perform the
Contract, according to the terms, stipulations or conditions included in the MBI. However, In the event
that Wildlands Holdings IX, LLC fails to meet the conditions of the Mitigation Plan, Travelers may fulfill
these obligations either by performing those obligations up to the applicable bond amount, or by paying
such bond amount to UP2Save who would develop a proposal to fulfill the mitigation obligations.
The Performance Bond will be retired upon approval of the final as-built report by the DE. Following
retirement of the Performance Bond, a Monitoring Bond will be issued by Travelers, to Wildlands
Holdings IX, LLC, with UP2Save as the Obligee, to cover anticipated monitoring and adaptive
management costs. The Monitoring Bond will be structured to provide continuous coverage that will
decrease in value each year according to Table 22. An annual Monitoring Bond renewal will be
submitted to the USACE upon approval of each previous years monitoring report. The principal amount
of the Monitoring Bond is calculated based on the total estimated costs that remains through closeout,
including monitoring and maintenance activities. Table 23 lists the proposed Monitoring Bond amounts
for each monitoring year.
Table 23: Financial Assurances Table
Category 2023 –
June 2025
July – Dec
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Engineering $43,000

Legal $7,400

Construction $750,000

Planting $75,000

As-Built $60,000

Monitoring

$15,000 $15,750 $16,538 $17,364 $18,233 $19,144 $20,101
Re-grading
Contingency

$0 $0 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $5,000
Re-Planting
Contingency

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Beaver Control

$0 $0 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500
Invasive Control

$0 $2,000 $0 $2,000 $0 $2,000 $2,000
Easement Access
Control

$750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750
Corps Admin Costs $15,900 $5,300 $5,300 $5,300 $2,650 $5,300 $2,650 $10,600
Sub-Total $951,300 $21,050 $23,800 $29,088 $24,264 $25,783 $26,044 $39,951
Bond Principal $951,300 $189,980 $168,930 $145,130 $116,043 $91,778 $65,996 $39,951
Monitoring Phase Bond

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 45 September 2024
13.0 References
Gill, Allison L., A.S. Gallinat, R. Sanders-DeMott, A.J. Rigden, D.J. Short Gianotti, J.A. Mantooth, and P.H.
Templer. 2015. Changes in autumn senescence in northern hemisphere deciduous trees: a meta-
analysis of autumn phenology studies. Annals of Botany 116:875-888
Mariën, Bertold, M. Balzarolo, I. Dox, S. Leys, M.J. Loréne, C. Geron, M. Portillo-Estrada, H. Abdelgawad,
H. Asard, and M. Campioli. 2019. Detecting the onset of autumn leaf senescence in deciduous forest
trees of the temperate zone. New Phytologist 224:166-176
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil
Survey. Available online. Accessed October 10. 2023.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Catawba River Basin Restoration
Priorities 2007 (Amended March 2013).
https://deq.nc.gov/mitigation-services/publicfolder/learn-about/core-processes/watershed-
planning/catawba-river-basin/rbrp-2007-lower-cat-032013-final/download
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality
Plan 2010.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/BPU/BPU/Catawba/Catawba%20Plans/2010%2
0Plan/Entire%202010-Catawba%20Plan.pdf
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). Upper Catawba River Basin Plan 2009
(Amended July 2018).
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Catawba_River_Basin/2018_
Upper_Catawba_RBRP.pdf
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land
Resources, Land Quality Section. Martin Marietta Materials Inc. Mine Inspection Permit No. 36-12
(2015).
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2011. Surface Water Classifications.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016. Standard Operating Procedures for
Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Version 5.0).
North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS), 1985, Geologic Map of North Carolina: Raleigh, North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Geological Survey Section, scale
1:500,00, in color.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). Element Occurrence database search for project site,
https://ncnhde.natureserve.org.
Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosgen, D.L. 2001. A stream channel stability assessment methodology. Proceedings of the Federal
Interagency Sediment Conference, Reno, NV, March 2001.
Schafale M. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. North
Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program.

Lower Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bootstrap Mitigation Site Page 46 September 2024
Shields, A. 1936. Application of similarity principles and turbulence research to bedload movement. Mit.
Preuss. Verchsanst., Berlin. Wasserbau Schiffbau. In W.P Ott and J.C. Uchelen (translators),
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA. Report No. 167: 43 pp.
Shields, D. F., Copeland, R. R, Klingman, P. C., Doyle, M. W., and Simon, A. 2003. Design for Stream
Restoration. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 129(8): 575-582.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2016. Federal Public Notice: Notification of Issuance of
Guidance for Compensatory Stream and Wetland Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District.
October 24, 2016.
United States Army Corps of Engineers Routine On-Site Determination Method presented in the 1987
Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual, the subsequent Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Guidance
United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS).
Agricultural Applied Climate Information System. https://agacis.rcc-acis.org/. Accessed September 9,
2023.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC).
Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of Concern and Candidate Species for
project site, https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac