20070491 Ver 1_Year 4 Monitoring Report_2015_20160224

FINAL
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 4 (2015)
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
STREAM/WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
ASHE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(DMS Project No. 372, Contract No. 004802)
Construction Completed December 2011
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Raleigh, North Carolina
December 2015

FINAL
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 4 (2015)
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
STREAM/WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
ASHE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(DMS Project No. 372, Contract No. 004802)
Construction Completed December 2011
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Axiom Environmental, Inc,
December 2015

Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................... 1
2.0 METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................. 3
2.1 Vegetation Assessment........................................................................................................ 3
2.2 Stream Assessment............................................................................................................... 3
3.0 REFERENCES........................................................................................................................ 4
Appendices
APPENDIX A. PROJECT VICINITY MAP AND BACKGROUND TABLES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
APPENDIX B. VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA
Figures 2 and 2A -2F. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A -5B. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Stream Fixed -Station Photographs
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
APPENDIX C. VEGETATION PLOT DATA
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 9. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
APPENDIX D. STREAM SURVEY DATA
Cross-section Plots
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Substrate Plots
Table IOa- IOd. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 11 a-11 d. Monitoring Data
APPENDIX E. HYDROLOGY DATA
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 13. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Summary
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Table of Contents

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (hereafter referred to as the
Site) is situated within US Geological Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 05050001 of the Upper
New River Basin and is in a portion of NC Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Priority Sub -
basin 05-07-02. The project is located in the northwest corner of Ashe County, about 1 mile south
of the Virginia state line and 3 miles east of the Tennessee state line (Figure 1, Appendix A). The
Site is encompassed within a 61.92 -acre easement located in a tract owned by Michael and Virginia
Tate. The Site includes an unnamed tributary to Ripshin Branch (UT), Ripshin Branch proper,
associated floodplain wetlands, and additional tributaries found on the property (Figure 2,
Appendix B). This report (compiled based on DMS's Procedural Guidance and Content
Requirements for EEP Monitoring Reports, Version 1.4, dated 11/7/11) summarizes data for Year
4 (2015) monitoring.
The project goals are as follows.
• Improve stream water quality and ecological function by excluding livestock, restoring pool and
riffle sequences, and restoring tree canopy and instream large woody debris.
• Enhance aquatic and terrestrial habitat in the stream corridor and adjacent wetlands.
• Enhance and/or restore the ecological function of riparian wetlands.
• Restore the riparian corridor (forested buffer) for watershed and wildlife benefits.
• Enhance habitat for native brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and improve fishery potential.
• Increase biodiversity of the stream ecology, riparian buffers, and wetlands.
These goals will be accomplished through the implementation of the following objectives.
• Improve channel geomorphology toward reference conditions by providing watershed scaled and
Rosgen-typed channel dimension, adding floodplain benches where floodplain access is not
feasible, restoring sinuous pattern to straightened reaches where possible, and adjusting profile as
needed to restore or maintain sediment transport equilibrium.
• Restore stream -side floodprone area where appropriate (increase floodwater access to the
floodplain).
• Reduce sediment and nutrient loading by reshaping and stabilizing banks, reducing bank scour,
excluding livestock, and restoring riparian buffers.
• Enhance or restore wetland hydrology and vegetation in former pastures and filled wetlands.
After construction, five vegetation plots were established and sampled. During Year 2 (2013)
monitoring, thirteen additional vegetation plots were established and sampled. Vegetation Success
Criteria (from the approved Ripshin Branch Stream & Wetland Restoration Plan [NCDMS 2007])
include the following.
• Survival of planted vegetation should exceed 80 percent after 5 years following planting (minimum
260 stems/acre).
• Planted vegetation stabilizing at 20 years with distinct canopy, subcanopy, and shrub layers.
• Establishment of herbaceous cover over 75 percent of the soil surface in restored wetlands and
riparian areas.
• Plant biodiversity dominated by native species, with minimal ecological impact from invasive
species.
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina page 1

Overall, vegetation was below success criteria with an average of 272 planted stems/acre
(excluding livestakes) across the Site. In addition, six of the eighteen vegetation monitoring plots
met, or exceeded success criteria. Plots 1-5 and 14 are located along the Ripshin Branch and
unnamed tributary stream and wetland restoration areas. The vegetation within these areas is
meeting success criteria with an average of 452 planted stems/acre. Additionally, four of the six
plots in this area met or exceeded success criteria. Potential causes of the low stem counts at Plots
2 and 4 include excessive hydrology associated with wetland restoration and over competition by
sedges and soft rush (Carex spp. and Juncus effusus, respectively). Plots 6-13 and 15-18 are
located in the Enhancement (level II) areas throughout the remainder of the Site. Average stem
density throughout this area is 182 stems/acre. Additionally, only two of the twelve plots in these
areas met or exceeded success criteria. Low stem density in these areas can be attributed to poor
planted stem survival due to harsh, high elevation climate and poor soils. Supplemental planting
throughout the Site Enhancement (level II) reaches is recommended for the winter of 2015/2016.
In addition to low stem densities, one vegetation area of concern was noted at the beginning of
2013. An overbank event scoured the floodplain and deposited gravel and silt along both banks at
the downstream end of Ripshin Branch near Vegetation Plot 5, and a number of planted stems
were buried by debris and sediment. This area appears to have stabilized, with woody stems and
herbaceous vegetation reestablishing. However, this area continues to scour during high stream
flows and is characterized by poorly developed rocky soils.
A visual assessment and geomorphic survey were completed for the Site. The visual assessment
indicated that project reaches were performing within established success criteria ranges as shown
below. During a 2013 heavy, summer rain event, a boulder was dislodged in a right bank structure
in the lower portion of Ripshin Branch. The boulder has since been stabilized by dense herbaceous
vegetation and is no longer dislodged. The structure will continue to be monitored closely but is
not expected to dislodge again during normal rain conditions.
During Monitoring Years 2 and 3 (2013-2014),
stream was mapped onsite using sub -meter GPS.
on Figures 2A -2F (Appendix B).
approximately 25,320 linear feet of additional
The locations of additional streams are depicted
Stream Success Criteria (from the approved Ripshin Branch Stream & Wetland Restoration Plan
[NCDMS 2007]) is as follows.
• Channel morphology retains the design stream type over the majority of the reach.
• Coarsening of riffle bed material in newly constructed reaches.
• Pool/riffle spacing should remain fairly constant.
• Maintenance of bankfull width at riffles within 10 percent of the design.
• Maintenance of bank height ratios at 1:1.
• Bank stability over 90 percent of altered channel reaches.
• Dimension and profile stability over 90 percent of altered channel reaches.
• No significant channel aggradation or degradation.
• Minimal development of instream bars.
• Biological populations (invertebrate and fish) remain constant or increase and species composition
indicates a positive trend.
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina page 2

Success criteria for stream restoration will be based on stream stability assessed using
measurements of stream dimension, pattern, and profile; Site photographs; visual assessments; and
vegetation sampling. Streams appear to be functioning properly, emulate design conditions, and
are trending towards success.
Wetland hydrology success criteria (from the approved Ripshin Branch Stream & Wetland
Restoration Plan [NCDMS 2007]) is as follows.
• Hydrologic monitoring indicates groundwater within 12 inches of the ground surface for 10 percent
of the growing season
• Increasing wetland vegetation
• Development of hydric soils
• Fulfill US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) criteria for jurisdictional wetlands
Six groundwater gauges were installed at the Site in mid-October 2012; therefore, no groundwater
gauge data is available for year 1 (2012) monitoring. All six groundwater gauges were
saturated/inundated for well over 10 percent of the year 4 (2015) growing season.
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment and
statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in tables
and figures within this report's appendices. Narrative background and supporting information
formerly found in these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report (formerly
Mitigation Plan) and in the Mitigation Plan (formerly the Restoration Plan) documents available
on the NC Division of Mitigation Services' (NCDMS) website. All raw data supporting the tables
and figures in the appendices are available from NCDMS upon request.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Vegetation Assessment
Five vegetation plots were established and marked during the Year 1 (2012) monitoring period,
and 13 additional plots were established and marked during the Year 2 (2013) monitoring period,
yielding a total of 18 vegetation plots on the site. Plots were established by installing 4 -foot, metal
U -bar post at the corners and a 10 -foot, 0.75 inch PVC at the origin. The plots are 10 meters square
or 20 meters by 5 meters and are located randomly within the Site. These plots were surveyed in
July 2015 for the Year 4 (2015) monitoring season CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
Levels 1-2 Plot Sampling Only Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) (http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm);
results are included in Appendix C. The taxonomic standard for vegetation used for this document
was Flora of the Southern and Mid -Atlantic States (Weakley 2012).
2.2 Stream Assessment
Annual stream monitoring was conducted in April 2015. Measurements were taken using a
Topcon GTS 303 total station and Recon data collector. The raw total station file was processed
using Carlson Survey Software into a Computer Aided Design (CAD) file. Coordinates were
exported as a text/ASCII file to Microsoft Excel for processing and presentation of data. Pebble
counts were completed using the modified Wolman method (Rosgen 1993).
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina page 3

Eight permanent cross-sections, six riffle and two pool, were established and will be used to
evaluate stream dimension; locations are depicted on Figures 2A and 2B (Appendix B). Cross-
sections are permanently monumented with 4 -foot metal U -bar posts at each end point. Cross-
sections will be surveyed to provide a detailed measurement of the stream and banks, including
points on the adjacent floodplain, top of bank, bankfull, breaks in slope, edge of water, and
thalweg. Data will be used to calculate width -depth ratios, entrenchment ratios, and bank height
ratios for each cross-section. In addition, pebble counts were completed at cross-sections 4 and 8,
and photographs will be taken at each permanent cross-section annually.
Two monitoring reaches were established (Unnamed Tributary and Ripshin Branch) and will be
used to evaluate stream pattern and longitudinal profile; locations are depicted on Figures 2A and
2B (Appendix B). Longitudinal profile measurements include average water surface slopes, facet
slopes, and pool -to -pool spacing. Seventeen permanent photo points were established throughout
the restoration reach; locations are depicted on Figures 2A and 2B (Appendix B). In addition,
visual stream morphology and stability assessments were completed in each of the two monitoring
reaches to assess the channel bed, banks, and in -stream structures.
3.0 REFERENCES
.Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Levels 1-2 Plot Sampling Only, Version 4.2. Available online at
httD://cvs.bio.une.edu/methods.htm.
N.C. Division of Mitigation Services (DMS, formerly Ecosystem Enhancement Program).
Unpublished. Procedural Guidance and Content Requirements for EEP Monitoring
Projects, Version 1.4, dated 11/07/11. NC Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Available online at http://portal.ncdenr.or,g/c/document_library/get _ file?
12_1_id=1169848&folderld=2288101 &name=DLFE-39268.pdf
N.C. Division of Mitigation Services (DMS, formerly Ecosystem Enhancement Program). 2007.
Ripshin Branch Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan - Ashe County, NC.
Rosgen. 1993. Applied Fluvial Geomorphology, Training Manual. River Short Course, Wildland
Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Weakley, Alan S. 2012. Flora of the Southern and Mid -Atlantic States. Available online at:
http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/WeakleysFIora.pdf [September 28, 2012]. University of
North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Weather Underground. 2014. Station at Jefferson, North Carolina. (online). Available:
http://www.wanderground.com/history/airport/KGEV/2014/ 1 / 1 /CustomHistory.html?daX
end=7&monthend=6&yearend=2013&req city=NA&req state=NA&req_statename=NA
[June 7, 2014]. Weather Underground.
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina page 4

APPENDIX A
PROJECT VICINITY MAP AND BACKGROUND TABLES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

s
��p• c+,� 1, ,, t ` -_ =.,sem,
-. �ri •, � ;� - � .._-_. Imo,;
Uk
ry Q Y i I s
7W44H�
G ON
Project Site
NCyRTH CARCiLINA _ - '— ` u,-` xnoe •, - : �i
JOCD
i-
Ak
Y
J
t
194
' -.A
r
Directions from Raleigh:�,r`1 a°
Take 1-40 West approx. 100 miles to US -421 North. e�'`+ jI
Travel approx. 71 miles, then take a right on US -221 North.
After approx. 12 miles, turn left on NC-194N/US-221 Bus. North.
Travel approx. 5 miles, then turn left on NC-194N/NC-88W.
After 2 miles, turn right on NC -194N.
Continue on S. Big Horse Creek Road. IAM,—
Turn Left on Big Windfall Road. �•..__ j'
After approx. 5 miles, turn left onto Rip Shin Road.
Site is about 2.5 miles on the right.
0 1.25 2.5 5 7.5 �fhao+
Miles rr_,.
copyri ht.0 2013 National 'Geo ra Iiic Societ 1 -cubed
- - - L ;_ � - - -- P y'_
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
[phone]
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
VICINITY MAP
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
DMS PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
Date:
November 2015
Project:
12-004.13

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final)
DMS Project Number 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
December 2015
Appendices
Miti ation Credits
Stream
Riparia Wetland
Type Restoration
Restoration Equivalent
Restoration
Restoration E uivalent
Buffer
Totals
7308
2774
3.8
1.99
Projects Components
Existing Linear
Restoration/
Restoration
Project Component/
Station
Priority
Mitigation
Footage/
Restoration Linear Footage/
Comment
Reach ID
Range
Approach
Ratio
Acreage
Equivalent
Acreage
Reach I (Ripshin Br. —
00+00—
800
Enhancement
E II
800
1:2.5
Area 2)
08+00
Reach 1B (Ripshin Br. —
08+00-
350
Priority 1I
R
400
1:1
Area 2)
12+00
Reach 1C (Ripshin Br. —
12+00-
285
Enhancement
E II
285
1:2.5
Area 2)
14+85
Reach 2A (Ripshin Br. —
14+85-
785
Priority 1I
R
815
1:1
Area 2)
23+00
Ripshin Branch — Area 2
--
518
Preservation
P
518
1:5
Reach 3A (UT — Area 1)
00+00-
132
Enhancement
El
124
1:1.5
01+24
Reach 3B (UT — Area 1)
01+24-
688
Priority I
R
788
1:1
09+12
Area 1 Tributaries
2419
Enhancement
E II
2419
1:2.5
Area 1 Tributaries
889
Preservation
P
889
1:5
Area 2 Tributaries
2166
Enhancement
E II
2166
1:2.5
Area 2 Tributaries
1158
Preservation
P
1158
1:5
Area 3 Tributaries
4020
Enhancement
E II
4020
1:2.5
Area 3 Tributaries
2208
Preservation
P
2208
1:5
Area 4 Tributaries
3367
Enhancement
E I1
3367
1:2.5
Area 4 Tributaries
9096
Preservation
P
9096
1:5
Wetland UT
0
R
1.5
1:1
Wetland UT
1.24
E
1.24
1:2
Wetland Ripshin Branch
0
R
2.30
1:1
Wetland Ripshin Branch
2.74
E
2.74
1:2
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final)
DMS Project Number 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
December 2015
Appendices

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits (continued)
Tate Farm (Ri shin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream (linear footage)
Riparian Wetland (acres) Buffer (square footage)
Restoration
2003
3.8
Enhancement (Level I)
124
Enhancement (Level 11)
13057
Preservation
13869
Wetland Enhancement
3.98
Creation
Totals
29053
7.78
Mitigation Units
10082 SMUs
5.79 WMUs
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete: 4 years 4 months
Elapsed Time Since Planting Complete: 4 years 0 months
Number of Reporting Years: 4
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
March 2007
Final Design — Construction Plans
Land Mechanics Designs, Inc
September 2009
Construction
August 2011
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area
Habitat Assessment Restoration Program
August 2011
Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area
Surveyor
August 2011
Containerized and B&B plantings for entire reach
Raleigh, NC 27603
December 2011
As -built Construction Plans
Seed Mix Source
December 2011
Year 1 Monitoring (2012)
October 2012
December 2012
Year 2 Monitoring (2013)
November 2013
January 2014
Year 3 Monitoring (2014)
October 2014
November 2014
Year 4 Monitoring (2015)
October 2015
December 2015
Year 5 Monitoring (2016)
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
Designer
Ecologic Associates, P.C.
Greensboro, NC 27404
Mark Taylor 336-382-9362
Construction Contractor
Land Mechanics Designs, Inc
Willow Spring, NC 27529
Lloyd Glover 919-422-3392
Planting and Seeding Contractor
Habitat Assessment Restoration Program
Charlotte, NC 28262
Surveyor
Stewart Proctor
Raleigh, NC 27603
Herb Proctor 919-779-1855
Seed Mix Source
Green Resource
Colfax, NC 27235
336-855-6363
Years 1-5 Monitoring Performers
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis 919-215-1693
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
Project Information
Project Name
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Project County
Ashe
Project Area (Acres)
61.92
Project Coordinates (NAD83
2007)
1,037,279.65, 1,234,847,66
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Region
Blue Ridge
Ecoregion
Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains
Project River Basin
Upper New
USGS 8 -digit HUC
05050001
USGS 14 -digit HUC
05050001010050
NCDWQ Subbasin
05-07-02
Project Drainage Area (Sq. Mi.)
2.0
Project Drainage Area
Impervious Surface
<5%
Watershed Type
Rural
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach 1
(Ripshin
Branch)
Reach 2
(UT)
Area 1
Tributaries
Area 2
Tributaries
Area 3
Tributaries
Area 4
Tributaries
Restored/Enhanced Length
(Linear Feet)
2300
912
2419
2166
4020
3367
Drainage Area (Square Miles)
2.0
0.56
NA
NA
NA
NA
NCDWQ Index Number
05-07
NCDWQ Classification
C, NSW, Tr
Valley Type/Morphological
Description
II/13C4
Dominant Soil Series
Colvard and Toxaway
Drainage Class
Well and Poorly Drained
Soil Hydric Status
Nonhydric and Hydric
Slope
0.02 0.02
FEMA Classification
NA
Native Vegetation Community
Montane Alluvial Forest and Swamp Forest -Bog Complex
Percent Composition of Exotic
Invasives
<5%
<5%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable
Waters of the U.S. —Sections
404 and 401
Yes -Received Appropriate Permits
Endangered Species Act
No Effect
Historic Preservation Act
No
CZMA/CAMA
NA
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
NA
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

APPENDIX B
VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA
Figures 2 and 2A -2F. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A-513. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Stream Fixed -Station Photographs
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

PTAreja 4)
.•ti'
.YFig. 2A,-
yy
•
1+
akf
i, • � � `;. �' �� �: �A� I'��' •� � ��r e'er � -
xw Y
_. Fig. 2E ( ea.
A�k
0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000
Feet

Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
[phone]
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW
TATE FARM (UT)
DMS PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
^ A
L)
Date:
Nov 2015
Project:
12-004.13

Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
[phone]
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
DMS PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
2 B
Date:
Nov 2015
Project:
12-004.13

Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
[phone]
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW
TATE FARM (AREA 1)
DMS PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
Date:
Nov 2015
2 C
Project:
12-004.13

Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
[phone]
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW
TATE FARM (AREA 2)
DMS PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
Date:
Nov 2015
2D
Project:
12-004.13

f -
��.
Easement signage posted in 2015 A
with fencing within easement
lug
IW% 41L
4.
Legend
J4 ',F`'7E' Bound,
'} F �r`{P_''4 ''��'i � ��, `4 � *, .� f .N�•��4k:: ,,� � �,y a � ' i- 7s �, -_
Streams
CVS Pl
ip-
•
r.
71,
36 {
Farm Plan Features
Ali
iLivestock Fence
Ok
Well
Water Tank
Spring Developm
J
s i`
0 125 250 ._ 500 750 1,000 1,254

3 f
j
Area
3
ze
1,7
v
J
� v
A rJ is � - S` � a v4.G ;x✓
w �
1
1i
.. r

Table 5A Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Unnamed Tributary
Assessed Length 800
Number with
Footage with
Adjusted %for
Number Stable,
Number of
Amount of
%Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Major Channel
Channel
Performing as
Total Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing as
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateqory
Metric
Intended
As -built
Segments
Footage
Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aaaradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
12
12
100%
1. Bed
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
—
10
10
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
10
10
100
43halweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
10
10
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
10
10
100
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
100 %
100
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Bank
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0 100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
4
4
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
8
8
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
4
4
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
4
4
100
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
4
4
100

Table 5B Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Ripshin Branch
Assessed Length 1444
Number with
Footage with
Adjusted %for
Number Stable,
Number of
Amount of
%Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Major Channel
Channel
Performing as
Total Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing as
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateqory
Metric
Intended
As -built
Segments
Footage
Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aaaradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
21
21
100%
1. Bed
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
—
25
25
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
25
25
100%
43halweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
25
25
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
25
25
100
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
100 %
100
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Bank
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0 100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
8
8
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
0
0
NA
3. Engineered
Structures
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
8
8
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
8
8
100
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
8
8
100%

Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Planted Acreage' 17.48
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
A=20.e_
% of Planted
Acrea e
1. Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.
0.1 acres
Tan
2
0.22
1.3%
2. Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels.
0.1 acres
NA
NA
8.00
45.8%
Total
2
8.22
47.0%
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year.
0.25 acres
NA
0
0.00
0.0%
Jib Cumulative Total
2
8.22
47.0%
Easement Acreage' 61.9
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV
De iction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Easement
Acreage
4. Invasive Areas of Concern"
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
100 SF
NA
0
0.00
0.0%
0 lir■
_T
5. Easement Encroachment Areas'
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
none
NA
0
0.00
0.0
1 = Ent�r thef 81ant d cretaue within tqi easement. ffTWs number is calculated as the easement acreage minus any existing mature tree stands that were not subject to supplemental planting of the understory, the channel acreage, crossings or any other
elemen s no Irectfy pan a as pa o he project e o
2 = The acreage within the easement boundaries.
3 = Encro�ch�ebnt [nav 0°cu�witf}in or o>�tsid of panted re and v�+ll therefor lef rreloulpted vainst the overall easement acreage. In the event a polygon is cataloged into items 1, 2 or 3 in the table and is the result of encroachment, the associated
acreages ou a ta��fetl In ere evant I em i.e., I em tt1, or as we as a para e a y In I em b II to t t h
4otelnrtI�a�stloe Ire�, °ucfcrm e�e net�v lygyond areas sd butemla wiW.inhie t�ieeassem�Pnt and will s�io�I t herr r ore Rec�Yhe coeurrllunie°s rain ure oa ezls inf conoieresia rat tree/Phd�lV�el tw. ds oveletimefrnh csr{hce{ ar�s�e��reloh9oeerwith �h�
ecatles,. e cfoGo%mocper oncem grou g'are tRo e specbl�ts th Es etnvera� tfo o� uante��wo °teems rrt e iI oe asefo ie seed m�diatirn wi �e �},e° dexc�aC eas° on c ePn ewra iongo ori, f,fabc��oc U bB Wgppe � Is teuci u��d,{; fer Wt �h [[� �O��rver
s�iibut�on d e 9y��na[ive r utass SancP�}e{r� efa e��c l ° clt e o int' t° e �slmi�u la ers w h n t � It m fro° e u sc ssedapa d r n?, %A af� ea r�ts i'treatpliec s i orx wil wa ra%t croun� cOveu°Thos 11 1ar es wit�ir eu�w tchcfi °toted IUm a�o�rhin ua
�%dre a e one�es�999�QQ�S,,;?er eRnr�o1{p���'ecauset Yo be 6 erveda� rosshe se wI Q n fre �ncho a In r dPrta) cs re o rtl�u{�ar I teees I en fii�elr exgr risk/ real �ev�I�un�s olin as o nts where.Isola�e s eclmens a e fo nu a�[td��arl eal I�
�geen�cac n�imsitheenumb�eon�OfSPeoees ae limiteuon�te nnr atve�se�on eftF ee�trvtehmm rynypcg��rtiise polnts�pofy°gg�n�a�eaeatuYe cane sym�ulliesdt°o aescrbe�ii�g�s�ui�Ig�°'�I�d2v concernan�pecies canfuer'I��Sueasaalomaphnsern

Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Stream Fixed -Station Photographs
Taken July 2015
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Stream Fixed -Station Photographs
Taken July 2015
(continued)
Photo
Point 8
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final)
DMS Project Number 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
December 2015
Appendices

Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Stream Fixed -Station Photographs
Taken July 2015
(continued)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final)
DMS Project Number 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
December 2015
Appendices

Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken July 2015
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final)
DMS Project Number 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
December 2015
Appendices

Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken July 2015
(Continued)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final)
DMS Project Number 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
December 2015
Appendices

Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken July 2015
(Continued)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final)
DMS Project Number 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
December 2015
Appendices

APPENDIX C
VEGETATION PLOT DATA
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 9. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment Based on Planted Stems
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
Vegetation Plot ID Vegetation Survival Threshold Met?
Tract Mean
1 Yes
33%
2 No
3 Yes
4 No
5 Yes
6 No
7 No
8 No
9 Yes
10 No
11 Yes
12 No*
13 No
14 Yes
15 No
16 No
17 No
18 No*
*When including natural recruits such as red maple (Acer rubrum), mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), eastern hemlock (Tsuga
canadensis), and silky willow (Salix sericea) in plot 12 and striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum), sweet birch (Betula lenta),
hickory (Carya spp.), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera) in plot 18, these plots exceed
success criteria.
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
Report Prepared By
Corri Faquin
Date Prepared
7/22/2015 10:28
database name
Axiom-EEP-2015-A-v2.3.l.mdb
database location
\\ae-sbs\Share\CVS database\2015
computer name
ED -PC
file size
42053632
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT------------
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data.
Pro', planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This excludes live stakes.
Pro', total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural/volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor bSpp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead
and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY -------------------------------------
Pro'ect Code
372
project Name
Tate Farm
Description
Stream and Wetland Restoration
River Basin
New
length(ft)
stream -to -edge width (ft)
area (s m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
18
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 9. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
DMS Project Code 372. Project Name: Tate Farm
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% P -all = Planting including livestakes
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 109/, T = All planted and natural recruits including livestake<
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% T includes natural recruits
Current Plot Data (MY4 2015)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
372-01-0001
Pnol-S P -all T
372-01-0002
Pnol-S P -all T
372-01-0003
Pnol-S P -all T
372-01-0004
Pnol-S P -all T
372-01-0005
Pnol-S P -all T
372-01-0006
Pnol-S P -all T
372-01-0007
PnoLS P -all T
372-01-0008
Pnol-S P -all T
372-01-0009
PnoLS P -all T
372-01-0010
Pnol-S P -all T
Acer pensylvanicum
striped maple
Shrub Tree
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
1
Acer saccharinum
silver maple
Tree
2
Aesculus flava
yellow buckeye
Tree
Alnus
alder
Shrub
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
4
4
4
Aronia arbutifolia
Red Chokeberry
Shrub
1
1
1
3
3
3
Betula lenta
sweet birch
Tree
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
2 2
2
1 1 1
Carpinus caroliniana
American hornbeam
Tree
Carya
hickory
Tree
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
2 2
2
Corylus americana
American hazelnut
Shrub
1 1
2
1
1
1
Crataegus
hawthorn
Tree
Crataegus phaenopyrum
Washington hawthorn Shrub Tree
Fagus grandifolia
American beech
Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
5
5
5
2
2
2 3
3
3
1 1
1
2
2
2
1 1
1
Ilex opaca
American holly
Tree
2
2
2
Kalmia
laurel
Kalmia latifolia
mountain laurel
Shrub Tree
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
3
3
3
Malus
apple
Tree
1 1 1
Pinus strobus
eastern white pine
Tree
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
6
6
6
2
2
2
3 3 3
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
Rhododendron
rhododendron
Rhododendron maximum
great laurel
Shrub
1
1
1
Rhus
sumac
shrub
Salix
willow
Shrub or Tree
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
Salix sericea
silky willow
Shrub
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1
Tsuga canadensis
eastern hemlock
Tree
3
3
3
Vaccinium corymbosum
highbush blueberry
Shrub
1 1
1
1
1
1
Viburnum dentatum
southern arrowwood
IShrub
31
31
3
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
121
41
485.6
121 13
1
0.02
41 51
485.6 526.1
61
41
242.8
61 6
1
0.02
4 41
242.8 242.8
111
41
445.2
111 11
1
0.02
41 4
445.2 445.2
31 31
1
0.02
21 21 31
121.4 121.4 161.9
131
51
526.1
131 13
1
0.02
5 51
526.1 526.1
21 21 3
1
0.02
21 21 21
80.94 80.94 121.4
3 3 3
1
0.02
2 21
121.4 121.4 121..47
11 71 1
1
0.02
1 1
40.471404.71
EL
10
6
10 12
1
0.02
6 7
404.71 485 61
41 41 4
1
0.02
2 2 2
161.91 161.91 161.9
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% P -all = Planting including livestakes
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 109/, T = All planted and natural recruits including livestake<
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% T includes natural recruits

Table 9. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species (continued)
DMS Project Code 372. Project Name: Tate Farm
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% P -all = Planting including livestakes
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% T = All planted and natural recruits including livestake<
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% T includes natural recruits
Current Plot Data (MY4 2015)
Annual Means
372-01-0011
372-01-0012
372-01-0013
372-01-0014
372-01-0015
372-01-0016
372-01-0017
372-01-0018
MY4 (2015)
MY3 (2014)
MY2 (20 3)
MY1 (2012)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
Pnol-S
P -all T
Pnol-S P -all T
Pnol-S P -all T
Pnol-S
P -all T
Pnol-S P -all T
Pnol-S P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
Pnol-S P -all T
PnoLS
P -all T
Pnol-S
P -all T
Pnol-S P -all T
Pnol-S
P -all T
Acer pensylvanicum
striped maple
Shrub Tree
3
3
1
3
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
2
1
4
10
17
12
Acer saccharinum
silver maple
Tree
2
Aesculus flava
yellow buckeye
Tree
7
3
Alnus
alder
Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
Aronia arbutifolia
Red Chokeberry
Shrub
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Betula lenta
sweet birch
Tree
16
2
18
3
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1 1
1
1
1
1
11
11
11
13
13
13
14
14
14
12
12
12
Carpinus caroliniana
American hornbeam
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
30
1
1
1
1
1
33
Carya
hickory
Tree
5
5
6
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
1
1
1 1
1
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
Corylus americana
American hazelnut
Shrub
4
4
4
6
6
7
6
6
6
6
6
30
6
6
6
Crataegus
hawthorn
Tree
1
1
3
Crataegus phaenopyrum
Washington hawthorn Shrub Tree
2
2
2
2 2
2
4
4
4
4
4
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
Fagus grandifolia
American beech
Tree
9
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
1 1
1
1
15
15
16
16
16
16
15
15
15
10
10
14
Ilex opaca
American holly
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Kalmia
laurel
15
Kalmia latifolia
mountain laurel
Shrub Tree
3
2
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
5
5
1
3
3
14
3
3
11
3
3
4
3
3
16
Malus
apple
Tree
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Pinus strobus
eastern white pine
Tree
1
1
1
2
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
2 2
2
1 1
1
14
14
14
15
15
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
1
1
1
1 1
1
3
3
3
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
Rhododendron
rhododendron
1 1
1
1 1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
9
1
1
4
Rhododendron maximum
great laurel
Shrub
4
4
6
2 2
3
7
7
10
7
7
9
7
7
7
7
7
7
Rhus
sumac
shrub
1
Salix
willow
Shrub or Tree
6
6
5
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
11
2
2
1
1
Salix sericea
silky willow
Shrub
3
7
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1
41
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Tsuga canadensis
eastern hemlock
Tree
1
1
3
3
5
3
3
5
3
3
4
1
Vaccinium corymbosum
highbush blueberry
Shrub
14
14
14
1616
16
16
16
16
15
15
19
13
13
13
Viburnum dentatum
southern arrowwood
Shrub
g77
7
101010
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
9
9
Stem count
21
21
49
4 4
14
3 3
3
2
28
0 0
0 4 5
5
2 2
2 0 0
12
121
122
183
127
1281
210
1191
1211
203
108
1091
192
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
18
18
18
18
size (ACRES)
0.02
1
0.02
1 0.02
1
0.02
1 0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1
0.44
1
0.44
0.44
1
0.44
Species count
4
41
91
31 31
71
21 21
21
101
101
121
01 01
0 3 41
4
21 21
2 0 0
51
221
231
301
221
231
311
221
231
281
211
221
31
Stems per ACREI
849.81
849.81 19831
161.91 161.91 S66.61
121.41 121.41 121.41890.31
890.31 11331
01 01
01 161.91 202.31 202.3
80.941 80.941 80.94 0 01 48S.61
2721
274.31 411.41
285.51
287.81 472.11
267.51
2721 4S6.41
242.81
245.11 431.7
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% P -all = Planting including livestakes
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% T = All planted and natural recruits including livestake<
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% T includes natural recruits

APPENDIX D
STREAM SURVEY DATA
Cross-section Plots
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Substrate Plots
Tables I Oa -d. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Tables l Ia-d. Monitoring Data
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 1, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
1.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Station SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation: 59.1
Area:
Elevation
0.00
58.95
6.53
59.09
Bankfull Cross -Sectional 29.0
7.78 59.22 Bankfull Width: 24.3
10.16 58.76 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 61.1
11.21 58.22 Flood Prone Width: 80.0
12.63 57.88 Max Depth at Bankfull: 2.0
14.45 57.82 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.2
16.42 57.28 W / D Ratio: 20.4
18.08 57.39 Entrenchment Ratio: 3.3
20.61 57.06 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0
w 60
58 Bankfull
Flood Prone Area
57 � MY -01 10/16/12
MY -02 06/114/13
56 MY -03 05/15/14
0 10 20 30 MY -04 4/27/15 40
Station (feet)
w 60
58 Bankfull
Flood Prone Area
57 � MY -01 10/16/12
MY -02 06/114/13
56 MY -03 05/15/14
0 10 20 30 MY -04 4/27/15 40
Station (feet)

River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 2, Pool
Drainage Area (sq mi):
1.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Station
Elevation
0.00
64.40
3.68
64.27
6.42
64.01
8.01
63.85
9.49
60.89
10.48
61.47
11.41
61.73
12.47
61.75
13.44
61.86
14.73
62.02
16.36
62.69
17.79
63.14
19.07
63.40
20.85
63.76
21.49
63.85
22.7
63.76
28.0
63.65
31.7
64.48
35.15
64.64
63
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
64.2
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
27.7
Bankfull Width:
26.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
-
Max Depth at Bankfull:
3.3
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
W / D Ratio:
-
Entrenchment Ratio:
65
Bank Height Ratio:
Stream Typ B/C
Ripshin Branch, XS - 2, Pool
67
66
65
E
64
s
0
63
- - Bankfull
Flood Prone Area
w
62
t MY -01 10/16/12
61
MY -02 06/14/13
MY -03 05/15/14
E0
0 10 20
30
MY -044/27/15
40
Station (feet)

River Basin:
Upper New
XS ID
XS - 3, Riffle
Watershed:
1.6
Tate Farm
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Max Depth at Bankfull:
2.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.3
W / D Ratio:
22.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Station
Elevation
0.54
65.94
4.26
65.99
9.01
65.23
11.23
65.12
13.20
64.71
14.51
64.43
16.70
64.09
19.95
63.91
22.70
64.06
24.74
64.13
26.48
64.59
28.20
64.77
Stream Type
B/C
30.15
65.30
32.46
66.01
35.0
66.22
Ripshin Branch, XS - 3, Riffle
38.8
66.07
70
68 -------------------------------------------------------------------
w
0 66
1
�1
- - - • Bankfull
64
- � � . Flood Prone Area
AMY -01 10/16/12
MY -02 06/14/13
62
MY -03 05/15/14
0 10
20
30 My -044/27/15 40
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
XS ID
XS - 3, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
1.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
66.0
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
35.5
Bankfull Width:
28.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
68.1
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max Depth at Bankfull:
2.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.3
W / D Ratio:
22.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

River Basin:
Upper New
XS ID
XS - 4, Riffle
Watershed:
1.6
Tate Farm
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
ago
0.00
77.59
Bankfull Elevation:
77.8
5.35
77.75
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
25.3
10.00
77.86
Bankfull Width:
23.8
11.92
77.33
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
79.8
-u, e
14.74
76.93
Flood Prone Width:
>80
15.70
76.68
Max Depth at Bankfull:
2.0
17.65
76.22
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
19.14
76.09
W / D Ratio:
21.6
21.74
76.05
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.4
.F
22.44
76.36
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
23.67
75.75
24.56
75.75
Stream Type
B/C
26.15
76.44
27.67
76.79
29.4
77.10
Ripshin Branch, XS - 4, Riffle
32.0
77.39
34.1
77.78
80
39.8
77.81
-----------------------------------------------------------------.
42.7
77.71
78
----------------------------
0
d
4� 76
Bankfull
Flood Prone Area
t MY -01 10/16/12
MY -02 06/14/13
74
MY -03 05/15/14
0 10
20
30 MY -04 4/27/15
LI I
Station (feet)
XS ID
XS - 4, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
1.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons

River Basin:
Upper New
XS ID
XS - 5, Riffle
Watershed:
1.6
Tate Farm
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
1
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Station
Elevation
0.0
83.1
9.4
83.2
13.6
82.7
16.9
82.8
18.5
82.7
20.6
82.0
23.1
81.8
24.3
81.8
26.6
81.4
28.2
81.3
29.4
81.6
30.8
82.3
Stream Type B/C
34.0
82.8
40.6
83.12
44.8
83.14
Ripshin Branch, XS - 5, Riffle
47.4
83.70
50.7
85.04
86
55.4
84.58
---------------------------------------------------------
-�
84
o -- ------------------------
--
- - - - - - - - - -
w82
----Bankfull
- - - Flood Prone Area
---$--MY-01 10/16/12
MY -02 06/14/13
80
MY -03 05/15/14
0 10
20
30 40
MY -044/27/15 60
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
XS ID
XS - 5, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
1.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
83.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
21.7
Bankfull Width:
31.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
84.9
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
44.3
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 6, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Station Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.0 80.3
Bankfull Elevation:
79.9
6.2 80.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
14.4
9.4 79.9
Bankfull Width:
16.8
10.8 79.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
81.6
13.0 79.3
Flood Prone Width:
>80
14.9 79.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.7
15.7 78.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
09
16.6 78.5
W / D Ratio:
19.6
17.5 78.3
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.8
18.3 78.4
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
19.0 78.7
20.1 78.7
Stream Type B/C
20.7 79.0
21.9 78.99
23.3 79.37
Unnamed Tributary, XS - 6, Riffle
25.1 79.72
26.7 80.08
82
29.5 80.17
-----------------------------------------------------------
w
0 80 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- ----------------------------
------
ti
Bankfull
Flood Prone Area
� MY -01 10/16/12
MY -02 06/14/13
7
MY -03 05/15/14
0
10 20
-MY-044/27/15
Station (feet)
River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 6, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons

River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 7, Pool
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
6.7
86.3
7.7
86.3
8.2
86.5
9.5
87.1
10.9
87.2
11.6
87.5
13.5
87.5
16.7
87.4
19.9
87.26
23.6
87.55
Stream Type
B/C
Unnamed Tributary, XS - 7, Pool
88
----------------------------
-
------ ---•
0 86
m
W-
- - • Bankfall
- - - • Flood Prone Area
t MY-01 8/18/09
MY-02 06/14/13
84
MY03 05/15/14
1)
10
MY-04 4/27/ 15
Station (feet)
River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 7, Pool
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Station
Elevation
0.0
87.7
2.6
87.8
4.2
87.7
5.3
87.1
5.7
86.3
6.7
86.3
7.7
86.3
8.2
86.5
9.5
87.1
10.9
87.2
11.6
87.5
13.5
87.5
16.7
87.4
19.9
87.26
23.6
87.55
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
87.4
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.1
Bankfull Width:
13.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
-
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
-
Entrenchment Ratio:
-
Bank Height Ratio:
-

River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Fane
XS ID
XS - 8, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
W / D Ratio:
3.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
14.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Station Elevation
0.0 94.7
3.6 94.2
5.7 94.5
7.6 94.4
8.5 93.0
9.5 93.0
10.3 93.1
10.9 93.2
11.4 94.3
13.0 94.7
15.8 94.6
16.9 94.4
Stream Type B/C
19.0 94.6
22.9 94.62
Unnamed Tributary, XS - 8, Riffle
96
________________________________________________________________
w
0 94
,�
W
_ _ _ • Bankfi ll
Flood Prone Area
t MY -01 10/16/12
MY -02 06/14/13
92
MY -03 05/15/14
0
1
MY -04 4/27/ l5
Station (feet)
River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Fane
XS ID
XS - 8, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.6
Date:
4/27/2015
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Gibbons
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
94.5
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.6
Bankfull Width:
5.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
95.3
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
W / D Ratio:
3.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
14.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

. J." -.-
i a1c 1.- - -.-
teach
Ripshin Branch Station 00+00 - 10+00
Feature
Profile
)ate
4/27/15
:rew
Perkinson, Gibbons
-*-Year 4 (2015) Water
2012
70.4
Year 1 Monitoring \Survey
Station
Bed Elevation Water Elevation
80
75
m 70
a
m
a
65
C
0
M
v
W
60
55
50
0
493.5
508.0
543.2
590.7
605.8
615.8
622.9
632.7
646.2
660.9
671.5
698.6
709.9
719.6
729.5
737.6
767.0
792.0
795.4
802.6
806.6
816.0
819.1
824.0
827.8
836.3
840.0
63.4
64.8
65.4
66.8
67.4
67.6
67.5
67.9
68.4
68.4
69.0
69.6
69.6
69.8
69.6
70.4
71.1
71.4
71.3
71.2
71.2
71.6
72.1
71.9
72.2
72.3
72.0
2013I 2014 I 2015 I 2016
Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Year 4 Monitoring \Survey Year 5 Monitoring \Survey
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
Tate Farm Year 4 (2015) Profile - Ripshin Branch 00+00 to 10+00
100
tYear1(2012)Bed
200
400
-4&-Year 2 (2013) Bed
707.8
69.4
-*--Year 3 (2014) Bed
70.3
739.9
-*-Year 4 (2015) Water
Surface
70.4
--m-Year 4 (2015) Bed
71.4
65.3
70.4
674.9
68.9
65.3
70.9
709.3
69.9
66.1
71.7
714.6
69.7
67.4
72.4
733.3
69.2
67.9
73.0
737.5
70.6
68.1
73.6
766.3
71.0
68.1
73.9
812.9
71.6
68.4
74.5
850.3
72.4
69.0
74.7
879.4
72.9
69.1
74.7
899.2
73.3
69.5
75.0
935.8
74.2
70.2
945.7
73.7
70.5
950.7
73.6
70.6
962.3
73.8
70.6
971.6
74.8
70.9
1015.1
75.5
71.6
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.5
72.5
72.5
72.8
72.8
72.8
73.1
74.8
75.2
76.0
500
Distance (feet)
617.4
300
68.1
400
69.5
707.8
69.4
70.0
70.3
739.9
70.4
70.9
70.4
771.4
71.4
71.8
70.4
806.4
71.5
72.1
70.9
862.9
72.5
73.2
71.7
924.9
73.3
73.9
72.4
940.8
74.0
74.4
73.0
948.7
73.3
74.4
73.6
952.9
73.3
74.4
73.9
965.5
73.9
74.7
74.5
977.7
74.6
75.1
74.7
998.2
74.8
75.3
74.7
1004.8
74.5
75.3
74.8
75.2
76.0
500
Distance (feet)
617.4
67.3
68.1
654.9
68.5
69.2
662.8
68.2
69.2
672.0
68.3
69.2
676.4
68.8
69.5
684.8
68.3
69.6
693.2
68.0
69.5
709.7
69.5
70.1
725.8
69.6
70.5
730.2
69.4
70.5
740.9
69.1
70.5
745.8
70.3
70.9
811.3
71.5
72.2
886.9
72.8
73.6
943.0
73.6
74.5
950.9
73.2
74.5
955.9
73.1
74.5
961.5
73.6
74.9
975.3
74.6
75.0
998.8
75.0
75.5
600
700
800
900
1000
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Avg. Water Surface Slope
0.0182
0.0189
0.0191
0.0190
Riffle Length
35
33
53
61
Avg. Riffle Slope
0.0247
0.0228
0.0224
0.0215
Pool Length
28
28
43
35
Pool to Pool Spacing
55
66
88
87
800
900
1000

Name Tate Farm - Profile
Ripshin Branch Station 10+00 - 15+00
Profile
4/27/15
Perkinson, Gibbons
2012
Year 1 Monitoring \Survey
86
84
82
T
m
s 80
m
G1
w 78
c
0
76
W
74
72
70
1000
2013I 2014 I 2015 I 2016
Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Year 4 ,Monitoring \Survey Year 5 Monitoring \Survey
Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station fled Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water
Tate Farm Year 4 (2015) Profile - Ripshin Branch 10+00 to 15+00
1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350
-+-Year 1 (2012) Bed Distance (feet)
-.&-Year 2 (2013) Bed
-t-Year 3 (2014) Bed
-41-Year 4 (2015) Water Surface
1420.9 83.1 83
1443.9 84.1 84
1400
1450
1500
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Avg. Water Surface Slope
0.0182
0.0189
0.0191
0.0190
Riffle Length
35
33
53
61
Avg. Riffle Slope
0.0247
0.0228
0.0224
0.0215
Pool Length
28
28
43
35
Pool to Pool Spacing
55
66
88
87
1400
1450
1500

UnnamedTributaryStation 00+00 - 08+00
e Profile
4/27/15
Perkinson, Gibbons
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Year 1 Monitoring \Survey Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Year 4 Monitoring \Survey Year 5 Monitoring \Survey
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation I Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation I Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation I Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
Tate Farm Year 4 (2015) Profile - Unnamed Tributary 00+00 to 08+00
100
95
75
70 +
0
351.6
84.0
85.0
357.0
84.0
85.0
361.1
84.7
386.5
366.4
84.8
85.1
369.9
84.4
85.2
375.0
84.6
85.2
376.9
85.1
85.2
380.3
84.7
85.2
385.6
84.9
85.5
395.5
85.7
861
406.6
86.3
86.3
417.5
86.0
86.4
431.0
85.2
86.5
435.7
84.8
86.5
440.5
84.9
86.4
446.3
86.3
86.4
450.3
86.1
86.5
451.9
85.9
86.5
460.5
85.9
86.6
463.0
86.8
86.9
468.4
86.1
87.0
472.3
86.2
86.9
473.0
87.3
87.4
490.8
87.9
88.1
515.9
88.2
88.6
522.8
87.7
88.6
527.8
87.0
88.6
100
306.8
-$--Year 1 (2012) Bed
tYear 2 (2013) Bed
-a-Year3(2014)Bed
--W-Year 4 (2015) Water Surface
373.3
85.2
386.5
85.1
394.9
85.7
395.9
85.8
400.3
85.4
406.2
85.4
407.8
86.2
422.1
86.4
429.6
86.1
433.5
85.7
437.8
85.8
444.5
86.5
464.2
86.8
465.5
86.4
473.4
86.4
474.7
87.2
478.2
86.8
485.8
86.6
489.0
87.4
497.8
87.8
507.1
87.2
515.3
86.9
534.0
87.5
537.7
88.1
559.1
88.8
583.8
89.1
587.3
88.5
200 300
85.7
306.8
84.4
85.5
85.7
330.1
84.5
85.9
86.1
334.0
84.3
85.8
86.0
339.5
84.3
85.8
86.1
343.0
84.5
85.9
86.1
345.9
84.7
86.0
86.4
347.9
84.6
86.1
86.8
350.8
84.4
86.1
86.8
356.6
85.1
86.3
86.8
384.4
85.2
86.6
86.8
403.2
85.8
87.0
86.9
407.3
84.9
87.0
87.0
408.6
86.1
87.2
87.0
412.0
85.5
87.3
87.0
415.2
85.4
87.3
87.3
419.7
85.9
87.4
87.4
432.8
87.0
87.5
87.4
449.1
86.4
87.8
87.9
451.8
86.3
87.9
88.1
460.7
85.8
87.8
88.2
465.4
86.7
87.9
88.1
476.4
87.0
88.1
88.3
487.4
87.0
88.3
88.5
489.0
86.7
88.4
89.2
491.5
86.7
88.4
89.3
492.3
87.7
88.8
89.4
505.1
87.7
89.1
400
Distance (feet)
6`IB.�
84.0
307.4
83.9
308.9
84.3
315.1
84.3
319.5
84.2
325.2
84.2
331.7
84.5
338.2
84.1
345.7
84.3
356.9
84.7
360.8
85.1
381.0
85.4
403.6
85.7
406.5
85.4
408.5
85.1
409.6
86.1
413.2
85.5
417.4
85.6
420.2
85.8
427.0
86.1
433.2
85.7
438.1
85.7
450.0
86.7
454.7
86.5
457.6
86.4
462.6729028
86.717596
466.7
86.7
84.9
85.0
85.2
85.2
85.2
85.4
85.3
85.4
85.5
86.0
86.2
86.5
86.5
86.4
86.8
86.8
86.8
86.8
87.0
87.0
87.1
87.6
87.6
87.6
87.598112
87.6
500
600
700
800
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Avg. Water Surface Slope
0.0201
0.0205
0.0196
0.0195
Riffle Length
30
22
26
20
Avg. Riffle Slope
0.0235
0.0294
0.0251
0.0289
Pool Length
21
24
13
17
Pool to Pool Spacing
44
48
37
37
600
700
800

Pebble Count
Tate Farm
New River
Note: i Cross Section 4 - Ripshin Branch
0.01
0.1 1
10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) --a—Cumulative Percent • Percent Item —Riffle —Pool —=—Run —Glide
Size percent less than (mm) Percent by substrate type
D16 D35 I D50 I D84 D95 silt/clav sand I gravel I cobble I boulder I bedrock

Pebble Count
Tate Farm
New River
Note: Cross Section 8 - Unnamed Trib
0.01
0.1 1
10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) --a—Cumulative Percent • Percent Item —P,—Riffle —Pool —=—Run —Glide
Size percent less than (mm) Percent by substrate type
D16 D35 I D50 I D84 D95 silt/clav sand I gravel I cobble I boulder I bedrock

Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Ripshin Branch)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - DMS Project Number 372
Parameter Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL UL Eq.
Min
Mean Med Max SD
Min
Mean Med Max SD
Min
Max Med Min Mean Med Max SD
BF Width (ft)
21.0
24.0
14.4
17.1
23.0
25.0
Floodprone Width ft
35
60
27
95
25
80
BF Mean De thft
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
BF Max Depth ft
1.9
1.7
1.9
2.7
2.9
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)
26.0
29.0
17.6
20.7
30.0
35.0
Width/Depth Ratio
18.5
21.0
11.8
13.2
17.0
18.0
Entrenchment Ratio
1.9
2.6
1.6
6.6
1.5
2.0
Bank Height Ratio
1.8
1.2
1.0
1.2
Profile
Riffle length t)
Riffle slope (all
0.0040
0.0170
0.0420
0.0400
Pool length (ft)
9.0
43.0
11.0
18.7
20.0
70.0
Pool Max depth ft
3.6
0.9
2.6
3.5
3.6
Pool spacing (ft)
33.0
253.0
25.7
69.3
80.0
130.0
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
7
80
20
41.7
29
150
Radius of Curvature Lft
10
160
25.3
185
55
135
Rc:Bankfull width ft/ft)
0.4
1
1.8
5.9
3
4.2
Meander Wavelength ft
30
240
97.5
140
85
365
Meander Width ratio
0.8
2.1
6.8
8
4.4
6.6
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) lbs/ft2
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power trans ort ca acit W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
B4/F4/C4
134/C4
134/C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
5.5
4.8-5
Bankfull Discharge cfs
158
Valley Length ft
----
----
Channel Thalweg Length ft
----
----
2300
Sinuosit
1.2
1.1 -1.2
1.1 -1.3
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
0.018-0.024
0.012 - 0.019
0.02
BF slope ft/ft
----
----
----
Bankfull Floodplain Area acres
----
----
----
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
----
----
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
----
----
Biological or Other
----
----
Table 10b. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Substrate, Bed, Bank, and Hydrologic Containment Parameter Distributions)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - DMS Project Number 372 - Ripshin Branch
Parameter Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach es Data Design Monitoring Baseline
Ri%/RU%P%G%/S%
SC%/SA%/G%/C%/B%BE%
dl6/d35/d50/d84/d95 0.2-0.3 4.0-12.0 0.5 3.0-5.0
Entrainment Class <1.5/1.5 -1.99/2.0 -4.9/5.0 -
Incision Class <1.2/1.2-1.49/1.5-1.99/>2.0

Table 10c. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Unnamed Tributary)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - DMS Project Number 372
Parameter Gauge Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only LL UL Eq.
Min
Mean Med
Max SD
Min Mean Med Max SD
Min
Max
Med Min Mean Med Max SD
BF Width (ft)
18.0
14.4
16.0
Floodprone Width ft
28
95
16
80
50
BF Mean Depth ft
0.9
1.2
0.9
BF Max Depth ft
1.4
L 1
1.3
1.4
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)
16.3
17.6
14.0
Width/Depth Ratio
21.8
11.8
18.0
Entrenchment Ratio
1.6
6.6
1.0
2.5
Bank Height Ratio
2.3
1.2
1.0
Profile
Riffle length (ft)
Riffle slope ft/ft
0.0400
0.0170
0.0400
Pool length ft
3.6
19.9
18.7
25.0
Pool Max depth 11
1.4
2.6
1.9
Pool spacing (ft)
11.0
80.0
69.0
50.0
90.0
60.0
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth ft)
12
33
41.7
35
100
Radius of Curvature ft
2.5
25
25.3
40
200
Rc:Bankfull width ft/ft
0.8
1.8
3.4
14
Meander Wavelength ft
50
170
97.5
120
160
Meander Width ratio
4.9
2.9
8.3
8.8
Trans ort arameters
Reach Shear Stress com etenc lbs/ft2
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (transport ca acit W, r2
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
134/F4
C4
134/C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
5.1
4.5
Bankfull Discharge cfs
83.07
Valley Length ft
----
----
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
----
----
912
Sinuosit
1.2
1.2
1.0-1.2
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
0.02
0.012
0.02
BF slope ft/ft
----
----
----
Bankfull Floodplain Area acres
----
----
----
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
----
----
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
----
I ----
Biological or Other
----
I ----
Table 10d. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Substrate, Bed, Bank, and Hydrologic Containment Parameter Distributions)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - DMS Project Number 372 - Unnamed Tributary
Parameter Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach es Data Design Monitoring Baseline
Ri%/RU%P%G%/S%
SC%/SA%/G%/C%/B%BE%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 0.2 4.8 12.8 44.2 78.5 8.0 11.8 18.4 73.0 100.0
Entrainment Class <1.5/1.5 -1.99/2.0 -4.9/5.0 -
Incision Class <1.2/1.2-1.49/1.5-1.99/>2.0

Table Ila. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Sections)
Tate Farm /Rinshin Rrnnehl - DMS Proiert Number 372 - Rinshin Rrnoeh
Table 1lb. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Tate Farm (Rivshin Branch) - DMS Proiect Number 372 - Rivshin Branch
Parameter Baseline
Cross Section 1
MY -1
Cross Section 2
Cross Section 3
Cross Section 4
Cross Section 5
Parameter
MY -3
Riffle
Pool
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Dimension and Substrate- Riffle Min Mean Med Max
Onlv
SD Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Dimension MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY5+ MYO MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY5+ MYO MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY5+ MYO MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY5+ MYO MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5 MY5+
BF Width ft
23.4
23.3
25.8
24.3
23.2
25.0
25.3
26.0
28.1
23.3
28.7
28.2
21.4
23.3
22.0
23.8
21.7
24.0
25.3
31.0
Floodprone Width (ft) (approx)
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
BF Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.6
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
BF Max Depth (ft)
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
3.4
3.3
3.4
3.3
2.1
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.8
1.8
2.0
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.8
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft)
27.6
27.9
28.8
29.0
36.1
32.2
28.1
27.7
37.4
30.7
33.2
35.5
23.5
21.0
24.4
25.3
19.2
18.0
18.3
21.7
Width/Depth Ratio
19.8
23.7
36.1
7.1
1 NA
NA
NA
NA 1
21.1
1 17.7
1 24.8
22.4 11
1 3.6 1
25.9
19.8
21.6 1
24.5
32.0
35.0
44.3
Entrenchment Ratio
3.4
3.4
3.1
3.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.8
3.4
2.8
2.8
3.7
1 3.4
3.6
3.4
3.7
3.3
3.2
2.6
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1,0
1.0
I
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
d50 mm
----
----
----
---
Riffle length (11)
5.3
35.1
79.2
1 81.6
1 80.3
56.9
----
33
198.3
----
Table 1lb. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Tate Farm (Rivshin Branch) - DMS Proiect Number 372 - Rivshin Branch
Parameter Baseline
MY -1
MY -2
MY -3
MY4
Dimension and Substrate- Riffle Min Mean Med Max
Onlv
SD Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD Min Mcan Med Max SD
BF Width ft
21.4
23.7
22.6
28.1
3.1
23.3
23.5
23.3
24
0.4
22.0
25.5
25.6
28.7
2.7
23.8
26.8
26.3
31
3.4
Floodprone Width ft
80
80
80
80
BF Mean Depth ft
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.3
0.2
0.8
1.1
1.1
1.3
0.2
0.7
1.0
1.1
1.2
0.2
0.7
1.1
1.2
1.3
0.3
BF Max Depth ft
1.9
2.0
2.0
2.1
0.1
1.7
1.9
1.9
2.0
0.1
1.5
1.8
1.9
2.1
0.3
1.8
2.0
2.0
2.1
0.1
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft')
19.2
26.9
25.6
37.4
7.8
18.0
24.4
24.5
30.7
5.9
18.3
26.2
26.6
33.2
6.4
21.7
27.9
27.2
35.5
5.9
Width/Depth Ratio
19.5
21.2
20.6
24.1
2.2
17.9
23.3
22.7
30.0
5.6
20.0
25.9
23.7
36.1
7.1
20.3
27.0
21.7
44.3
11.6
Entrenchment Ratio
2.8
1 3.4
1 3.6 1
3.7
0.4 1
3.3 1
3.4
3.4
3.4
0.1
2.8
3.2
3.1
3.6
0.4
2.6
3.0
3.1
3.4
0.4
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0 1
1
1
1
1 1.0
Profile -Downstream
Riffle length (11)
5.3
35.1
26.3
107.8
28.6
14.2
56.5
33
198.3
50.7
13
71
52
233
63
10
61
38
197
56
Riffle slope (ft/ft)
0.0059
0.0247
0.0260
0.0445
0.0105
0.0145
0.0238
0.0228
0.0355
0.0065
0.0014
0.0224
0.0239
0.0363
0.01
0.0056
0.0215
0.0212
0.0398
0.0096
Pool length (ft)
8.6
27.7
24.7
77.0
16.2
10.1
34.1
27.8
102.9
25.5
11
43
46
95
26
14.0
34.7
28.7
80.8
21.9
Pool Max depth (ft)
3.4
3.3
3.4
3.3
Pool spacing (11)
8.6
55.4
43.8
160.7
37.0
24.3
84.0
65.9
234.1
54.6
28
113
88
270
77
20.9
87.2
76.0
229.5
61.4
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
Radius of Curvature (ft)
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Meander Width ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
B/C-type
B/C-type
B/C-type
B/C-type
Channel Thalweg Length (11)
1444
1449
453
1499
Sinuosity
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0182
0.0189
0.0191
0.019
BF slope
----
----
---
----
/n
Ri%/RU%P%G%/S
SC%/SA%/G%/C%/B%BE
dl6/d35/d50/d84/d95
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
0
0
0
0
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
----
----
--
----
---Biolo
Biological
ical or Other,
--

Table lle. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Sections)
Tate Farm (Riushin Branch) - DMS Proiect Number 372 - Unnamed Tributary
Parameter
Cross Section 6
Riffle
MY -1
Cross Section 7
Pool
Cross Section 8
Riffle
MY -2
I
MY -3
I
MY -4
Dimension MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MYS+ MYO MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MYS+ MYO MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5 MYS+
BF Width ft
17.4
16.8
17.5
16.8
16.0
15.8
14.7
13.5
17.4
18.7
5.0
5.6
Floodprone Width (ft) (approx)
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
80.0
80.0
80.0
80.0
BF Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
1 0.9
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.0
BF Max Depth ft
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
2.4
1.6
1.2
1.2
1.2
0.7
1.0
1.5
BF Cross Sectional Area (fe)
17.4
15.8
16.9
14.4
14.5
8.9
4.9 1
5.1
8.9
7.6
2.6
4.6
Width/Depth Ratio
17.4
17.9
18.1
19.6
NA
NA
NA
NA
34.0
46.0
9.6
3.7
Entrenchment Ratio
4.6
4.8
4.6
4.8
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.6
4.3
16.0
14.3
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
d50 (mm)
-
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
1.0
7.3
8.4
8.4
Table lld. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - DMS Project Number 372 - Unnamed Tributary
Parameter Baseline
MY -1
I
MY -2
I
MY -3
I
MY -4
MY -5
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Min Mean Med Max
Only
SD Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Atean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD Min Mean Med Max SD
BF Width (ft)
17.4
16.8
17.8
17.8
18.7
1.3
5.0
11.3
11.3
17.5
8.8
5.6
11.2
11.2
16.8
6.7
Floodprone Width ft
80
80
80
80
BF Mean Depth (ft)
0.5
0.8
0.8
1.0
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.4
0.5
0.8
0.8
1.0
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.0
BF Max Depth ft
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.7
0.4
0.7
1.2
1.2
1.7
0.7
1.0
1.4
1.4
1.7
0.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.7
0.1
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft)
8.9
13.2
13.2
17.4
6.0
7.6
11.7
11.7
15.8
5.8
2.6
9.8
9.8
16.9
10.1
4.6
9.4
9.4
14.1
6.7
Width/Depth Ratio
17.4
26.1
26.1
34.8
12.3
18.7
32.7
32.7
46.8
19.9
10.0
13.8
13.8
17.5
8.1
7.0
14.0
14.0
21.0
9.9
Entrenchment Ratio
4.6
4.3
4.5
4.5
4.8
0.3
4.6
10.3
10.3
16.0
8.1
4.8
9.5
9.5
14.3
6.7
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Profile - Upstream
Riffle length ft
3.9
29.7
27.3
65
17.9
8.79
26.5
22.4
53
14.8
3
26
23
66
17
4.03
20.36
19.45
55.8
14.3
Riffle slope (ft/ft)
0.0064
0.0235
0.0233
0.0436
0.0108
0.0038
0.0305
0.0294
0.0639
0.0154
0.0000
0.0251
0.0230
0.0627
0.02
0.0048
0.0289
0.0299
0.0632
0.0165
Pool length ft
7.1
20.8
19.0
43.2
10.8
7.4
22.7
23.7
39.9
9.8
3.0
13.0
11.0
33.0
7.0
6.0
17.0
15.3
33.0
8.9
Pool Max depth (ft)
2.4
1.6
1.2
1.2
Pool spacing (ft)
7.1
43.6
39.3
103.9
28.7
12.9
42.7
47.9
85.2
18.3
8.0
37.0
35.0
78.0
20.0
10.6
37.2
37.9
88.5
20.3
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth ft
Radius of Curvature (ft)
Rc:Bankfull width ft/ft
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Meander Width ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
B/C-type
B/C-type
B/C-type
B/C-type
Channel Thalweg Length ft
799
803
816
814
Sinuosity
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0201
0.0205
0.0196
0.0195
BF slope t
----
----
---
----
Ri%/RU%P%G%/S%
SC%/SA%/G%/C%/B%BE%
dl6/d35/d50/d84/d95
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
19
0
0
0
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
----
----
----
Biological or Other
---
--
----

APPENDIX E
HYDROLOGY DATA
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 13. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Summary
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Pro_lect Number 372)
Date of Data
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo (if
Collection
available)
June 7, 2013
January 17, 2013
Approximately 3.9 inches of rain documented* at a nearby rain
---
station over a four day period from January 14-17, 2013.
Wrack and sediment observe on top of banks after approximately 4.2
April 28, 2013
January 30, 2013
inches of rain was documented* at a nearby rain station on January
1-3
30, 2013.
Approximately 4.34 inches of rain documented over three days at the
June 12, 2013
May 7, 2013
--
onsite rain gauge.
Wrack observed in the floodplain after approximately 5.92 inches of
June 12, 2013
May 24, 2013
rain was documented over eight days at the onsite rain gauge.
4
August 13, 2013
July 4, 2013
Approximately 4.13 inches of rain documented over two days at the
onsite rain gauge.
Wrack and laid back vegetation observed in the flood plain after
August 13, 2013
August 10, 2013
approximately 3.52 inches of rain was documented at the onsite rain
5
gauge.
October 7, 2014
September 2-8, 2014
Wrack observed in floodplain after rainfall totaling 4.37 inches
6
documented at the onsite rain gauge.
Wrack and laid-back vegetation observed on the floodplain after
April 26, 2015
April 19, 2015
approximately 2.32 inches of rain documented at an onsite rain
7-8
guage on 4/19/15 with an additional 3.21 inches documented the
preceding 2 weeks.
November 5, 2015
July 14, 2015
Approximately 4.21 inches of rain documented over two days at the
onsite rain gauge.
November 5, 2015
October 3, 2015
Approximately 6.38 inches of rain documented over a ten day period
at the onsite rain gauge.
*Jefferson Weather Station (Weatherunderground 2014)
Bankfull Photo 2:
Unnamed Tributary
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Bankfull Photo 4
Ripshin Branch
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 13. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Summary
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (DMS Project Number 372)
* Groundwater Gauges were installed in October 2012; therefore, groundwater monitoring was initiated during the
Year 2 (2013) monitoring year.
**Gauge 4 malfunctioned at beginning of 2014 growing season resulting in loss of data. A battery failure at the
beginning of the growing season resulted in a loss of data. The gauge was replaced and is currently functioning
properly, but during a subsequent visit additional data was lost due to a failed Meazura PDA. Based on hydrology of
the additional gauges, in addition to abundant precipitation, it is likely that Gauge 4 would have met success for year
3(2014).
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season
Gauge
(Percentage)
Year 1 (2012)*
Year 2 (2013)
Year 3 (2014)
Year 4 (2015)
Year 5 (2016)
1
--
Yes/130 Days
Yes/34 Days
Yes/22 Days
(81%)
(21%)
(14%)
2
Yes/ 160 Days
Yes/160 Days
Yes/160 Days
(100%)
(100%)
(100%)
3
Yes/ 160 Days
Yes/160 Days
Yes/ 160 Days
(100%)
(100%)
(100%)
4
Yes/152 Days
No/14 Days**
Yes/46 Days
(95%)
(8%)
(29%)
5
Yes/ 160 Days
Yes/47 Days
Yes/43 Days
(100%)
(29%)
(27%)
6
Yes/ 160 Days
Yes/46 Days
Yes/ 114 Days
(100%)
(29%)
(71%)
* Groundwater Gauges were installed in October 2012; therefore, groundwater monitoring was initiated during the
Year 2 (2013) monitoring year.
**Gauge 4 malfunctioned at beginning of 2014 growing season resulting in loss of data. A battery failure at the
beginning of the growing season resulted in a loss of data. The gauge was replaced and is currently functioning
properly, but during a subsequent visit additional data was lost due to a failed Meazura PDA. Based on hydrology of
the additional gauges, in addition to abundant precipitation, it is likely that Gauge 4 would have met success for year
3(2014).
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 4 of 5 (2015)
DMS Project Number 372 December 2015
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2
4
v
-6
N
� -8
v -10
c
c -12
-14
-16
-18
-20
-22
-24
-26
-28
-30
-32
-34
-36
-38
-40
A (.n W W W 0) 0) Ol M V V V V V 00 00 00 00 lD lD lD lD F-+
O O
W V N N N A F-` N N N lD N N W 01 N N N W N
O A F� 00 -- 00 In T W O W O V O V A H 00
Ln Ln N Ln Ln N
Lq Ul Ln LM Lq V1 h` F, h-` lIl Ul Ln LM Lq U'1 Ln W Ln Ul Ln Ul W
Ul l!I U'1 Ul U'1 Ul l!I l!I U'1 Ul VI l!I l!1 Ul Ul In In Ul
Date
Tate Farm Groundwater Gauge 1
Year 4 (2015 Data)
2.5
2.0
P
1.0
0.5
0.0

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2
v -4
-6
a0+ -8
m
3 -10
v
3 -12
° -14
u
-16
-18
-20
-22
-24
-26
-28
-30
-32
-34
-36
-38
-40
A Ix V1 V1 In T M 0) Ol V V V V V W 00 00 00 lD W lD lD F� N
O O
W V F-` N N A N lD N W 01 N W
O A N 00 N 00 LM Ol W O W W
Ln Ul F-` L- F-, In Ul h' LM 111 In F-, h' W Ul LM h' F-` ll1 LM F-+
Ul Ul V1 U1 Ul Ul Ul V1 Vl Ul Ul In Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul In
Date
Tate Farm Groundwater Gauge 2
Year 4 (2015 Data)
2.5
2.0
P
1.0
0.5
0.0

Tate Farm Groundwater Gauge 3
Year 4 (2015 Data)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
c 2
-4
-6
m
3 -10
12
° -14
l7
-16
-18
-20
-22
-24
-26
-28
-30
-32
-34
-36
-38
-40
A Ln Ln V1 Ln 01 01 0) 01 V V V V V W W W 00 W W W W N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O O
W N N N N �O N W M I--+ N N W N N N \ \
O \ A N 00 \ N co LM \ \ 0) W O \ W O V \ O V A I--` W
\ N \ \ \ N \ \ \ N N \ \ \ N \ \ \ N \ \ \ \ \
U, V1 Ln F-` Lq Ul h-` W h-` In V1 Ln F-` Lq Ul h, h-` Ln lfl Ln W
(n Ul U'1 l!I Ul In Ul Ul U'1 l!I Ul Ul (n Vl Ul Ul Ul In
Date
2.5
2.0
c
1.0
0.5
0.0

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2
-4
-6
a0. -8
3 -10
3 -12
° -14
l7
-16
-18
-20
-22
-24
-26
-28
-30
-32
-34
-36
-38
-40
U Ln Lnl O N P 0 0
W N N A N N N N WN W
W O N W MW O N N W
O
\ A N W Q1
00 In \ 1--� \ \ \ V 0 \ O V A N W
Ln Ln
Ln Ul F-` In F-` Ul N N Ln U'1 U'i h` h' Ln Ul Ln H' Ln Ul N N N N N
U'1 Vl Ul V1 Ul U'1 Ul V1 Ul Ul Ul Vl Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul
Date
Tate Farm Groundwater Gauge 4
Year 4 (2015 Data)
2.5
2.0
P
1.0
0.5
0.0

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
.�-. -2
a, -4
-6
°7 -8
3 -10
a
-12
l7
-14
16
-18
-20
-22
-24
-26
-28
-30
-32
-34
-36
-38
-40
A Ln Ln Ln Ln O M D1 O V V V V V 00 00 00 00 lD lD lD lD N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 0
W V N N N A N N N N lD N N W D1 N N W 0
O \ A N 00 \ I--' 00 In \ \ 01 W O \ W W O V 0 \ O V A I--� 00
Lq \ \ \ F+ Lq \ \ \ Lq \ \ \ N \ \ \ \ \
N l./l N N N l./l F+ F+ Ln Ul C/l h` U, Ln Vl Ln Ln Ln l./l Ln F+ F+ F+ h+
Ul U'1 V1 U'1 Ul Ul l!1 lfl Ul Ul Ul Ul U'1 U'1 l!1 U'1 Vl Ul
Date
Tate Farm Groundwater Gauge 5
Year 4 (2015 Data)
2.5
2.0
P
1.0
0.5
0.0

IL
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2
a, -4
-6
Y -8
m
3 -10
v
3 -12
-14
16
-18
-20
-22
-24
-26
-28
-30
-32
-34
-36
-38
-40
A In In In In 0) 0) 0) M V V V V V 00 00 00 00 lD lO lD lD N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O O
W V N N N
O 00 00 \ N 00 Ln\ \ Ql W O \ W O V 0 '1 \ O V A N 00
\ Ln \ \ \ 5 \ \ \ W F-` \ \ \ U, \ \ \ \ \
N U1 H+ N N U1 H+ N I-' U'1 U'1 N N W U'1 W N V1 N N N H' N
Ul Ul U'1 Ul U'1 Ul Ul Ul U'1 Ul Ul U'1 Ul Ul V1 Ul U'1 Ul
Date
Tate Farm Groundwater Gauge 6
Year 4 (2015 Data)
2.5
2.0
c
1.0
0.5
0.0