20100104 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report Final_20080414

• Tick Creek Stream Restoration Project - Project # 379
Chatham County, North Carolina Jift
MKMEIVED
Second Annual Monitoring Report - FINAL FEB 15 2008
February 2008 NC ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMENTPROGRAV
•
Designed by:
Earth Tech
701 Corporation Center Drive, Suite 475
Raleigh, NC 27607
For:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Natural Environment Unit
Natural Environment Engineering Group
1598 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
L9 @ Lc79 L?? DO
APR 1 4 2008
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
r~
} Ecosystem Enhancement Program
AND 1652 Mail Service Center
('I I Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
f•4'::i.4 FFr

TICK CREEK STREAM RESTORATION - Projcet # 379
2007 MONITORING REPORT
CONDUCTED FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary/Project Abstract ....................................................................... .. I
II. Project Background ................................................................................................... .. 2
2.1. Project Objectives .................................................................................................. .. 2
2.1. Project Objectives .................................................................................................. .. 2
2.3. Location and Setting .............................................................................................. .. 2
2.4. History and Background ........................................................................................ .. 4
2.5. Monitoring Plan View ............................................................................................ .. 7
III. Project Conditions and Monitoring Results .......................................................... .. 9
3.1. Vegetation Assessment ......................................................................................... .. 9
3.1.1. Vegetation Problem Areas ............................................................................. .. 9
3.1.2. Vegetation Problem Areas ............................................................................. 10
3.2. Stream Assessment ............................................................................................... 10
3.2.1. Procedural Items ............................................................................................ 10
3.2.2. Stream Problem Areas ................................................................................... 12
3.2.3. Fixed Photo Station Photos ............................................................................ 12
• 3.2.4. Stability Assessment ...................................................................................... 13
IV. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 22
4.1. Stream Methodology ............................................................................................. 22
4.2. Vegetation Methodology ...................................................................................... 22
References ........................................................................................................................ 23
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map ..........................................................................................................3
Figure 2 Monitoring Plan View ..........................................................................................8
Figure 3. USGS Stream gauge data for Tick Creek at US 421 .........................................11
Tables
Exhibit Table I. Project Mitigation Structure and Objectives ..............................................4
Exhibit Table II. Project Activity and Reporting History ................................................... 5
Exhibit Table III. Project Contact Table ............................................................................. 6
Exhibit Table IV. Project Background Table ......................................................................6
Exhibit Table V. Verification of Bankfull Events ........................................................... 11
Exhibit Table VI. Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment .................... 13
Exhibit Table VII. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary ................................. 14
Exhibit Table VIII. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary ........................... 17
• Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A
•
1. Executive Summary/Project Abstract
The Tick Creek stream restoration and preservation project is located southeast of Siler
City, in Chatham County, North Carolina, southeast of the intersection of Rives Chapel
Church Road and Jim Moody Road. The project design was completed by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) in 2002, and includes preservation of a
114 foot wide buffer along 3,733 feet of Tick creek (immediately downstream of the
Rives Chapel Church Road Bridge), and restoration of 2,597 feet of an unnamed tributary
to Tick Creek (UT). The entire project occupies 29 contiguous acres in USGS HUC
03030003070023 (NCDWQ Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-12). According to
telephone conversations with Jamie Lancaster, PE (construction project manager,
NCDOT), construction was completed on the Tick Creek site on 1 September 2005 and
bare rootstock planting was completed during the week of 6 February 2006.
As-built qualitative evaluation was conducted by RJG&A during early February 2006.
The First Annual Monitoring Report (2006) indicated that the project had met its
geomorphologic and vegetation goals design by October 2007. The last 2006 visit to the
Tick Creek site was on 1 November. No on-site evidence of bankfull events was
observed during 2006.
The 2007 evaluation and monitoring of the Tick Creek stream restoration site indicates
that the project has met all its design goals during the second year post-construction. As
stated below, evidence of bankfull flow was observed during the April 2007 evaluation.
USGS hydrograph data indicate that at least one bankfull event was likely to have
occurred during December 2006. At least one other was likely to have occurred during
spring 2007. The project, therefore, has met its bankfull goals for two consecutive years.
Average planted woody stem density was 830 live stem per acre and has exceeded the
vegetation success criteria by 159 percent. A total of 51 stems recorded in 2006 were
missing or dead in 2007, resulting in a mortality rate of 29 percent. Dog fennel
(Eupatorium capillofolium) remained a dominant herbaceous cover in parts of the project
area that lack existing overstory, while Chinese lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) continues
to thrive in portions of Reach 2. Exotic invasives (Eleaganus umbellate, Albizia
julibrissin, Ligustrum sinense and L. japonicum) are present throughout the restoration.
n
LJ
Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 1
•
•
II. Project Background
2.1. Project Objectives
The Tick Creek Stream Restoration Project was designed to achieve the following
objectives:
• restore pre-agricultural water quality,
• improve aquatic habitat function and value,
• improve sediment transport capability,
• restore bank stability.
2.1. Project Objectives
The Tick Creek Stream Restoration Project involved the preservation of 3,733 linear feet
of Tick Creek and a Priority I restoration of 2,946 linear feet of an unnamed tributary that
flows into Tick Creek. The project involved bedform transformations, channel
dimension adjustments, pattern alterations, structure installation (root wads, rock vanes,
and woody debris), and riparian buffer restoration (woody vegetation planting and stock
exclusion).
2.3. Location and Setting
To get to the Tick Creek restoration site from U.S. 64, turn south on Rives Chapel
Church Road (-0.9 mile east of Siler City), travel 4.4 miles, turn left (east) onto Jim
Moody Road. The upstream boundary of the unnamed tributary restoration site is 0.3
miles east of the intersection, on the right (south) side of the road. The project's western
easement boundary (preservation) begins on the downstream side of the Rives Chapel
Church Road Bridge over Tick Creek (south of the Jim Moody Rd. intersection) (Figure
1).
The 2002 Tick Creek Restoration Plan describes the site's pre-restoration land use as
cattle pasture that involved agricultural clearing, stream ditching and straitening, and
unrestricted cattle access to the stream. This land use caused bank instability, which
increased sediment load. This caused the direct loss of aquatic habitat and caused the
impairment and degradation of aquatic resources along the restoration project's entire
reach (from the Jim Moody Road culvert, to the confluence with Tick Creek).
Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 2
•

•
I _11,
Tick Creek Stream Restoration Site

0

•
Figure I Tick Creek
Stream Restoration - Chatham CountN NC
source WIN) I Data I Astnhuhun - -file 'S ]',C(sptcjll Feet
Nx,k%N% nc.lot orp it Lis Datal )istnhuuon cluldGIn) C'ounh 0 2.000

2.4. History and Background
The project design was completed by the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) in 2002, and includes preservation of a 114 foot wide buffer along 3,733 feet
of Tick creek and restoration of 2,597 feet of an unnamed tributary to Tick Creek (UT).
According to telephone conversations with Jamie Lancaster, PE (construction project
manager, NCDOT), construction was completed on the Tick Creek site on 1 September
2005 and bare rootstock planting was completed during the week of 6 February 2006.
•
Exhibit Table I. Mitigation Structure and Objectives (from NCDOT Tick Creek Restoration
Plan Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
Reach ID Mitigation Type Approach Linear Stationing Mitigation Comment
Feet Credits ratio
Protection of
Tick Creek Preservation 3
733 high quality
, 1,244 (3:1) aquatic habitat
(rare mussels)
Reach 1 Restoration Priority 1 Shallow pools
10+00- ,
14+50 small meanders,
and steep riffles
Reach 2 Restoration Priority 1 20+00- Realigned,
35+00 widened
flood lain
Reach 3 Restoration Priority 1 Realigned
40+00- ,
49+00 reconnected to
flood lain
Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 4
•
•
Exhibit Table II. Activity and Reporting History
Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
Activity or Report Data Collection Completion
Restoration Plan February - May
2002 September 2002
Construction NA I September 2005
Temporary S&E mix
applied NA NA
Permanent seed mix
applied NA NA
Bare Root Planting NA 6 February 2006
Mitigation Plan NA NA
As-built March 2006
Year 1 Monitoring November 2006
Vegetation September 2006
Geomorphologic October 2006
Year 2 Monitoring October 2007
Qualitative Evaluation April and October
2007
Vegetation Jul 2007
Geomorphologic Jul 2007
40 Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 5
•
•
•
Exhibit Table III. Project Contacts Tick Creek
Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
Design:
Earth Tech
701 Corporation Center Drive, Suite 475
Raleigh, NC 27607
Mr. Ron Johnson
[phone]
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Natural Environment Unit
Natural Environment Engineering Group
1598 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1598
Mr. Jamie Lancaster, Supervisor
919 715-1441
Construction Contractor:
NA
Monitoring Performers:
RJG&A
1221 Corporation Parkway, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27616
Mr. Sean Doig
919 872-1174
Exhibit Table IV. Project Backg round - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
County Chatham
Drainage Area 96 acres (0.15 square miles)
Drainage Impervious Cover Estimate %)
Stream Order First Order
Ph sio ra hic Region Piedmont
Ecore ion Carolina Slate Belt
Ros en Classification of As-built
Reach 1 B6
Reach 2 C5b
Reach 3 E6
Dominant Soil Types
Reach 1 Geor eville silt loam
Reach 2 Geor eville silt loam
Reach 3 Nanford Badin complex (upper 1,000 feet),
Riverview (lower -400 feet, to confluence with Tick
Creek
Reference Site ID Spencer Creek
USGS HUC for Project and Reference 03030003070023, 03040103050090
Tick Creek Stream Restoration
EEP Project # 379
RJG&A
2007 Monitoring Report
Year 2 of 5
Page 6
•
•
Exhibit Table IV. Project Background - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
NCDWQ Sub-basin for Project and
Reference 03-06-12, 03-07-09
NCDWQ Classification for Project and
Reference C
Any portion of the project segment 303d
listed? No
Any portion of the project segment
upstream of a 303d listed segment? No - not in NCDWQ 30-06-12
Reasons for 303d Listing or Stressor NA
% of Project Easement Fenced 0%
2.5. Monitoring Plan View
See Figure 2 for Monitoring Plan View.
is Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 7
N ?0
U o o
3 Z a, a =° Q.i I a?
Cl) Z' 0 43)
u U U
(n 0 70 70
CD 2 :t:! E
U O W O
?? N cd Q
A-I U Z LL N 2 (n Y O co '"S CD 0
O
b.0 m W v .o
V U I O N ?- U > , I g
N
O W a ~
a> >?Y 0
cn
O p? J cn cn I I C o
? ' .o > v (1) aoi m U W
o - 330 ZZ
1 j cu CU CL
o
a
bA O ? W
i
e o ?
00
?
O
O
rn
o?
c0

59p
l
,\ 1
f

o?
`ag'o
?-Tpoo,tv
4!f
5Ltl
e

O ?C N

?tl

LO _

? ?? oytl
??j
f
I `-
y5v

I oA`O
J C)

?
r
c
Q,
O
ll>
10
b0 ON MhN't MN?0.In O AO O0 NM00 D
C l? O M 01 O In r- [? M 00 ?t 'O
tr) O O m m m N O O ? N ct ON O 00 OM N
0 N N N N N N N N O N N N N O N N N N N O
z OOOOOOOOOl?OOOOOl?OO0OOOOl?
1? 00 ? 0? ON N N N N Z In 00 00 M -
M --????pppp ?o [- O 0OC N O N Ir1 ?O O krl N •--I Vl M
W O O N ON N N N N N N N NO 00 N N N ON N N
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 DD 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
N N N N N N +-• N +r
s~ ? G?? G???? G G O O O
U] Ul Vl V] U7 U1 Vl VJ V1 V] U7 VI ?" 'j+" ?'+
1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I
??????o?uo?no?n
o 22 2 2 22 2 2 2 1 1 2
U O o u u O O 5 o o u o o Q Q p A U>>>
of
N
e

0 0 0
o >Cl) ?-
U -° > d o rte.,
U) 0)
m C a- O f • N
U LFU) ?U
?? o .° U-
c Z c ?^
U Z \0 N 2> N m _?S O
blo C:
Lo- F a)
H ?
S~ U J 3 n , N
O p? 2 0) O a3
• ? H o> N Nm U w
o o I f--- 3 3 o
01 ?M Zz
0 04
W
s. _ R
0 36 /C\l
o m
W
N
O r,*) F"?

1 $\

0 7
CD

"x r
O
O
O
r _
a _

4

N ?-404r4
,l ? ? i i ? i N N M M ? ? V) N i i d' V) \O l- 00
N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
rn v. 'A Ln v' cn v v' CA v' v' v' v' v' `n V) `n v'
n O -? N M
rn v? cn V) ? n ? ? CA CA 'A ? 'A ? cn v, cn V) .? .--i .-r •--i N O N N O
O OO O O OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 OO O O OO O O O O r- 00 7 b?q b?A b?A b?U
V U U U U U u U U U U U U U U U U U U l"a
0 0 0

?R N

O
O
M
R N
O t
O
N

cri

O
O
O
. '? O
N

O . R
1

19? ?
,• O
t.
f

O I?
,
P b _ 6 un
r I ?-? ? ors

N l? ?O 00 - k M N 01 (? 00 O? Vl - l? - N l? d 00 Vl
?O M 00 N M-) r- O r- 00 O O If, O l? N N ti [` t- D\ N 00 d
O
M
O l?
W)

O Ln M
N- 00 M
N
N O N ?O
00 ?p 0 m m
N N
M
M
?
N
N
O \ Z p
A
p
. p
p
?
O r-OOt-OOOOOOOOt-OOOOOOOl?O[? OOOI- OOO

O

R
`
R
s
I b-Z
00 ',D ?O 00 M `O -+ 00 r- `p O1 V'1 00 N 1,0 V'1 00 C1 C? M \O M •? Z C1 ? M - 00
Cl-

R f
v Lf) -i N 't 't r? \O M •--? -r r `O -? 00 V) 00 M 0O r` r- 00 0o O a,
Nool?C? riO.OCV Og?l-?ooN?- .--MNO??ON?OMOo
M Z V) `O M 01 M Vl 01 \O ?O f? N 01 N 00 Z \O M ?O M - W) 01 00 00 V-?
z r- r- 00 01 O N O -? - N M N M Q, O ,-i N M N [- 00 N N O N O
N CA
0
0
°?aCi???x0C o ?aMrnm o?? o o???
00

.y ?.
a:.t. ??
?
??0
0 0 0?
00 00 00 00 00 o0 00 00 00 00 00 00 - o0 00 - o0 00 00
.--i .--r .--i .-.i .--i .--i - - .--i .-•-i - ,--i .--i - .--i .--i - .--i .--i .--i - .--a .--i .--i .-•+
L_J
III. Project Conditions and Monitoring Results
The first qualitative project evaluation in the second growing season was conducted on 6
April 2007. Second annual quantitative geomorphologic and vegetation data were
collected during July 2007. The site was again qualitatively assed on 28 October 2007.
Flowing water was observed in the channel in 2007 only during the April site visit. No
water was observed during the July site visit. Pools were full, but no flowing water was
observed during the October evaluation.
Several relatively minor geomorphologic problem areas were observed during April
2007. Fewer problem areas were observed in October, but the lack of flow, at the time of
the visit and for several months previously, reduced the ability to identify and accurately
assess flow patterns.
3.1. Vegetation Assessment
In 2007, the average density for all reaches was 830 live stems per acre, exceeding the
required stem density (320 live stems per acre) by 159 percent. Twelve woody stem
• species were originally planted at Tick Creek. Quercus alba, Platanus occidentalis, and
Fraxinus pennsylvanica had the highest stem density (Appendix A: Table 5). A total of
51 stems recorded in 2006 were missing or dead in 2007, resulting in a mortality rate of
29 percent (Appendix A: Table 2). Summary vegetation monitoring data and plot photos
for Monitoring Year 2 can be found in Appendix A.
3.1.1. Vegetation Problem Areas
Sparse planting, invasive herbaceous and woody cover, and relatively low planting
success are issues at the restoration site (Figures Al-A2). As was observed in Reach 1 in
2006, woody stem planting in the areas furthest from the stream banks was sporadic,
minimal, and absent in some places (Appendix A2-VP I). Because of the lack of
overstory from mature trees, which are present in Reach 2 and most of Reach 3, early
successional herbaceous volunteer density and relative cover was again high (dog fennel
(Eupatorium capillofolium), and horseweed (Conyza canadensis)) (Appendix A2-VP2).
Natural succession of perennials, primarily blackberry (Rubus argutus) has begun
throughout Reach 1. This type of early sucessional herbaceous density is common in
recently disturbed areas and can be beneficial to the planted stems by prolonging soil
moisture in upland areas and reducing early evapotranspiration. Invasive woody
volunteers were not quantitatively observed in Reach 1's monitoring plot (plot 1). They
are relatively sparse outside the plots.
In Reach 2 the invasive herbaceous Chinese lespedeza's (Lespedeza cuneata) density has
increased since 2006 in Reach 2. Invasion from autumn olive (Eleaganus umbellata),
mimosa (Albizia julibrissin), and Chinese and Japanese privet (Ligustrum sinense and L.
Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 9
japonicum, respectively) appears to have increased since 2006. Similarly, native early-
successional woody species density, particularly sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciua),
has significantly increased in Reach 2 since 2006. Because of the abundance of these
species in adjacent forests, their successful management within the restoration area may
be difficult. The planted woody stem success under these invasive herbaceous stands is
relatively high, so, like in 2006, continued observation, without remedial action, is
appropriate.
As in 2006, Reach 3 had relatively minimal invasive species problems; however,
monitoring plot 6 suffers from a lower success rate than the remaining plots in the
restoration. A suspected cause is substrate compaction. The Restoration Design Plan
View map indicates that a relatively large staging area was located here during
construction. Because of the adequate live planted stem density in plot 6 no remedial
action is recommended at this time. Like in the Reach 1 and Reach 2 problem areas,
continued observation is appropriate.
3.1.2. Current Conditions Plan View
See Figures Al-2 in Appendix A for the Current Conditions Plan View for vegetation.
3.2. Stream Assessment
• 3.2.1. Procedural Items
3.2.1.1. Morphometric Criteria
RJG&A staff evaluated the condition and success of the Tick Creek Stream Restoration
project during April, July, and October 2007. Overall, the site is maintaining its as-built
dimension, pattern, and profile, and planted woody stem success is high. During July
2007 the third annual cross section, pattern, and longitudinal profile data were collected
based on the 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines (USACE 2003). Fifteen cross-sections
were surveyed and a longitudinal profile of the entire UT was conducted. Photographs
were taken at all cross sections, and at the 14 permanent photo locations (established by
NCDOT during February 2006) during the July survey.
3.1.1.2. Hydrologic Criteria
No crest gauges are installed on the Tick Creek site and on-site quantitative hydrologic
evaluation is therefore not possible. As reported in the spring 2007 Initial Assessment,
on-site qualitative evidence of at least one bankfull event (rack and drift lines and
downed vegetation/stems above the bankfull elevation) was observed on 6 April 2007 at
several cross vanes and on the inside of meanders below station 1,700. The previous site
visit/observation was on 1 November 2006.
•
Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 10
• The USGS stream gauge on Tick Creek near Mount Vernon Springs (USGS 02101800) is
located on Tick Creek, approximately 3 miles upstream from the restoration site's
confluence. It has a drainage area of 15.5 square miles. Bankfull discharge at this gauge
is 655.3 cubic feet per second (cfs) (Harmen, 1999). Based on USGS data for 2007
(Figure 3), there have been five bankfull events since 1 November 2006 (Figure 3 and
Exhibit Table VIII).

Based on the dates of occurrence, the Tick Creek stream restoration site has received at
least one bankfull event during both its first and second monitoring years.
Figure 3. USGS Stream gauge data for Tick Creek upstream of US 421 - Tick
Ureek Stream Restoration - ELF Yro_lect #379
C 1598
USGS 02101800 TICK CREEK NEAR MOUNT VERNON SPRINGS, NC
0
is
0
N
L
6!
C6 1999
4J
U
599
LL
L 9
L1
N
O
Jan 91 Mar 91 May 91 Jul 91 Sep 91 Nov 91
2997 2007 2007 2997 2997 2997
---- Provisional Data Subject to Revision ----
}
J
~ -599
- Daily naxinun discharge .............. Daily nean discharge
- Daily nininun discharge
Exhibit Table V. Verification of Bankfull Events - Tick Creek Stream Restoration -
EEP Project #379
Date of Data
Collection Date of Occurrence
(mm/dd/yy)
Method CFS
NA 22 November 2006 Proximal USGS gauge resource 1,390
NA 25 December 2006 Proximal USGS gauge resource 832
NA 2 May 2007 Proximal USGS gauge resource 919
NA 15 April 2007 Proximal USGS gauge resource 670
NA 16 April 2007 Proximal USGS gauge resource 704
• Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 11
•
•
3.2.1.3. Bank Stability Assessments
A detailed BEHI only applies to Monitoring year 5 and was, therefore, not performed
during 2007 (monitoring year 2).
3.2.2. Stream Problem Areas
The quantitative data and qualitative evaluations indicate that the structure and function
of the entire restoration project closely match the as built conditions during the second
monitoring year, (i.e. little change has occurred)
As shown in Appendix B2, 16 structural and substrate problem areas were identified
during the 28 October 2007 qualitative evaluation. Two of these, as illustrated in BI
(Current Conditions Plan View (Streams)), have obviously worsened. They are both
located in the final series of step pools above restoration Reach 3's confluance with Tick
Creek. They warrant close and frequent observation to prevent them from becoming
undermined, which could eliminate grade control.
With the exception of the channel headcut (station 396) and the lateral bank cut between
rootwads (station 1203), the remaining 12 problem areas identified had been previously
observed. Because of the lack of flowing water inside the restored channel, the condition
of five of them (stations 290, 545,760, and 2,373) was not clear. Several problem areas
identified as locations with moderate piping during April 2007 appeared to have
stabilized.
No significant aggradation in pools was observed during October 2007. Special attention
was given to evaluation of the three pools in Reach 3, and the one in Reach 2 that were
cited in the 2007 Initial Assesment and the associated Problem Area Plan View Map 3.2.
Since the April 2007 evaluation, all four pools appear to have been scoured during
subsequent storm events and are functioning as designed.
3.2.3. Fixed Photo Station Photos
Appendix B4 contains the 16 photo station photos.
• Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 12

•
r?
3.2.4. Stability Assessment
Exhibit Table VI. Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability
Assessment Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
Reach 1 286 feet
Feature Initial MY-01 MY-02 MY-03
A. Riffles 100% 100% 100%
B. Pools 100% 100% 100%
C.Thalwe 100% 100% 100%
D. Meanders 100% 100% 100%
E. Bed General NA NA NA
F. Vanes/J Hooks, etc. 100% 100% 100%
G. Wads and Boulders NA NA NA
Reach 2 1,521 feet
A. Riffles 100% 100% 100%
B. Pools 100% 100% 100%
C.Thalwe 100% 100% 82%
D. Meanders 100% 100% 100%
E. Bed General NA NA NA
F. Vanes/J Hooks, etc. 100% 93% 95%
G. Wads and Boulders 100% 100% 99%
Reach 3 (974 feet)
A. Riffles 100% 100% 100%
B. Pools 100% 99% 100%
C.Thalwe 100% 100% 100%
D. Meanders 100% 100% 100%
E. Bed General NA NA NA
F. Vanes/J Hooks, etc. 100% 92% 92%
G. Wads and Boulders 100% 100% 100%
Tick Creek Stream Restoration
EEP Project # 379
RJG&A
2007 Monitoring Report
Year 2 of 5
Page 13
??II
?J
w
Q
r
? a
u
v
o
L
Pr
d ?
O ?
Ar A
C
O
L ,1
O V
a ?
c
G h
L
R d

V] R V
a
d
d ?
a ?
?
L
U
C

H V
i
y
,w ?
a U
? d
R 00 C
E '" F•
7
V] V r?-
V
R
.
?N
/
's Fw
R
L
pq
'O C C
x

C k
W C
R
? °' U
L
e? fs.
0
0
s
a
L ?
0
d
a
cc „

R bD
Chi

? (An R
F ? A
,O
r
k
W
L p
y O
E C
6,
PO c"a
E
00 00 N 00 7 O
Vl M 00 ?D ?O 00 'D
N oo O r N O r Q1 O C -

?O M
?O ^, M
01 V'1
00 7
7
O r
"O
^, O
O N
00 O
O O
O
O? `O c? ' r O
O
M
O?
O M
N
N C
O O r O?
?
O O
7
O O
N ?!1
V'
00
M Vl O --? N N
'n r .--i Q? M o0 M
.--i 00 O
~ O O
a, ?t N un Ul a) a, O O O O
O V'1 ?O O O O O V1 V1 M O r o r

O r m ? N
r- C, CD ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ . M N Q' O Q' N
O,
?O
n O
?c 0
0
O
O
DD
?.,?
A
Z
Z
Z
Z
p
r
Z
O
Z
M
D
00 O
O

Cl 00
c! r
9,

r
N
M
O
DD
N
N
Z
Z
Z.
Z.
7
7
N
Z z
M
00 N O O r N N In O
O
N
O
In

N w

in M

N

¢

C

Q
_
00
O ?
p ?p O 4 N Z Z Z Z 7 N Z Z
N M O M
O
0
O

M
Q
Q
Q
¢
¢ N
O
Q ?
?p
? M (5
O in W)
0 W)
4 Z Z Z Z O O O O Z Z
l r
'1 ,--? 0 O 00
0

M p?
? ?0 0

53
3 a u
^-? O
O N
Q Q U N
' 0.
? R ?' E' C N O y y a R
? b L L y 7b 7C .?
'C a 'O w 4
p
w a? of
3 O c
tl ai
3
x p m R S-.
::5 a? L
;Q .
" O O
w w w aa v? o o w U x A. I a a w
m
L
V
R
R
F4
V
R
a
R
C
0
b
¢
it N .--i
O `"
O y
d) N
R
C O
O
C
O
r
O
O
N
a
O
L
?N
W
O M
? U
N 2
L o
Val
F-? W aG
•
w
P?
h
Q
01
r
?k ?
u
O
L
Q•I
C
u bo
•o
? A
0
tR. Y
O 67
d
?
a L
G L
R L
i .C p
?
d
L d
a
V
U e

F w d
L
y
,w V
a U

o U
A
V1 V
u R

R
L
p?
., o
x
.fl k
W
R
? O
L
b0 Qr
O
O
s
6
L d
O
V
C

.a? R y
O C
R b0
?

?i d
a
r'
? R
H
r ? A
L
k

L C
? O
C
R Y
i
G. A
0
O? M N ? ol a, C? 00 N 000
M ?O ?
N DD ?
N N vl ? O N N O O ?
N W) N N N r- N O N
o 0 0 rn o 0 0
7 O ?O N v? vl N O 00 O 00
M l? Vl M N M M c!1 ? M M O 7
Q\ V .?-?
l? 00
v1 O?
?O M [?
[? O?
V1 N N M
v1 O
o0 O
O N
0
O ? N O Q Q Q Q N N N

N
n O
Q\ l
O
;, z
z
z
z
M
?O
T z z M

00
'." ^' 7 Q Q Q Q Q Q
[? N M O? 00 N N
N z z z z
N N
7 7 -
N z O z M
? N O O --? ? V'1 ? ? O
O
N ?
O
M LO
M N O 7 Q Q Q Q O
M Vl
N 00
Vl M
N Q' Q' 00
N G N z z z z 7 ?O N Z Z
M M
O
O
00

?O
O
[?
M
O\
O
--?
?
O
91
N
O\
? a, v? V? z z z z pc Vl
N M z z
t O vl O
0
O

? \O O

?i C. O C ?i ? N ? O
W'J ..' ?••J . ? ? .O L y •i7 ? C cC
C4 v

Q
?°. U
Q a Q ' raj
xi G"
^d '"
O R
{"'
. p
L O
y at
'L3 a?i
b
to r.
°: aY

T
O _ N
ca

w O

w
n
co
w
N
2
RS
?

3
C
ro
w
N
3

x
p
0?0
R
.r'
R
x
N
N
L
.
s
w
ix
w
i
O
O
W v? o 0 0. U r a w
O c!1 M
` 00 V'1 ?
n ? o o U
O O

Z Z Z Z Z Z
z z W
Z z z z
z z ri z z ? z z

z z ° z z v z z

W

o
?
? ? O U

?yaq ?
aCi cve
w ?
aw N
? °
? aXi
-
C C
? C ? i. O y O y

> > a a x
L
E'
R
L
R
iL
y:
V
R
a
R
e
O
'C
Q
t.. V V1
W ^"
O p U
aQi N ?
x ?a
O
C
O
O
O
N
C
O
c?
O
U M
U
U O^
U p" ?
E•? W ?
•

y E
r
v
u
o
L
a
I
V ?0
O ?
? A
C
O
L 1.
O
++ d
V
ul
C'
G L
? u
r ? C

L
U
c
F L
y
w V
a U

E. R
U
?' M F
3
? V

3 ai
R
L
pq
? C C

C k
W C
R °' U
0
0
s
a
i ?
O

Rf
U
V
C

v p .?+
o C
R
?Q bL
?N
r.i

A
F ??
r
X
W
0
L C.
? O
N •H
R ?
i
a A
[? .?•r N
N
0000 00
?O
r- M
O?
0N0 [?
?p .•r
O? ..r
M
O? 00
N ?O
.^
N M O N N N O > ?p N ul O O O N ?D
O
?D
O O
00 N
N O? O? ..r
[? V1
7 V'1 X V1 [?
O O
M ? O
Vl V'l O
O ?
? ?
1 O?
N 01
M' lam O
".. 00 M 00
00 O [? O
0 ?O
7
?
N 10 N 7 N N N

? <r [? O
N O1 T
O ?7
' C l- N N O C O
7 ? 7 O v
1 l? M ? vl O O
O
N O O O o7 M O `O

O
?
¢
¢
¢
¢
N
N 00
N
Q'
Q'
N /? O
T r
O N _
/? Z Z z -. m ?D N Z -. M

Cl 00
r4
r N M Q? 00 N Z Z 7 N Z Z M
00 N O O [? N N i!1 O
O
N
In
O

".'
M
'.'
O
O
O
¢
¢
¢
¢
O
N
V' M
N
¢'
C
¢ _
00
O \O ?O N Z Z Z Z 4 \c M N Z O Z M
N
O
O
T
r-
O V7
C? r
--? --?
N
¢
¢
¢
¢
?O O
O?
00
¢ O
O
¢
O
?D O
kn M N 01 M Z Z Z Z N O M Z C Z a0
V1 O\ 00 O
O
0
M ?
C7,

s' O O -? ? C cC
.D '? Y A ?
a/ R >..
?U+ ?
C 'b cC .? ,

3 C ¢ a E 3 3

.-..
Q
^^
3 y
j
?]
U
+ v v
• ;;
R C
G C
G
C W
U w
U
N
0
is v
'O C CC
• y
° N ? .?
?U+ ?
Imo. i
i
m d V
?'
o ti
0

?
?
? °'
? b
' ° ono
ca
«
?
? i°. w
c w
c
°
°
W w W w W x ? b b a, ? rs rs, G G n
. a
V) M N
V .--i ?O
?
M
?p ?O
O? ? O O W

Z Z Z Z U Z Z
M
W
Z Z - Z Z Z Z
Z Z ZI j Z Z
Z
z z z z W z z
°

N CO
.
.

C V C-. v O X
? a Y o u U ?
. N
C
? V]
? L1
O C
?
O a0+
.Ui

>
u c
rA
CQQ
gQ4
x
h
L
d
r
Cd
G
L
A
Cti
Z
u
?A
W
t0
Q
O 0
? O y
ca A~
C N
O
C
O
O
O
N
C
O
L
Q
h
O M
Y
y
14 N O
i ?<
U ? ?c!
F-? W
r-1
L
•
r-I

O
O 0 Zo 7 l: 4 N N Z O
O N ?O 00 6 O0 7 M O O

r
M
M
O
V'1
O
00
M
h
O
.--I
C O O _ ?p M M Q1 ? ? O

L
a

W
y 7 p O N ! C, Q

C
m
O
O 7
`O ?O
O N
? C,
N
O v1
O

O
L

?O N
d O v'1 DD O N M V1 ?D N
?/

R C

z [? M
DD 00
O lp vl
7 N
O l?
O O
O
M
R
r

C?7 O 7
O C' ,? 00
M r r 7 ?O
t' r/j C 00 7 r, O O
V ? O N o0 O N N O O O O
u ,
?•

I

p 00
T
m
?
?
°
W

n
E

m

°

v

a C,

o

0 . 00

0

f
N
E
7

bD l r4
O M O
O
ai
o N 00
T
O r-
N
O O
O N
+r N
C
O

N r- M M 7 O
M r 0 N N M O O 00
^O N
x

R
O _ M V
Cl? ?O N O? Z
bD vi N p? O N ,may O
d
O
t
a
0

x

? G O
,

O Q T 'O C
_ r C '
' c
C w E E

d
A as w eCg ? ? 3 w as 3 x ? o c

O
C
O

0
C
o
?-
M
O
C
O

O ?
C 00 M Vl 7 ? O

^ M -11* 00 N V'1
p .
r
? ? N ? N O O 00
?

? ti
C
ti
x
3 72

?. s.. CO
cUC
6 C ? C C C
?"
b ? y O
L
? 4
-i O O
Or a 04 C C Pr Pr
i
R
6
a
a
R
L
Q
N N rr z z z
Vl Vl N M d
00 N N .--i D Z Z
v
E w
L
O ?
0.n
? a O
O '?• ? U
w

C v
? w •? b
C a ` y n U y
u C O y O
110 O

>U
30.w1
xx O
,?
n o
N N
Cr
b4 N
.L
O
C
O
l\
O
O
N
0
O
0
a;
E
O M
? U
'EP
W ti
F?WCC
4
\J
Exhibit Table VIII . Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary - Tick Creek Steam Restoration - EEP Project #379
Reach 2 1,521 ft
XS 2-1 XS 2-2 XS 2-3
Dimension As-built Mon 01 Mon 02 As-built Mon 01 Mon 02 As-built Mon 01 Mon 02
Bankfull Width (ft) 18.22 18.77 19.23 17.92 18.02 19.77 20.96 18.35 14.99
Flood prone Width (ft) 42.00 42.00 105.00 40.40 40.50 40.5 51.00 51.00 51.00
Bankfull Area (sq 11) 22.61 23.53 22.80 14.15 14.53 15.53 23.28 23.58 17.89
Mean Depth (ft) 1.24 1.25 1.19 0.79 0.81 0.79 1.11 1.29 1.19
Maximum Depth (ft) 2.37 2.37 2.20 1.58 1.59 1.64 2.78 2.77 2.34
Width/De th Ratio 14.68 14.98 16.22 22.70 22.35 25.17 18.87 14.28 12.55
Entrenchment Ratio 2.30 2.24 5.46 2.25 2.25 2.05 2.43 2.78 3.40
Bank Height Ratio 1.54 1.22 1.59
Wetted Perimeter (ft) 19.17 19.60 19.98 18.37 18.46 20.39 22.90 20.58 16.64
Hydraulic Radius (ft) 1.18 1.20 1.14 0.77 0.79 0.76 1.02 1.15 1.08
Substrate
d50 (min) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03
d84 (mm) 0.06 0.06 0.62 0.05 0.05 0.05
po ntn
Reach 2
Pattern Mon 01 Mon 02 Mon 03 Mon 04 Mon 05
Channel Beltwidth (ft) 25.81 26.01
Radius of Curvature (ft) 24.74 15.95
Meander Wavelength 70.53 78.43
Meander Width ratio 0.19 0.21
Profile
Riffle length ft) 23.02 15.45
Riffle slope ft/ft) 0.031 0.015
Pool length (ft) 15.61 19.46
Poolspacing (ft) 22.86 22.46
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length (ft) 1,150 1,150
Channel Length (ft) 1,521 1,506
Sinuosity 1.32 1.31
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.022 NA
BF slope (ft/ft) 0.022 0.016
Rosgen Classification C5b C5b
Habitat Index NA NA
Macrobenthos NA NA
J
Tick Creek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project # 379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 18
•
C
0
N
O

D

0

cli

0
Z

l

M

C=

O

M

O

M

O
C M ,--? N --? N M O O

n

N C O [? a0 Zo O r- N t, O O
,Q

L ? ? M
M r
V) vl
N ? ? ?
M O O
a
a.

W _
7
O
O
N
-

DD 00 , 110

M
W
In 'n, 6
N
O d M

O
a O
C O H "t m
--? 00
N ?'
01 N
(- a0
O M
O \O
O
?o O
- 00

R
v
c r
4 In
y
Y
u ?
.
i N
c
n r
O a1
v O
° 00
O
° N
O C, 00
U
Y

V o
YC a
00

N

N

M
O
N o

O

O
F

v: CD
O1
O
N
_
00 00
C?
O
=
In
N CD
N
E d
o .?
b0 N

.o R N
O
?
O
N
M
N
?
l?
N
C
O
?
N
^C. a N O N N 00 M .. N p ?
O

N N
V O
O O
N
M N
O
D _
k O
O
R
L VI O T O N n

x
9
R C
M C M O O
a1 O v1 O 01 01 O
a ? ?
r
a
L
o

v
R

W C ? C d ? Q "C O .? •E GC
.--. O r. Q C o i E
O
lu x ` ' k ? x b
« ? y E E
E C Q
O . O ro _
'd .1
a N ? 0 00
A a? u. m ? ? 3 C
w c
C
w 3 x v? o va

O
a
O
r
7
O
C
0

O
a
O

C O - N
' N r- O
O
00 l? ?!1 O M \p 00
N O N
N N O N

O ? O
? c

W a
O U

6
O
O
'?O
'O
N
a
Ci C
y a a a 0 y ^ ti
.
.
0.? U LYE 0. a a 0. 90.
t
O
o „
N ?
bq y
C
O
a
n
O
O
N
vl O ?
O N N N ?'`? ? Q Q
v
E ?
? w a
R

b y . y
W ?
d .Y ?

e a .a
o y .
V?
aai .
??
'?. T C O
N O N M
_

.o
I-, L Q
U a"
?

E-' W L4?
•
•
0
N .-r
C ?D ?O ? --' ? O O

Q?
t`

u •?

0.i
t-- to vi O
W .? O a0 .? \O 7 O l? O N
L n N -+ O --? V O 00

O Q
w
RI
O
y p ?D O
00 00
O vl V'1 O 01 M v'1
00 O M l? O O
? ? O N ? M '--+ O O O O
Ri
d
UD
.1 N
?' M 00 N 00
oo O M M
M
h M
0 ?n
0
U
?
u rn
D'C C
? ? ? ? O N N M ? O O O
_
F
?
+- O O O M ? O to ? l?
Rt w p o0 ? t` O N O M O O
E ? N --+ ? .•-+ N N
? Q

CA M
bD
C u
r4O
O
O
O
O
M
N
00
M
?D
O
O\
M
?n
a C
S l? 01 vl l0 O O
O --?
"D 00
-4 ?O
k O
C n

ci
•

ti

O

0
00

O

M

?

N

l?

O

'1
l?

--?
V'

M

1
L O ?} O ? O O
x

Rt O t` kn \?c t` O kn
O
p
N
N
0
--
O
N
O

o
t
LL
0
r.

u

i6 aU+
k Q ts E C
c
_

y 'a a
k
c^
C p
O U .
Rt b C N O 00
A c4 w w w 3 x tn° a s
O
0

7
O
C
O

O
C
O

? O
? M o0 ? ? N 7 ?O
O M M O M N 116

p N t? O O l? M N
\O ?O O O
m O N N

? O

a O
w C
3 b
3
y
C
U

a u 94 F4 g P. FiOr
S
R
a
L.
d
E
ca
L
z C,?zoWzz
O
O in rt' M? '"" W Q Q
C M [? ° ° z z
? O ? C O
u
u
C w
? w
R
94
O
a lul o
.0 bD
kn o
t
04r N
O y
P4 N cl
ca a
t N
L
O
O
O
N
C
O
L
RS ?
U M
y
U
v W ti
F?WC4

r?
?A
N
o

p
tr)

o°o

`n
00

oo
O

oo
N

l?
'O

,?_,

N
00

M
O

kn
O
O ? ? ? O N N N ?+ ? O O O

en
y p c, 00 C1 [? Vl M O\ M It ?z
00 O M 00 O O
d ? ?Or ? ? ? O N O N ? O O O

QN
w y
kr) _
`. v, O O ? O N N N N O
O Q ~

O
u
CG o
C 01 N
O N
N
00
N
M
M m
O kn
O
N N '•-? cV N N N O O
ca
d
r

L
M
p
00
00
O
(?
l?
N
M
,--?
?f
O
u

I
a+
R W 41 N C1 cq In M

N
in
N
N
N N
N
'?
E
O Q
? M

C u N
o
kn
°
N
N
l?
00
M

h
O
N
N
00
[?
0
M
O

O
y C
O N N N N --? N ^' O O
C
O

o ° o
i. V? O c O M ,? ,_, O O
x
.a
C
R
o
6
O
O
M
l-
M
D1
? N N O
O
O N ? N N
i'
a

0
oil,

u
•--•
?"-.
`y'a
'
0
m O ?
Jk -S *c4
C4
04
U
'O
-

w
o
3
¢ -Qj
„
? C
6! .b
°o .
yi
m :+
ca b . a ?, b y o w
A a? u. co 3 w w 3 x v b b
O
0
O
?-
r
O
A

O
Q
O

N _
?
? N
? M
? o
0 1
0 ? ? N O
A ?
N ?D
?O
O n M M O M
p ?' N l? O O l? M N ?

O \O l0 M Q \O V

U

O

CO bL)
U
ca
r w

o ?d
U "O
? y
? y
? O
r
G c,..,
' O
O O
O
i
R f C R P
. P
-
.C
c
R
a
d
R
Q
N
????zoWzz
O
????oowzz
d
u
E w
c`Q. w
RS
Rn ,^ G. O
•? b!7 U '7-i 'fn k ?
O y V] CL !"„ ?
? ? ? O y y O
ti ? U
-0 ca
Q > U 5?
0 4. N
O y
P N Ms
C a
bq N
C
O
C
O
O
N
O
L
O
C7,
R3
N M
L
? L
U
c'xiWti
E-? W C4
r:
•
IV. Methodology
Monitoring methodologies follow the current EEP-provided templates and guidelines
(Lee et al 2006). Photographs were taken digitally. A Trimble Geo XT handheld
mapping-grade unit was used to collect cross section, vegetation corner, photopoint, and
problem area locations. Additional notations were written on the as-built plan sheets.
4.1. Stream Methodology
Methods employed were a combination those specified in the Mitigation Plan, the First
Annual Monitoring Report, and standard regulatory guidance and procedures documents.
Stream monitoring data was collected using the techniques described in US ACE Stream
Mitigation Guidelines, US Forest Service's Stream Channel Reference Sites, and Applied
River morphology (USACE, 2003; Harrelson et at., 1994; Rosgen, 1996). A South
Total Station and Nikon automatic level were used for collecting all geomorphic data.
Photographs facing downstream were taken at each cross section.
4.2. Vegetation Methodology
Eight representative vegetation survey plots were selected and installed in reaches 1, 2,
and 3 during September 2006, pursuant to the EEP/CVS vegetation monitoring protocol
(Lee et al 2006). All plots measure 100 square meters and are either 10 meters by 10
meters, or five meters by 20 meters. Pursuant to the guidelines, the four corners of each
plot (0,0; 0,10; 10,0; and 10,10 were marked with 18 inch long one half inch diameter
galvanized steel conduit.
Level 1 (planted woody stems) and Level 2 (volunteer woody stems) data collection was
performed in all plots, pursuant to the most recent CVS/EEP protocol (Lee et al 2006).
Within each plot, each planted woody stem location (x and y) was recorded, and height
and live stem diameter were recorded for each stem location. All planted stems were
identified with pink flagging. Vegetation was identified using Weakley (Weakley 2007).
Photos were taken of each vegetation plot from the 0,0 corner.
Tables 1 through 5 in Appendix A contain the data from the vegetation monitoring.
Monitoring plot photos can also be found in Appendix A.
• TickCreek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project #379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 22
E
•
References
Harrelson, Cheryl, C. L. Rawlins, and John Potpondy. (1994). Stream Channel
Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. USDA, Forest Service.
General Technical Report RM-245.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Roberts, Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. (2006).
CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.0. Retrieved October 30, 2006,
from: http://www.nceep.net/business/monitoring/veg/datasheets.htm.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell (1968). Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, NC.
Rosgen, D L (1996) Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa
Springs, CO.
Rosgen, DL. (1997). "A Geomorphological Approach to Restoration of Incised Rivers.
In Proceedings of the Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel
Incision, ed. S.S.Y. Wang, E.J. Langendoen and F.B. Shields, Jr. University of
Mississippi Press, Oxford, MS.
USACOE (2003) Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACOE, USEPA, NCWRC,
NCDENR-D WQ
Weakley, Alan (2007). Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding
Areas. Retrieved March 27, 2007 from: http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/flora.htm.
• TickCreek Stream Restoration 2007 Monitoring Report
EEP Project #379 Year 2 of 5
RJG&A Page 23
• Appendix A Vegetation Data
Al. Vegetation Data Tables
Table 1. Vegetation Metadata
Table 2. Vegetation Vigor by Species
Table 3. Damage by Species
Table 4. Damage by Plot
Table 5. Stem Count by Plot and Species
Table 6. Vegetation Problem Areas
0 A2. Vegetation Problem Area Photo
A3 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Figures Al-2. Current Conditions Plan View
•
C]
•
Q)
O
c
co
a)
U
N_
M
00
O
O
N
Cl)
C)
Y
_U
C
a)
m
(6
70
O)
a)
U)
U
r -
C)
O
Q
O
Y
0
a)
C
3
0
Q1
C
(1)
U)
a
E m
U m
? c
a)
O E
N
Q O
CD 0
Of U

m

o
(D E
u
u
+-
• CL
Q co
O
` n c
.
(L w
a) m

d a
O
CL d)
w w

U
m
a)
T

a
a)
U
m
Q

cn
E
O _0
U) a)
.O
m ?
O U
X
a)
O a)
C co
?
U U
E
a)
Q ()
m -O
m C 0)
U ? (n
() U
O C

CL a) a
C
a) 7 m
-C
U
U

m
? O
a) N
M a) ?O a
U N a) O
a)

O
Q
a)
Q p C U U
co
L a)
.C Q)
Q O a)
- In Q
o i
3 L
v
U)
m
U) in o) M
a) a)
E U V m O O Q
U a) a) cn
U) _m
d
m > > m m
N E
TTa)
O O m n?o
O
-
-
U c C:
N O O - 0
0
a) a) w
_
3 > 0 :3 a) m fD
a)_0 -0 7
(u
- :3
_
a
Z3 c
to
Y 0
w
U T T cn
O D U O m m>
>> -
O Q C C E a) a) ?o
0) 0)
a) a)
O 7 O O
- m m C
Q
0
fn N fn E E ?
m m O
F J LL LL _1 0 0 0
H
z
w
2
D
U
O
0
cn
2
F
z
U)
I-
w
w
2
cn
Y
O
3
LL
O
z
O
H
a
U'
N
01
Q
CL
U)
c
0
EL a
o >,
a N a
3
cn a) a) U
o o M R M E
E E E
co
C
O
m
0
N
Y a)
E
?U
m
i U U
H U
w
? m
D?
D (D
CL
o E a
V U O
? v?
a?
-) ?'aw E y •`- a
•O •O ? C L L ? (O
IL IL ao ?' w mWU)
• Table 2. Vigor by Species
•
Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing
Betula ni ra 6 2 1 2
Ca rya ovata
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Cornus amomum 1 1 3
Fraxinus penns Ivanica 11 8 3 2
Li ustrum smense
Li uidambar st raciflua
Quercus acutissima 1
Quercus alba 23 2 1 5
Quercus falcata 3 5
Quercus ni ra 3 1
Quercus phellos 2 3
Rosa multiflora
Salix ni ra 28 2 1 6 1
S mphoricarpos orbiculatus
Ulmus alata 3 1
Juni erus vir iniana
Elaea nus
Fa us
Quercus 5
Quercus rubra 6 4
Ca rya labra
Liriodendron tulipifera 6 3 41 10 8
Platanus occidentalis 30 4 2 2
Prunus serotina
Acer ne undo
Acer rubrum
Ulmus americana
TOT: 28 122 -23- -8 11 40 11
0
•
r1
L_J
Table 3. Damage by Species
?y

?
w
V?
q
moo, qj <
0

Q o
?
i
y
•
? Q ? O
O
S
?
Acerne undo 1 1
Acer rubrum 3 3
Betula ni ra 12 11 1
Ca rya labra 1 1
Ca a ovata 1 1
Ce halanthus occidentalis 1 1
Cornus amomum 5 4 1
Elaea nus 1 1
Fa us 1 1
Fraxinus enns Ivanica 27 27
Juni erus vir iniana 3 3
Li ustrum sinense 2 2
Li uidambar st raciflua 5 5
Liriodendron tuli ifera 33 31 1 1 1 1
Platanus occidentalis
Prunus serotina 1 1
Quercus 5 51 1
Quercus acutissima 1 1
Quercus alba 31 30 1
Quercus falcata 8 8
Quercus ni ra 5 5
Quercus hellos 6 6
Quercus rubra 11 10 1
Rosa multiflora 1 1
Salix niara 40 39 1
S m horicar os orbiculatus 3 3
Ulmus alata 6 6
Ulmus americana 2 2
TOT:
r1
LJ
E
0
Table 4. Damage by Plot
oy
m
V
Fo
a of
y o
?c y
o
Tick Creek-wjs-0003- ear:1 32 32
Tick Creek-w's-0004- ear:1 20 10 10
Tick Creek-w s-0005- ear:1 47 45 1 1
Tick Creek-w's-0006- ear:1 24 23 1
Tick Creek-w s-0007- ear:1 48 44 4
Tick Creek-w's-0008- ear:1 33 32 1
Tick Creek-w's-tck 1- ear:1 20 18 2
Tick Creek-wjs-tckw's2- ear:1 31 311 1
TOT: 8 255 235 3 2 14 1
0

Table 5. Stem Count by Plot and Species
1 1• t• 2• t? ?
•
?y y
? F
yQ0 ?0 e&?
Betula ni ra 9 2 4.5
Cornus amomum 2 1 2
Fraxinus enns Ivanica 22 3 7.33 10
Liriodendron tuli ifera 23 4 5.75 2
Platanus occidentalis 34 3 11.33
Quercus alba 25 2 12.5
Quercus falcata 3 3 1
Quercus ni ra 4 2 2
Quercus hellos 2 1 2
Quercus rubra 6 1 6
Salix ni ra 31 5 6.2 6
Ulmus alata
1 3 1 3
TOT: 12 1641 12 18

C:
•
•
Table 6. Vegetation Problem Areas - Tick Creek Stream Restoration -
EEP Project #379

Feature/Issue Station/Range Suspected Cause Photo #
No/Limited Planting 00-380 Planting Oversight vPI
Dense herbaceous/increasing Abundant groundwater

woody exotic invasives 565-1780
ins ring VP2
Lower planted woody stem success Soil Compaction

(relative to Reaches 1 and 2) 2220-2600
During Construction VP3
0
0 0 0
Appendix A2. Representative Vegetation Problem Area Photos - 2007 - Tick Creek Stream Restoration
VI'l. Sparse Woody Stem Planting
ty9
OWN
g
VP3. Relatively Low Planting Success
VP2. Exotic Herbaceous and Woody Invasion
•
0 0
Appendix A3. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek Stream Restoration
Plot 2 (September 2006)
Plot 2 (August 2007)
•
0 0
Appendix A3. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek Stream Restoration
Plot 3
IRb
for.
M
Plot 4 (September 2006)
Plot 4 (August 2007)
0
0 0
Appendix A3. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek Stream Restoration
Plot 6 (September 2006)
Plot 6 (August 2007)
s
9 0
Appendix A3. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek Stream Restoration
Plot 8 (September 2006)
Plot 8 (August 2007)
o
0 a LO

x

_U

N -
3
0
a U)
•°
M
7
>

U)

0

••
?i O M L N U

:3 cu -Do O f
0

A. _ Q o d

o 00
Z
) _
(1)
?
ad) co 0_ U
C

?

co
-0

1 , LL
o W
U W N
ZLL
r ? -
m L
3 ®
ca w ?
c° D
0
0
.

d

a co
.-,

r- C? ?
LU 3: _
U) c _0
O Z s > cUi d °" ?aY N O
U N p S D ac
CD o
M

cn u
1
a)
>
a)"
co
co,
U
w
g
d cz
o
°?

C's H O

0
0
M

7

511
I 16
s
M
\ o
00 N \
? 1 1
0
c°n
0
N
59p //? 1 0 - /?
1 1
09 °M 0 f
j ono
e? l
I o0
e ja
o?
Pp ,
o?
?Aoo
s?4
e
?a
?a
0 0
m
0 C 4
s
U p Co . LO
M 3 CL Cl)
-0
U 0 Z M N r-?
O ch fC9 U d p0 V..?
_ ??' • • ors \?
O d y U = 0 11 aas
a) cn m (n ct U
'C ?". a V n C L O 0
U O W ZLL cow ® O . G O W
LU L. U)
W 3 c > v
1:1 re -a
o z a> 0 m ??Y (n N
U N p O c pcn O
U a) m om U W
N j 3 3 3 0
O
J L L
411
? cC ? HHH
N
oZ>
O
O
N
N ,
s
1 ,;,
l
1-1
O
O
M
r
e
SE6
0
a
O
O
LO
r

O
O
N
r
e
<4
o?
„s
,
O
O
C\j
1
M
I
%• 7
r

919
/ N I
o°
N
0 0
•
0 Appendix B Geomorphologic Raw Data
B 1. Current Conditions Plan View
B2. Stream Problem Areas Table
B3. Representative Stream Problem Area Photos
B4. Stream Photo-station Photos
B5. Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment Table
B6. Cross section Plots and Raw Data Tables
B7. Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables
0 B8. Pebble Counts
is
a
? m o 'L7 LCO ?
L C m O v.J
WOO
Q O LL
? m o o c
.-I U U c
M a P z
W
c t C1 ,
~ N ~ l0 a o
a,?0 o (U m-0a aZ
L4 z?rry4 c m?LL, U T
41
V, t 41 d 9O a s `-° m U o
?v W3oc a-9
v J? o J`Lr' a a _
9L X
aUi ill m >
W O 'F O c t r Q $
a n I- H U
o
0
B
i
O y
4 5
00
?.
s
0
0
V
A
w
a ?
S
t
t
r oa
pa //
o
4r, r
9
k.
a
a
0 0 0
_ 31aar
e
O 5 O C C f LL 44 v
?/ m E
N W U U C at5
m ? ? p
u Ld
12 a
G Z C 16 c c m W ,
cl) p Q- O yCC m m m a. j N «-0 z
.
G U Z LL L v Q O n Q? W 7i rn ?y
_ m ]+
Y , A
?+ W 'n an ° o In
U Wyk A fl ZU = at. j 1 AA
-tz U IL H ?_ a
bU f? ? ~ V ? r
G t
N ° m m
3: #0 (IV
GQ G o s m p ,??f11
? a d Q H F- U i
rA Z ?
(s, W =
S A
N
N
@4
a,
.? QD
A ryVA
S
tV
A `00
N
s
c
O o
i
? s
O
00
Vy
i A
A ?•
x
LIP
a # ( 9bV
f
r lip
f 4
eO
O
A ?-
S l
LIP d
g lk
ti d
i
O
;r
0 0 0
•
•
B2. Stream Problem Areas Table - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Pro'ect #379

Feature/Issue Station Suspected Cause Photo #
Reach 1
Piping above structure 290 Insufficient coarse backfill SPI
Reach 2
Headeut channel 396 Insufficient coarse backfill SP3
Piping above structure 545 Insufficient coarse backfill SPI
Piping above structure 625 Insufficient coarse backfill SPI
Piping above structure' 760 Insufficient coarse backfill SPI
Piping with headcut 1001 insufficient coarse backfill SP2
Piping above structure 1104 Insufficient coarse backfill SPI
Lateral bankeut between rootwads 1203 Insufficient coarse backfill SP4
Piping above structure 1418 Insufficient coarse backfill SP1
Reach 3
Piping with headcut 2050 Insufficient coarse backfill SP2
Piping above structure 2373 Insufficient coarse backfill SP I
Piping with headcut 2396 Insufficient coarse backfill SP2
Piping above structure 2463 Insufficient coarse backfill SPI
Piping with headcut 2568 Insufficient coarse backfill' SP2
Piping with headcut 2662 Insufficient coarse backfill SP2
Piping with headcut 2754 Insufficient coarse backfill SP2
C
•
• •
Appendix B3. Representative Stream Problem Area Photographs - 2007 - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project # 379
SP1. Piping above rock structure SP2. Piping and headcutting

b
C"
A
C
K
O
O
Q+
w
x
A
A
A
r
a
10
ou
a
k'
CC
w
.?y
0
m
K
a?
-s
0
a
a
b
O
O
UQ
'Y
m
'C
S
H
N
O
O
J

A
T'
n
A
A
K
Z
A
A'+
3
0 • •
Appendix B4. Permanent Photopoint Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek - EEP Project #379
PP#1 Looking Upstream (11/21/06)
PP#2 Looking Upstream (08/17/07)
PP#2 Looking Upstream (08/23/07)
0 0 0
Appendix B4. Permanent Photopoint Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek - EEP Project #379
J'i•
fFr
a
PP#4 Looking Downstream (11/21/06)
PP#4 Looking Downstream (08/17/07)
t ' h
0
0 0
Appendix B4. Permanent Photopoint Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek - EEP Project #379
PP#6 Looking Downstream (11/14/06)
PP#6 Looking Downstream (08/17/07)
0 0 0
Appendix B4. Permanent Photopoint Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek - EEP Project #379

?f ,? i ? y?, f
?" `* t ??, ?.. k?? p r F
,,;.
''?n of b.i ???r.'? ?
??
M
d.

PP#7 Looking Downstream (11/14/06)

n•'
.
Air.,

? • R:.. r,,.ir
s

PP#7
PP#8 Looking Upstream (11/14/06)
PP#8 Looking Downstream (08/17/07)
•
0 0
Appendix B4. Permanent Photopoint Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek - EEP Project #379
4
PP#10 Looking Downstream (11/14/06)
PP#10 Looking Downstream (08/20/07)
• s •
Appendix B4. Permanent Photopoint Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek - EEP Project #379
PP#11
PP#l2 Looking Downstream (08/20/07)
PP#12 Looking Downstream (11/13/06)

Appendix B4. Permanent Photopoint Photographs - 2006 & 2007 - Tick Creek - EEP Project #379
VA ?-
PP#14 Looking Downstream (11/13/06)
PP#14 Looking Downstream (08/20/07)

? E '-'
a LO R
L
L
N
a
?a) o
?•
wEm!' O<
L "O
O Ln O O <
T
a c U
IL

S n m
•fl R ?
L 3 N c i
O c
o s
q
v z Z)
R
d
L I
O ?
p? - Q =

N <
T,
M O N
k Z n
a+
U
O ? L C N
L
d

N <
Co
E e T
LU :3
Z
ui
LL. m
U
d
O
L
.
IL
C

R
L
0
•
U)
d

E
R
N y
L

Y N
C1 c6
L ?
U
?
Y U
U C

Ld
_ a3
d
E a
U) C
U) Co
R :'
y .5
y
a I
ma
U N
C
O s a)
O .i N
Q N l1 e
LO T c

R O
_y

N U
m d y
°?
L 1?
R
•
FR- LL Q
O
O
T
0
0
N
T
N
T
O O O
r T-
0
O
T
O
0
O
O
T
0
i O
I O ,
I Cl
T ?
i 0
M
T
M
T
N
N
T
_N N
[6 E
N a)
0 O
a> a)
U
m am
a) .
N aa)
U f0
C
LL
cri
C
N
rn
m
a
NP
C14 1.
?u)I TI V4IVJF T1cv1

L71

d y

O R R

m U ?
° °o °
CD o Z
T T- O O 0000 Q

O

T O

T 0000
T
T T T
Z
o O 0000 Q
i o 0 0 000 Z
N N N O
Z Z N
N N N N
Z Z Z
O

C
C p
O C
ca
Ea
O ?

(L6 N
R
N
O U
LO C O cn
I N i 3
m O OL
ca
C w O
O R a
++ m a L
M R O
I I (U 7
C L
a) L
I O
' p Q w
I R
f O U L° L
Cl) a)
(D ca Ea) O
l6 (? E L
f C O 0 .C 0 0

m 0
Y C
O
N
t

U

C U

N CL Q
0 C d p
7FD -
O

i

U O

O
L N

O
C CU N N
2 N
0 U N LL
Q LL LL

T N L T N cM 4 T
y
R
?
L

C O
d m
0 y W

m R
Ld Li (?

S E" o o o Q
m o o CD Z
co
m g
a

a) E m•'-'
- OOOOO Ooo vT 'oQoO Q Q o
`-
0 C) C) 0 C) C) 0 0 C) I- CA O Z O O Z Z O
y? O
a a) c U T T T T T T T T T T T T
IZ
a)
O C - w
L m
m
16
C) 0 0 C) C)
\
\
\
\
\
O O O
\
\
\
0 C)
Lo \
0 0 0 0
\
\
Q
to
O
=
to O O
O
O
O O
O O O
? O O
O O Z
T O
U)
?
N Z
?
L
U ?

.?
t0 a) U)
0 +u .D Q =
E
:3 Cn a) a) rn CD ?t v v T N N Q N N Q Q N
t
" co CM co co m v 4 4 M co co Z co co Z Z co
C" Z a
ti
)
()
++ N C
-0
(D
A) ?_0 E C
E mm01)0)a) gt?qT
t M O N Q N N Q Q N
665
p C Mcommco 4vv N N M Z M co Z Z co
1- :3 IL Za
U)
u
d
o
a 0
c 0)
c
O
w
L0
C 3
2 C
• °-
U)
m c
c c 0
E
v
m E `

E m C C
g o o m
R

N U a)

U
c
to
O m
N• N
O m
Q N a) L .? a)
N a)
C O C
U.? +.
?.C to V
m C

O
C _
N
O
y
(
n
` m

C
«- a)
c
O
m O
U C
c C
o m
m
o

Y U
C
` a)
U C a
)
M`

H m
N O m
a) U (n m
m
I

m s
a) O to
E
U U -
CD C: ?-
:3
a) a)
fn E (D V
Q U
m O
U
E -O to a) c O§ m m 'O

V) O
m O a)
a)
C 4)

N *k c .C

m E

E
`
4)
U)
Cl a) a) •m
m
m E
$ L m
rn
m

U) C
a r
a)
- N cn c a
-a a) 0
c: -0
0
Q L O N O O O` E 0 U 0 m O Y
t6 (n
Q O_
Cl CL
Cl O m 'O ?' w

C a) L a) U

m
U m m a)
CU C: CU () 0 0
O Q C` m C N ? jn L O (D •a) cU C '+' O
O (D 0
cn
E °) E d)
U
a w 3 m
CL m c m U (D
a
i ) :::
fl- CL QLL ?J afnJ ?O OOQU) (D L) m LL
T N M "T Lo T N c) T N T N M v T N L T

O
0 t0
CD
N
4)

(A
d
m m
m U) ?
3 = U)
7 ' 0 t m m
d
(? _
m 0
a )
a
m m
>

•
H LL Q m U LLJ LL:
o c
O c
T I
O c
O C
N C`
M C
M v
6L
a
i c
1 «
1 LC
i Cf
I C%
) tY
) n
O
TO
O
i
M
I M
llW
a)
a)
Q)
(n
M
M
M
i C 7
Q O m
i Q N to
O O C
O O O
LL LL LL
i , T ico a)
O
0
m
ea
C7 ?
LT ?

C
N N
LL N
a
0
c
.
n ?_
U
'O
N c O
a N U
a
N
o
U)
7 O
..0- U
Z
M L
?
N
U (0 m Q

r

F a)
CD :3 M
a'
z a
O _ -a
M .?
" N
CU
(DU) O t C r
M
* Z In
m
a
r
u
as
0
L
-
a
c
O
r
cc

O
• `
m

N
!Lf
N
V/
Y to
m m
m
U U
Y c
?
_U
H
c L
?
cd
E I6
y w
y 7
U)
Q
_
? O
V Cl C
V)
O U (D
_
O a
C.
I
-
O

O
_)

U
m L d
m ?

FlOo
?
O
O
0
O
M
Cl)
=) O
D O
r ?
?7 Cl)
.n co
O
O
r
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
N
M
N
M
M
M
i Q
O N
O N
U •`
C Q_
N
a
_
O Q IO
? L Q
E " a)
-E C N
D 11
N
Z5
E
Q
N
c
c
e
1 c
1 c
1 c
i c
I C`
1 v
I C`
1 C
1
1
) O
O
r-
O
O
I O
) Cl)
) Cl)
O
O
r
O
O
O
O
O
Cl)
O
Cl)
•? c
•• a
c
a) c
U Q
C
O C
U 'C
? Q
C w
7 C
L
C
.Q aC
N C
I C u
f E
w
O
LI) c-INI°)I .-ILNI r
L

lv d
cn 3 c
O ca
ru

m U D
Q O
Z o
0 o
) O
Q O
Z M
Z M
t=
L_
i ?
C
e
c
c
r
c
c
c
r
c
v
1
1
c
c
c
i c
) 4
2
) 4
) L
a
Z
I
' Z
1 Cl)
i r
Q
Z
Z
7
O
U
to
E
(0
O
Y
U
(0
O
a)
N
LL
IM11
-1N C
to
d
? y
-a c
m >
W LL
O
O O
0 CC)
O N
ce) I M
-I C)
Cl) m
N
m
r-
I`
(O
N
aD
CO
N
O
O
0
O
M
M
0
O
r
O
O
0
O
Cl)
Cl)
a) cn
([j L
•L
OL
N
LO 7
? U
N
N
N N
L
.Q+ O
N E O
n N L N
O C 7 m
L6 C= a O rn
_ N 0 0 c
= N _
' N O
i
2 Q LL i
N CO 'IT N
tl)
d
7
O
co
c?
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 1-1
r?
•
Partirle Ci a Ranee (mm) Tntal # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay <.062 79 79 79
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 79
.d Fine Sand .125-.25 0 79
Medium Sand .25-.5 0 79
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 79
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 79
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 1 1 80
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 80
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 1 1 81
Medium Gravel 8-11.3 1 1 82
L Medium Gravel 11.3-16 9 9 91
U Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 5 5 96
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 3 3 99
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 99
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 99
Small Cobble 64-90 0 99
:3 Small Cobble 90-128 1 1 100
,a
Medium Cobble
U
128-180
0
100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Lar a Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
70
c
60
a?
a. 50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d50 = 0.04
d8= 12.34
® Class %
-t -Cumulative %
Sp•.72S•26 •S, 7p ?? FS 6)8 762?26u?2g43s6?99p,7780 23s u'62 S?2 7p2 ?2p
O
2 . ?2S 's 'p O 76' `?6' u'2 V. A O 28 78p ?'S6 u'62 S72 ,70 8
8
Particle Size Class (mm)
•

B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
.' r.
I +
Nit each:
sir ? y ?. ?' a'1, '? ?, ?i . . (. •."
r
SUMMARY DATA +?? VF ti r°e4': lJ
p ??? b `
Flood rone Elevation ft 457.41 ; ' a,,• r
-?, ?. ,
Bankfull Elevation ft 456.1 1? =4 '
Flood prone Width ft 42.00
Bankfull Width ft 15.46
Entrenchment Ratio 2.72
Mean Depth ft 0.64
Maximum Depth ft 1.30
Width/De th Ratio 24.16
Bankfull Areas ft 9.88
Wetted Perimeter ft 15.70 s ?: •:t iY
H draulic Radius ft 0.63 s? fit/ i
."fie #'?.•li ?1 g ??at
View of cross-section 1-I looking upstream
Stream Type: 136a
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 1-1 (riffle)
459
458
d 457
0
> 456
w - Bankfull
?Yr 2 - 8/14/07
455 - -
Yr 1 - 11/01/06
-As-built
454
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Station (feet)
River Basin: Ca e Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 1-1 riffle
1
Date: 8/ 14/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and L. Cole
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 5.39 457.96
3.6 5.9 457.45
6.2 6.29 457.06
7.4 6.58 456.77
9.5 6.93 456.42
11.5 7.08 456.27
12.9 7.24 456.11
14.7 7.74 455.61
15.7 7.98 455.37
17.6 8.33 455.02
18.4 8.54 454.81
19.1 8.42 454.93
20.1 8.36 454.99
22 8 455.35
24 7.71 455.64
25.3 7.59 455.76
28.2 7.27 456.08
31.2 6.69 456.66
32.7 6.35 457
34.6 6.03 457.32
35.8 5.93 457.42
37.3 5.57 457.78
38.5 5.41 457.94
39.5 5.38 457.97
40 5.31 458.04
40 4.94 458.41

B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 1-2 (pool)
Reach: 1
Date: 8/14/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and L. Cole
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 7.37 456.02
0 7.45 455.94
2.2 7.71 455.68
3.9 7.95 455.44
6.4 8.41 454.98
8.4 8.85 454.54
10.2 9.39 454
12.1 9.67 453.72
12.9 9.97 453.42
13.7 10.5 452.89
14.7 10.98 452.41
15.1 11.26 452.13
15.9 11.54 451.85
16.4 11.69 451.7
17.1 11.64 451.75
17.4 11.57 451.82
18.3 11.06 452.33
19.2 10.9 452.49
19.6 10.76 452.63
21 10.7 452.69
22.8 10.07 453.32
24.8 9.8 453.59
26 9.68 453.71
28.2 9.18 454.21
30.3 8.83 454.56
31.4 8.65 454.74
31.4 8.57 454.82
136. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
i rs r.
7 r? -,f n r?; ' , y'
it f ` <' i2S ?' a •.%8
V ° k : t?twa ?t.
c kF , f `' r e
4 .1 ,
Station Rod Ht. Elevation SUMMARY DATA
0 5.73 451.90 Flood rone Elevation ft 451.88 y $ r h , f
'? 'tL }iis 1pryP,y j? 's,,l? 19
0 5.94 451.69 Bankfall Elevation ft 450.44 r f t ?' ?: s ra
2.9 6.19 451.44 Flood prone Width ft 56.00 s"..,` ? s? r4y
4.7 6.25 451.38 Bankfull Width ft 12.72 a def. r bd?4}? ?„
7 6.32 451.31 Entrenchment Ratio 4.40
8.7 6.46 451.17 Mean Depth ft 0.69 ?,,`L x r 1 ` r, ' `i
10.7 6.79 450.84 Maximum Depth ft 1.44
12.2 7.05 450.58 Width/De th Ratio 18.40•. 1r ?+ ,, r k" " r ?lvi-f ?? ,
14.8 7.28 450.35 Bankfull Areas ft 8.79 gel µ• °? ?
16.4 7.6 450.03 Wetted Perimeter ft 13.272t? ,
17.6 7.79 449.84 Hydraulic Radius ft 0.66 kip f' ?'?
18.7 7.93 449.70
?. re
19.7 8.09 449.54
20.5 8.09 449.54 View of cross-section 1-3 looking upstream
21 8.32 449.31 Stream Type: C5b
21.2 8.61 449.02
22 8.63 449.00 Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 1-3 (riffle)
22.2 8.59 449.04
22.5 8.36 449.27 452
23.7 8.22 449.41
24.6 7.98 449.65
25.7 7.52 450.11 451 - - -
26.5 7.19 450.44
27.8 6.85 450.78
29.4 6.56 451.07
31.4 6.16 451.47 0 450
32.5 6.04 451.59 > -Bankfull
33.5 5.86 451.77 w 4 Yr 2 - 8/14/07
33.5 5.69 451.94 449 - -- - -
Yr 1 - 11/01/06---
-As-built
448
0 5 10 15 20 25 34
Station (feet)
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 1-3 riffle
Reach: 1
Date: 8/14/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and L. Cole
• 1 •
B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC

7

L t t

Flood prone Elevation ft
Bankfull Elevation ft 448.16
445.96
Cx"
Flood prone Width ft 105.00
Bankfull Width ft 19.23
Entrenchment Ratio 5.46
Mean Depth ft 1.19
Maximum Depth ft 2.20
Width/De th Ratio 16.22
Bankfull Areas ft 22.80 R
Wetted Perimeter ft 19.98
H draulic Radius ft 1.14

View of cross-section 2-1 looking downstrearn

448

447

446

c
0
> 445
a?
W

443
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Station (feet)
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 2-I (pool)
Reach: 2
Date: 8/1
4/2007
Field
Crew: S.
and L. Cole
Doi g
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 3.69 447.68
0 3.73 447.64
1.6 4.25 447.12
3.6 4.76 446.61
4.8 4.99 446.38
6.7 5.37 446
8.6 5.65 445.72
10.5 6.12 445.25
12.3 6.52 444.85
13.6 6.6 444.77
14.7 6.68 444.69
15.6 6.92 444.45
16 6.9 444.47
16.2 7.15 444.22
17.4 7.59 443.78
19.2 7.61 443.76
20 7.49 44188
21.3 7.3 444.07
22.2 6.92 444.45
22.7 6.6 444.77
23.6 6.36 445.01
25.1 5.85 445.52
26.2 5.41 445.96
28.3 5.01 446.36
32.6 4.99 446.38
36.2 5 446.37
40 4.83 446.54
42 4.65 446.72

2

57
u r t y
SUMMARY DATA
e f+?j' i
at • P 7!t
?° i1? r?`t• ^?`?
j h r ?r = ?jfs ml:er 1 ' ' s
r •x?',? ,+?A r .`.?? ??
e# h:+' ' W ? a Y ?:g ;Y rZ" 4
Stream Type: Ob
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 2-1 (pool)
446.8 444 Yr

-Bankfull
t 2 - 8/14/07
- Yr 1- 11/01/06
- As-built
B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 2-2 riffle
Reach: 2
Date: 8/14/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and L. Cole
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 5.85 445.52
0 5.97 445.4
3.6 6.18 445.19
6 6.24 445.13
8 6.26 445.11
9.3 6.43 444.94
10.7 6.67 444.7
12.4 6.69 444.68
13 6.78 444.59
13.7 6.86 444.51
14.1 6.99 444.38
15.3 7.17 444.2
17 7.79 443.58
17.9 8.21 44116
19 8.42 442.95
20.9 8.65 442.72
22.9 8.67 442.7
23.3 8.9 442.47
23.9 8.99 442.38
25.1 8.71 442.66
27 8.54 442.83
27.7 8.47 442.9
29.4 7.79 443.58
31 7.5 443.87
34.4 7.25 444.12
37 7.27 444.1
39.8 7.5 443.87
40.5 7.48 443.89
40.5 7.28 444.09
SUMMARY DATA
Flood prone Elevation ft 44536
Bankfull Elevation 11 443.87
Flood rone Width 11 210.00
Bankfull Width ft 14.80
Entrenchment Ratio 14.19
Mean Depth ft 0.87
Maximum Depth 11 1.49
Width/De th Ratio 16.98
Bankfull Areas ft 12.89
Wetted Perimeter ft 15.24
H draulic Radius ft 0.85
446
445

0 444
cc
w
443
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 2-2 (riffle)
-Bankfull
- - 6 Yr 2 - 8/14/07
Yr 1- 11/01/06 F
- As-built
0
442
5 10
15 20 25
Station (feet)
30 35 40
View of cross-section 2-2 looking downstream
Stream Type
: C56
•
0 0
B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 2-3 (pool)
Reach: 2
Date: 8/15/2007
Field Crew: J. O'Neal and L. Cole
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 4.46 439.22
1 4.6 439.08
5.5 4.33 439.35
7.8 3.79 439.89
8.5 3.68 440
9.5 4.03 439.65
9.8 4.3 439.38
10.4 4.27 439.41
10.8 6.87 436.81
12 7.61 436.07
12.5 7.76 435.92
14 8 435.68
15.2 7.985 435.695
15.5 7.98 435.7
18.7 6.89 436.79
19.5 6.52 437.16
22.2 5.78 437.9
25.6 5.66 438.02
26.9 5.39 438.29
30.7 5.47 438.21
34 5.16 438.52
34.5 5.31 438.37
35.4 5.45 438.23
36.6 5.49 438.19
38.1 5.24 438.44
38.8 5.37 438.31
39.8 5.39 438.29
40.1 5.18 438.5
42.9 5.26 438.42
44.1 5.03 438.65
46 5.03 438.65
47 5.3 438.38
48 5.37 438.31
48.9 5.04 438.64
50 5.19 438.49
50.2 5.19 438.49
50.6 5.05 438.63
51 4.99 438.69
•
9 0
B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC

River Basin: Cape Fear 1-
Watershed: Tick Creek y
XS ID XS 2-4 (riffle)
Reach: 2
Date: 8/15/2007

Field Crew:
J. O'Neal and L. Cole
s " ac ?

Station Rod Ht. Elevation SUMMARY DATA =y
0 5.52 431.55 Flood tone Elevation ft 433
34
3 5.52 431.55 Bankfull Elevation ft .
431.02
6 5.82 431.25 Flood rove Width ft 120.00
13.8 5.94 431.13 Bankfull Width ft 21
43
v
r
x,
20 6.05 431.02 Entrenchment Ratio .
5
60 r p
I - e
?
° p'
23 6.48 430.59 Mean Depth ft .
1.13 s
+ a
25.9 6.9 430.17 Maximum De tIt ft 2.32
29.1 7.68 429.39 Width/De th Ratio 18.91
30.3 7.91 429.16 Bankfull Areas ft 24.28
31.2 8.05 429.02 Wetted Perimeter ft 22.02 fv "j
31.8 8.26 428.81 Hydraulic Radius ft 1.10 , _ .
32.5 8.37 428.7 lr h r .+ ao Qi :.
`
33.7 8.35 428.72 . .
`
35.2 7.89 429.18 View of cross-section 2-4 looking upstream
37.4 7.22 429.85 Stream Type: C5b
40 6.26 430.81
43.4 5.76 431.31 Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 2-4 (riffle)
46.7 4.89 432.18
48.4 4.88 432.19
53 5.01 432.06

60.2
5.03
432.04 432
- -- -
65.7 4.86 432.21 - --_,
70 4.78 432.29
431
_m
c
-
0
> 430
--
a:
U1 -Bankfull
429
tYr 2 - 8/15/07
Yr 1 - 11/3/06
- As-built
428
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Station (feet)

•
0 0
B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: "Dick Creek
XS ID XS 2-5 riffle
Reach: 2
Date: 8/20/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and J. Tisdale
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 3.48 429.18
2 3.61 429.05
3.5 3.63 429.03
4.6 3.52 429.14
6.7 3.61 429.05
8.6 3.9 428.76
10.2 4.2 428.46
12 4.34 428.32
13.5 4.33 428.33
14.9 4.4 42826
16.1 4.77 427.89
17.5 5.32 427.34
19 5.49 427.17
20.6 5.65 427.01
22.5 5.83 426.83
23.8 6.02 426.64
24.5 6.28 426.38
25.7 6.65 426.01
27 6.78 425.88
28.4 6.76 425.90
28.7 7.1 425.56
29 7.32 425.34
29.4 7.36 425.30
29.8 7.33 425.33
30.4 7.2 425.46
30.9 6.83 425.83
33.2 6.65 426.01
34.2 6.34 426.32
35.4 5.65 427.01
36.9 5.08 427.58
38.5 4.98 427.68
40.4 4.81 427.85
42.1 5.01 427.65
42.9 4.93 427.73
44.3 4.81 427.85
46 4.66 428.00
429.86
427.58
90.00
20.01
4.50
1.13
2.28
17.69
22.64
20.91
1.08

- -Bankfull
-0 Yr 2 - 8/20/07
Yr 1 - 11/3/06
-As-built

20 30 40 50
Station (feet)
•
0 0
136. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
v,
r
NW , ? SI-1,
Reach: 2
v ;NYC ,,:, + z
Ll h r
t y •' {3? k2' 3L 5 .? Y',lj 1•. r? t j".
one Elevation ft 429.33
$A
Depth ft 4.18
Y .arr ?,y r rr ' 'S tYs
L-WL
w 2 ^ aee ?.
t '44
y
v? Y..L
Hydraulic Radius (ft) 1.61
liN
ACU
View of cross-section 2-6 looking downstream
Stream Type: 136
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 2-6 (riffle)
426
4.7
0 4
w 422
421 1 st Year
4
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (feet)
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: "Tick Creek
XS ID XS 2-6 riffle

Date: 8/20/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi g and J. fisdalc
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 3.96 425.53
3 4.05 425.44
7 4.02 425.47
10 4.12 425.37
13 4.16 425.33
14.3 4.57 424.92
15.6 5.1 424.39
17 5.57 423.92
19 5.96 423.53
21 6.37 423.12
6.74 422.75
23.1 7.17 422.32
24 7.45 422.04
24.9 7.95 421.54
25.5 8.13 421.36
25.9 8.38 421.11
26.5 8.37 421.12
27.1 8.62 420.87
27.8 8.22 421.27
28.7 8.13 421.36
29.5 7.85 421.64
32.4 7.08 422.41
32.8 6.7 422.79
35.2 6.49 423
36.6 6.33 423.16
37.4 6.03 423.46
38.7 5.74 423.75
40.7 5.41 424.08
42.5 4.94 424.55
43.7 4.73 424.76
45 4.44 425.05
46.5 4.38 425.11
48 4.36 425.13
49.5 4.33 425.16
51 4.19 425.3

1.6

.38 Flood
Maximum
Wetted Perimeter
425.11
SUMMARY DATA

Bankfull Elevation fr 425.05
Flood tune
Width ft
63.00
Bankfull Width ft 37.01
Entrenchment Ratio 1.70
Mean Depth ft I.bg

Width/De th Ratio 22.09
Bankfull Areas ft 62.02
meter ft 38.60

25

24

23

-Bankfull

-2nd Year - 07
_ - 06
-As-built
20

136. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 3-1 rifle
Reach: 3
Date: 8/20/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and J. Tisdale
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 3.42 421.53
1.5 3.39 421.56
3 3.49 421.46
4.4 3.7 421.25
6 3.79 421.16
7.3 3.91 421.04
8.3 3.8 421.15
9.6 3.94 421.01
10.8 3.98 420.97
12 4.06 420.89
13.3 4.1 420.85
14.5 4.27 420.68
15.9 4.36 420.59
17.1 4.41 420.54
18.7 4.49 420.46
19.9 4.58 420.37
21 4.71 420.24
22.1 4.9 420.05
23.9 5.13 419.82
25.3 5.26 419.69
26.6 5.29 419.66
28.1 5.22 419.73
29.6 5.36 419.59
31.2 5.55 419.4
32.5 5.83 419.12
33.6 6.01 418.94
34.7 6.16 418.79
35.1 6.24 418.71
36.1 6.62 418.33
36.7 6.69 418.26
37.9 6.62 418.33
38.6 6.41 418.54
40.2 6.11 418.84
40.8 5.9 419.05
41.7 5.69 419.26
42.6 5.5 419.45
SUMMARY DATA
Flood rone Elevation ft 422.22
Bankfull Elevation ft 420.24
flood prone Width ft 265.00
Bankfull Width ft 40.00
Entrenchment Ratio 6.63
Mean Depth ft 0.71
Maximum Depth ft 1.98
Width/De th Ratio 56.68
Bankfull Areas ft 28.23
Wetted Perimeter ft 40.90
H drautic Radius ft 0.69

TA{

View of cross-section 3-l loo cross-section 3-1 looking downstream
Stream Type: B6
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 3-1 (riffle)

L
N
0 4
w
4
418
0
10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
?I
LL
21

20

19 -Bankfull
[ty
2
8/20/07
r
-
- Yr 1- 11/13/06
-As-built

0 9 0
136. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
YjjI" !e

3a eR * i
,?y R

SUMMARY DATA ?',?
Flood prone Elevation ft 419.60
x

Bankfull Elevation ft

417
54
yZ x+,
A
-Food prone Width ft .
270.00 ?`YrW ?J W' 3 tf J?' if
~?
M

Bankfull Width ft
17.76 .
?f 54
V-1-0,
Entrenchment Ratio 15.20 >
4t. y s t ?t
Mean De th ft 0.85 ?, y
s
1F i '
VP
`?
4
Maximum Depth ft 2.06 his ;
? "
>
+!
Width/De th Ratio 20.91 +
i
BankfullArea s ft 15
08
Wetted Perimeter ft .
19.08 s
H draulic Radius ft 0.79
,w*',,? d?T.,fta

View of cross-section 3-2 looking upstream
Stream Type: C6b

Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 3-2 (pool)

420

419

418

0
> 417

416

As
415
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)

River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 3-2(pool)
Reach: 3
Date: 8/20/2007

Field Crew: Y
S. Doi and J. Tisdale
Station
Rod Ht.
Elevation
0 5.8 417.98
0 5.95 417.83
2 5.93 417.85
3.7 5.95 417.83
5 5.98 417.8
6.5 6.03 417.75
7.7 6.12 417.66
9 6.13 417.65
10.6 6.15 417.63
12 6.2 417.58
13.7 6.21 417.57
14.5 6.1 417.68
15.1 6.08 417.7
16.5 6.23 417.55
17.8 6.35 417.43
18.3 6.35 417.43
19 6.41 417.37
19.6 6.54 417.24
20 6.32 417.46
20.4 5.92 417.86
21.3 6.07 417.71
22 7.13 416.65
22.5 7.15 416.63
23.3 7.91 415.87
24 8.22 415.56
25.4 8.3 415.48
26.7 8.22 415.56
28.2 7.76 416.02
29.2 7.09 416.69
29.7 6.94 416.84
30.3 6.73 417.05
31.3 6.67 417.11
33 6.55 417.23
34.3 6.48 417.3
35.7 6.24 417.54

38.5
6.01 w -Bankfull
417.77

?-Yr 2 - 8/20/07
Yr 1- 11/13/06
-built

B6. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 3-3 (pool)
Reach: 3
Date: 8/20/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and.). Tisdale
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 4.7 417.14
1.1 4.82 417.02
2.5 4.86 416.98
3.8 4.9 416.94
5.3 4.92 416.92
6.8 5.01 416.83
7.7 5.1 41674
8.5 5.06 416.78
9.2 5.15 416.69
9.8 5.22 416.62
10 5.3 416.54
11.1 5.33 416.51
12.2 5.35 416.49
13.4 5.41 416.43
15 5.5 416.34
16.3 5.5 416.34
17.4 5.5 416.34
18.7 5.49 416.7-
20 5.54 416.3
21.4 5.65 416.19
22.7 5.74 416.1
23.5 5.77 416.07
25 5.95 415.89
26.2 6.03 415.81
26.9 6.26 415.58
27.7 6.61 415.23
28.5 6.77 415.07
29.2 6.76 415.08
29.7 6.93 414.91
30.3 6.95 414.89
31.6 7.38 414.46
32 7.4 414.44
32.7 7.31 414.53
33.4 7.18 414.66
34.2 6.95 414.89
35.1 6.89 414.95
DATA
250.00
18.14
13.78
0.69
1.63
419
418
417
0
0
> 416
a)
W
415
414
0
10 20 30
Station (feet)
-Bankfull
tYr 2 - 8/20/07
Yr 1-11/13/06
-As-built
40 50 60
417.70
View of cross-section 3-3 looking upstream
Stream Type: CO Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 3-3 (pool)
7
0 0 0
136. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
arc, , E z
z a° y_
sn "? t v
SUMMARY DATA
Flood rone Elevation ft 418.08
Bankfull Elevation ft 415.36 .+rtY4 ' x
Flood rone Width ft 300.00
Bankfull Width ft 26.67 -
Entrenchment Ratio 1 1.25; E
Mean Depth ft 1.12
` • t r.
Maximum Depth ft 2.72
Width/De th Ratio 23.78
'14 0
Bankfutt Areas ft 29.90
Wetted Perimeter ft 28.02
H draulic Radius ft 1.07 jw&r p} '
View of cross-section 3-4 looking downstream
Stream Type: C6
ID 415
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: "Pick Creek
XS [D XS 3-4 (pool
Reach: 3
Date: 8/21 X2007

Field Crew: r
L O'Neal and]. I isdalc
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 4.75 416.02
2.6 4.88 415.89

4 5
.02 415.
75
6.2 5
.1
8 415.59
8.6 5.09 415.68
11.5 5.41 415.36
13.4 5.84 414.93
15 6.32 414.45
16 6.22 414.55
17.4 6.21 414.56
17.9 6.33 414.44
19 6.4 414.37
19.7 6.69 414.08
20.7 6.9 413.87
21 7.24 413.53
22.8 7.93 412.84
24.4 8.13 412.64
25.6 8.07 412.7
25.9 7.81 412.96
26.6 7.82 412.95
27.6 7.41 413.36
28.3 6.84 413.93
28.5 6.8 413.97
29.6 5.94 414.83
30.5 5.66 415.11
32.7 6.16 414.61
35.2 5.91 414.86
39 5.27 415.5
40 4.97 415.8
41.2 4.88 415.89
41.8 5.05 415.72
43.9 4.97 415.8
46.5 4.84 415.93

.5

65 r'?r
4x ,` it r +
417
414
w
413
Yr 1
-As-built
416.12
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 3-4 (pool)

416 -

0
>
a?
-Bankfull

- - - -
?
Yr 2 - 8/21/07

- 11/13/06
412

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Station (feet)

136. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project 9379 - Chatham County, NC
(p 7
2y_.
"!??: .tip
ajr?` r?4??y° r
*iay.
Depth ft 1.22
'.l$ •?b 'yY.
!. s
a.. i
?l
View of cross-section 3-5 looking downstream
Stream Type:
C6
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 3-5 (pool)
416
415 - _
414
c
0
-- -
-Bankfull
a12 -- -
-As-built
411
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (feet)
- -
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 3-5 001
Reach: 3
Date: 8/21 /2007
Field Crew: J. O'Neal and.I. Tisdale
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 2.44 415.84
0 2.74 415.54
0.9 2.94 415.34
3.7 2.88 415.4
5.3 3.06 415.22
6.6 3.09 415.19
7.4 3.3 414.98
9.2 3.49 414.79
10.4 3.55 414.73
11.1 3.68 414.6
13.9 3.88 414.4
4.08 414.2
16 4.11 414.17
16.3 4.04 414.24
16.8 3.95 414.33
18.5 4.22 414.06
19.1 4.25 414.03
22.1 4.78 413.5
22.6 4.84 413.44
22.9 4.95 413.33
24 5.03 413.25
25 4.87 413.41
26.5 5.19 413.09
26.8 5.32 412.96
27.2 5.37 412.91
27.9 5.56 412.72
28.6 5.67 412.61
30.2 6.46 411.82
32.1 7 411.28
33.6 7.09 411.19
34.5 7 411.28
35.5 6.8 411.48
36.1 6.52 411.76
36.3 5.97 412.31
36.6 5.66 412.62

.1

36 SUMMARY DATA
Flood
Bankfull Elevation
Flood
Mean
41
Bankfull
Wetted Perimeter
H draulic Radius (ft)
> 413
w
t Yr 2 - 8/21/07
Yr1-11/13/06
412.92

tune Elevation ft 416.87
ft 414.03
tune Width ft 220.00
Bankfull Width ft 24.59
Entrenchment Ratio 8.95

Maximum Depth ft 2.84
Width/De th Ratio 20.21
Area s ft 29.92
ft 25.91
1. I S
0 0 0
136. Cross Section Plots, Photos, and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Project #379 - Chatham County, NC
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
XS ID XS 3-6 rife
Reach: 3
Date: 8/20/2007
Field Crew: S. Doi and J. Tisdale
Station Rod Ht. Elevation
0 2.67 415.59
0 2.8 415.46
0.8 2.95 415.31
2 2.93 415.33
4 3.18 415.08
6.3 3.27 414.99
9.3 4.01 414.25
10.9 4.45 413.81
11.7 4.81 413.45
13.7 5.23 413.03
14.5 5.51 412.75
17.6 5.6 412.66
20.2 5.77 412.49
21.3 6.03 412.23
23.4 6.17 412.09
24.1 6.41 411.85
24.5 6.44 411.82
25.6 6.63 411.63
26.3 6.77 411.49
26.5 6.98 411.28
27.7 7.3 410.96
28.4 7.71 410.55
29.2 7.85 410.41
29.8 7.74 410.52
30.9 7.24 411.02
32.3 7.04 411.22
33.1 6.84 411.42
33.4 6.5 411.76
33.7 6.39 411.87
35.3 5.94 412.32
36 5.79 412.47
37.5 5.79 412.47
39 5.4 412.86
39.7 5.35 412.91
41 5.02 413.24
43.1 4.37 413.89
44.8 4.07 414.19
48.1 3.63 414.63
49.1 3.5 414.76
52 3.13 415.13
414.57
62.00
17.38
3.57
0.82
View of cross-section 3-6 looking downstream
Stream Type: C6
Cape Fear River Basin, Tick Creek XS 3-6 (riffle)
416
415
414-
C: 413
a
w 412-
411
410
0
10
20
Station (feet)
30
40
50
-Bankfull
4 Yr 2 - 8/20/07
-- Yr 1- 11/13/06
- As-built
9 0
B7. Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
Reach: Upstream
Profile ID: Profile I
Date: 16-Jul-07
Field Crew: S. Doi g and L. Cole
458.0
457.0
456.0
455.0
454.0
453.0
N
452.0
c
0
451.0
N
W 450.0
449.0
448.0
447.0
446.0
445.0
Pattern min max average Prorde min max average
Channel Beltxidth (ft) 4.37 9.38 6.84 Riffle length (ff) 3.16 18 75 9.43
Radius of Curvature (ti) 3.58 15.04 7.36 Riffle slope (ft/ft) 0.001 0.055 0.027
Meander Wavelength 31 40 44.68 38.08 Pool length (ft) 4.67 12 42 8.09
Meander Width ratio 0.34 0.61 052 Pool spacing f f) 8.56 36.11 19.88
0
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length (ft) 255
Channel Length (ft) 286
Sinuosity 1.12
Water Surface Slope(ft/ft) NA-
BF slope (ft/ft) 0.0.039
Rosgen Classification B6
0 50 100 150 200 250
Station (feet)
• •
B7. Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: lick Creek
Reach: Middle
Profile ID: Profile2
Date: 17-Ju1-07
Field Crew: S. Doig and L. Cole
Pattern min max avera a Profile min avera,e Additional Reach Parameters
Channel Beltwidth (ft 8.89 53.48 26.01 Riffle Ien th f) 31.09 15.45 Valle Len gth ft 1,150
Radius of Curvature (ft) 7.5 21.68 15.95 Riffle sloe (fVft 0001 0.037
7? 0.015 Channel Len th (ft 1,506
Meander Wavlen h 57.62 132.45 78.43 Pool Iength(ft) 51871 42.937 19.45942 Sinuosity 131
Meander Width ratio 0.450 1.445 1.059 Pool s acing ti) 2.521 37.776 22.857405 Water Surface Sloe (IUfo NA*
BF slope (ft /ft) 0.016
Ros en Classification C5b
Reach 2 Longitudinal Profile (Stationing 285-800)
- Bankfull
Water Surface*
2nd Year-07
1 st Year - 06
As-Built
A Grade Control Structures
* no water was observed
during the 2007 survey

I I I I ? i ? i
485 535 585 635 685 735 785
Station (feet)

137. Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
River Basin: Ca e Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
Reach: Middle
Profile ID:
Date: 17,Iul-07
Field Crew: S. Doi, and L. Cole
Pattern min max average ofile min max average Additi onal Reach Paramete rs
Channel Beltwidth (ft 8.89 53.4 W fFle length (ft) 4.90 31.09 15.45 Valle Len nth (fi 1,150
Radius of Curvature ft 7.58 21.6 fFle slo e(ft'ft) 0.001 0.037 0.015 Channel Length(ft 1,506
Meander Wavelength 57.62 132.4 ol length (ft 5.1871 41937 19.45942 Sinuosi 131
Meander Widthratio 0450 1.445 1.059 Pools acim'Ift) 2.521 37.776 22.857405 Water Surface Slope(fft) NA*
BF slo e (ffft) 0-016
Rosen (Classification C5b
Reach 2 Longitudinal Profile (Stationing 500-1300)
438.0
436.0
434.0
m
c
0
432.0
m
W
430.0
428.0
426.0
800
-Bankfull
Water Surface*
2nd Year - 07
I st Year - 06
- As-Built
L Grade Control Structures
_ * no water was observed
during the 2007 survey

I'

850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300
Station (feet)
9 0 0
137. Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: 'Fick Creek
Reach: Middle
Pro£de ID: Profile 2
Date: 17-1ui-07
Field Crew: S. Doi and L. Cole
Reach 2 Longitudinal Profile (Stationing 1300-1800)
430.0
428.0
,, 426.0
N
Q)
c
,o
coo 424.0
a?
W
422.0
420.0
418.0
1300
1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800
Station (feet)

B7. Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
Reach: Downstream
Profile m: Profile 3
Date: 18-Jul-07
Field Crew: J. O'Neal and J. Tisdale
421
419
v
w
0
417
415
413
Pattern min max average Profile min max avera'e Additional Reach Parameters
Channel Beltwidth (ft) 8.74 26.93 1531 Riffle len nth (R) 5.33 22.16 11,27 Valle Len nth (ftl 635
Radius of Curvature (R) 8.27 23.08 13.88 Riffle slo e (ft' fit 0.002 0.013 0.007 Channel Length (ft) 975
Meander Wavelength 34.43 84.77 53.96 Poollen ihlft) 7.02 35.04 22.45 Sinuosity 153
Meander Width ratio 0503 0.673 0-530 Pool s a6ri, (fi) 1.81 071 16-68 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) NA
BF sloe (ft/ft) 0.010
Rosen Classification E6
Station (feet)
1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100 2150 2200 2250 2300
9 0 0
B7. Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - EEP Project #379
River Basin: Cape Fear
Watershed: Tick Creek
Reach: Downstream
Profile ID: Profile 3
Date: 18-Jul-07
Field Crew: 1. O'Neal and J. Tisdale
Pattern min max avera e Profile min max a,e a'e Additional Reach Parameters
Channel Beliwidth (ft) 8.74 26.93 15.31 Rffle len nth (H)
i 533 22.16 1327 Valle Length (f) 635
Radius of Curvature (fl) 8.27 23.08 13.88 R
iffle slo e (f/ft 0.002 0.013 0.007 Channel Length (f) 975
Meander Wavelen rth 34.43 84.77 53.96 Pool len nth (f) 7.02 35.04 2275 Sinuosity 1.53
Meander Width ratio 0.503 0.673 0.530 Pools acin (ft) 1.81 48.74 16.68 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) NA
BF slo e (f/f) 0.010
Ros yen Classification E6
Reach 3 Lnnoitndinal Prnfln rct,tino:n.. 11fifi-I znnt
416
414
y
w_
C
O
ro
412
410
408
2300

Station (feet)
2350 2400 2450 2500 2550 2600 2650 2700 2750
•
•
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 1-2
Particle Size Ranee (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Cla < .062 63 63 63
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 63
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 63
R Medium Sand .25-.5 0 63
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 63
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 1 1 64
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 1 1 65
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 2 2 67
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 8 8 75
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 6 6 81
L Medium Gravel 11.3-16 6 6 87
C7 Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 5 5 92
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 4 4 96
Very Course Gravel 32-45 1 1 97
Very Course Gravel 45-64 1 1 98
Small Cobble 64-90 1 1 99
Small Cobble 90-128 1 1 100

Medium Cobble
U
128-180
0
100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
,. Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
14 Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
Total
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100
dso = 0.05
d84 = 13.65
C • pb, 72 •2S •S 7 p ,?? A,S S) 87 77 76, S? FS 6,Q 9p 72 79 ?S 3s S7 70 J
06,2 ? 7 S2 6 70 2 > 8 7S S7 c'2 GS F6 6Q ,90 7?8 879 pGOG?S7?? ?Q? OQS
?S S 6 6 O 6 ? 2 2sr ` OA8
Particle Size Class (mm)
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 1-3
r?
U
0
Particle Size Ranee (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay <.062 57 57 57
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 57
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 57
Medium Sand .25-.5 0 57
Ln Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 57
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 57
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 3 3 60
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 1 1 61
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 5 5 66
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 8 8 74
L Medium Gravel 11.3-16 10 10 84
U Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 8 8 92
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 3 3 95
Very Course Gravel 32-45 1 1 96
Very Course Gravel 45-64 1 1 97
Small Cobble 64-90 1 1 98
Z Small Cobble 90-128 2 2 100
U Medium Cobble 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
o Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
LL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d50 = 0.05
d84= 16.00
® Class %
t--t - a- + -i-'' -?-Cumulative
%
c Os p62 72S ?6 S,7 70 ?? srS, 677 7J? 76226 u'2A AS6 Gg9967 7?? 78O 236 Os-'T S7-70 7-
. 'V 2 , 72S,2S•S O 2 76 26 ?? S V O 26 7&0 x'36' x'62 72 2 "q
8
Particle Size Class (mm)
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 2-1

r-?
LJ
Particle Size Ranue (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay < .062 88 88 88
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 88
.d Fine Sand .125-.25 0 88
R Medium Sand .25-.5 0 88
v' Coarse Sand .5-1.0 1 1 89
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 89
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 2 2 91
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 1 1 92
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 1 1 93
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 1 1 94
Medium Gravel 11.3-16 3 3 97
C7 Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 2 2 99
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 1 1 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100

Small Cobble
d
64-90
0
100
B Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
c Medium Cobble
U 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^o Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
14 Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
LL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
dso = 0.04
d84 = 0.06
® Class %
Cumulative %
',3 ?6;p? '6' &V' '90'7 720 780 X56 ?&1. S72 70? ?2p
C p6 0 6? 72S ?S, S,7 70 2Y ASj 77 76'
2 _72S 2S S •O 2 S 76 V. A O 28 78p ?S6 62 S7? 70?? 20
IV8
8
Particle Size Class (mm)
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 2-2
•
•
Particle Size Range (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay <.062 96 96 96
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 96
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 96
R Medium Sand .25-.5 0 96
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 96
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 96
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 96
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 1 1 97
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 1 1 98
Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 98
Medium Gravel 11.3-16 0 98
C7 Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 2 2 100
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 0 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100

Medium Cobble
U
128-180
0
100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
LL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d5o = 0.03
d84 = 0.05
® Class %
Cumulative %
'0 O6, 06? 1- -? S70 2.4 'V j 877 770 76'? ) `?I?AAS,6, OV 00,7 718 7& 11 Sp `+ '2 S72 702 J?O
Z0
2 , 72s 2s $ O 2 .6 76 2s 62 S 4 O 26 760 2iS6 x'62 S72 702A 2 4?9
6
Particle Size Class (mm)
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 2-3
r,
L_J
•
Particle Size. Ranee (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay <.062 100 100 100
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 100
ti Fine Sand .125-.25 0 100

Medium Sand
R
.25-.5
0
100
CA Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 100
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 100
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 100
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 100
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 0 100
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 100
Medium Gravel 11.3-16 0 100
C7 Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 0 100
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 0 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100

Medium Cobble
U
128-180
0
100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
L Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
Total
100
90
a , 80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100
d5o = 0.03
d8 = 0.05
Class %
---Cumulative %
2 J20
r O6, pb? ?2S 26, S, 70 ?V TIS j )S c9 O J7 7J- 76?22? u?24 St s6 6'g99?7778O 2?5 u?62 S>2 70
2 . 7?S 2S'S 'O 2 u' 76' ?0 u'? S 9 O 20 700 2 0 0s? S72 'O ? ?9-
0
Particle Size Class (mm)
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 2-4
•

Particle Size Range (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Cla < .062 74 74 74
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 74
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 74
R Medium Sand .25-.5 1 1 75
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 75
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 75
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 75
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 75
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 1 1 76
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 3 3 79
L Medium Gravel 11.3-16 6 6 85
U Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 6 6 91
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 6 6 97
Very Course Gravel 32-45 1 1 98
Very Course Gravel 45-64 2 2 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
Medium Cobble
U 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
IL 80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d50 = 0.04
d84 = 15.22
c 06.0 S? 723 2S s 770 2? ASS 9977 7?u? 7522 6'24 Af 6 Gg9 A?7 728 70O 2SE-'?6' ?S2 S7-70 7?2 ,20
2 72s 26 S O 2 ?, 76' 2?O 02 S Y O 20 700 2S6 S72 ",P V&
0
Particle Size Class (mm)
L
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 2-5

•
Particle Size Ranee (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Cla <.062 91 91 91
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 91
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 91
R Medium Sand .25-.5 0 91
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 91
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 91
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 91
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 1 1 92
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 2 2 94
Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 94
i Medium Gravel 11.3-16 1 1 95
Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 2 2 97
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 0 97
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 97
Very Course Gravel 45-64 3 3 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
U Medium Cobble 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
L Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
•o Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
a
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d5o = 0.03
d84 = 0.06
® Class %
-+-Cumulative %
c ps ps2 72s 7? ?>z srS j ?6?777u? 76' "?? Qp`?srsr56 0,'90
7 B 78,1-0 + S7? 7, ?O
2 ; 72S 2s•S O ?, 7s ?6 p2 S R O 28 7s0 ASS ?'6? Sj2 7p?A 2pg8
Particle Size Class (mm)
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 2-6
•
•
Particle gi7.e Ranee (mm) Total # class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay < .062 99 99 99
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 99
ti Fine Sand .125-.25 0 99
a Medium Sand
R .25-.5 0 99
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 99
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 99
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 1 1 100
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 100
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 0 100
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 100
cc Medium Gravel 11.3-16 0 100
Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 0 100
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 0 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
c Medium Cobble
U 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
EL 80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d5o = 0.03
d84 = 0.05
® Class %
Cumulative %
0 72S 2s s7 70 AS 5- ) 87 77 7s ?2 `1? A5, 6A, go 72 780 X56 "'62 S7? 7, .1
062 ?. 7?S ?S S O 2 '8 70 u'76?266;0? 45 6y 90 726 790 256 u'6? 872 70?F 2 ?Q8
6
Particle Size Class (mm)
is
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 3-1
is
•
0
Particle Size Ranee tmml Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Cla < .062 100 100 100
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 100
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 100
Medium Sand .25-.5 0 100
`z' Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 100
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 100
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 100
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 100
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 0 100
Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 100
L Medium Gravel 11.3-16 0 100
Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 0 100
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 0 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
a Medium Cobble
U 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
LL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d50 = 0.03
d84 = 0.05
&
T- O6 0s2, ?2S ?S,S ?o ?? Yr AS j ?&7?u? 7 622`?G,??AAS G 69' 'Q'7 78 7
S?? ???y
? 2s6 ?s-'57
. )?S 2S' 76 ?6 ?2 S 9 O cp& 790 t?SS ?S? 70?A 2 ?A9
8
Particle Size Class (mm)
•
•
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 3-2
Particle Size Ranee (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay < .062 96 96 96
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 96
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 96
Medium Sand .25-.5 0 96
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 96
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 1 1 97
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 97
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 97
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 1 1 98
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 98
L Medium Gravel 11.3-16 0 98
Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 1 1 99
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 1 1 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
U Medium Cobble 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^o Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
Total
100
90
80
LL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100
d5o = 0.03
d84 = 0.05
C 06' pS? 725, 2s S,7 70 ?? 'V ' 8677 7,7 7622261?2A VIP OV 90,7 728 760, 260 662 S72 702 ,20
2 .725 2S S O ? 76 26 u'2 S A O 26 760 2S6 'G2 `ri2 7028 V_
6
Particle Size Class (mm)
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section
7
•
0
Particle Size RanLye (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay < .062 100 100 100
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 100
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 100
° Medium Sand
R .25-.5 0 100
U' Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 100
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 100
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 100
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 100
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 0 100
Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 100
R Medium Gravel
L 11.3-16 0 100
Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 0 100
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 0 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Small Cobble 90-128 0 100

Medium Cobble
U
128-180
0
100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
L Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
LL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
deo = 0.03
ds4 = 0.05
Class %
Cumulative% ? ?
C pG 2 72S 2S '70' 70 2S! TrS) d?7777?' 76222 24AS6 6A 07 726 76 0 %'S 6 X62 S7 2 702 ,
6 9 20
062 .72s 2S S 2 S 76 26 S2 S A O 26 760 `SSG S62 Sit 70 2E 2pQ?6
Particle Size Class (mm)
U
•
0
138. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 3-4
Particle Size Ranee (mm) Total # Class % Cnm11151tive "/
S/C Silt/Cla < .062 96 96 96
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 96
a Fine Sand .125-.25 0 96

Medium Sand
R
.25-.5
0
96
Cn
Coarse Sand
.5-1.0
0
96
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 96
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 96
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 96
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 2 2 98
Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 98
R Medium Gravel
L 11.3-16 0 98
Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 1 1 99
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 1 1 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100

Medium Cobble
U
128-180
0
100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^a Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
0 Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
Total
100
90
80
9L
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100
d50 =
d84 =
7 J
O' 7 2 S, 7 A, S 8, 77 7 ? u' A G 9 7 7 d '57
OS 62 2S S,S 70 0,2 S) 9 77 ? 62 2s 2A 5,6 A,9 07 26, 80, S6 82 ? 02 2
2 72S 23 u' 76 ?8 A O 28 780 2S6 ?62 S72 702 A,2 0A8
A A8
Particle Size Class (mm)
0.03
0.05
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 3-5
•
•
Particle Size Ranee (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/Clay <.062 96 96 96
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 96
ti Fine Sand .125-.25 0 96
Medium Sand .25-.5 0 96
C2 Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 96
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 96
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 0 96
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 96
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 0 96
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 96
R Medium Gravel
L 11.3-16 0 96
U Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 1 1 97
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 2 2 99
Very Course Gravel 32-45 1 1 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
:3 Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
U Medium Cobble 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
o Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
S Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
co Lar a Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
100
90
80
LL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Total
100
d50 = 0.03
ds4 = 0.05
® Class %
Cumulative %
C O6 062 72S ?S 3 7 7 p 2u ASj 6677 776 762226 u'2A Sri, OV 007 728 76p 236' 662 572 702 ,20
2 .725 25 S O 2 7s 26 02 S A O 26 760 2S6 u'62 S7, 7p2A 2 RA6
6
0 Particle Size Class (mm)
•
A
0
B8. Pebble Count - Tick Creek Stream Restoration - Second Year Monitoring 8/22/2007
Cross Section 3-6
Particle Size Range (mm) Total # Class % Cumulative %
S/C Silt/C!2 <.062 95 95 95
Very Fine Sand .062-.125 0 95
Fine Sand .125-.25 0 95
Medium Sand .25-.5 0 95
Coarse Sand .5-1.0 0 95
Very Course Sand 1.0-2 0 95
Very Fine Gravel 2-4 2 2 97
Fine Gravel 4-5.7 0 97
Fine Gravel 5.7-8 1 1 98
;, Medium Gravel 8-11.3 0 98
Medium Gravel 11.3-16 1 1 99
U Coarse Gravel 16-22.6 1 1 100
Coarse Gravel 22.6-32 0 100
Very Course Gravel 32-45 0 100
Very Course Gravel 45-64 0 100
Small Cobble 64-90 0 100
Z Small Cobble 90-128 0 100
U Medium Cobble 128-180 0 100
Large Cobble 180-256 0 100
L Small Boulders 256-362 0 100
^o Small Boulders 362-512 0 100
o Medium Boulders 512-1024 0 100
Large Boulders 1024-2048 0 100
Bedrock > 2048 0 100
Total
100
90
80
CL
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100
d5o
d84 =
C .062.7 .,,3 •S7 70 " F`S? 887777676`2226'?,,AA666'A9`907 728 760 256 00 1572 702,20
02 , 725 2S•S O 2 .6 76 2s u,2 S A O 26 760 2r6' X62 `572 702Q 2 AA6
6
Particle Size Class (mm)
0.03
0.05