HomeMy WebLinkAbout20061905 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20090212Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project
Hyde County, NC
2008 Annual Monitoring Report
Year 1, Baseline
NCEEP Project Number D06001
Tar-Pamlico River Basin
Submitted to
NCDENRJEcosystemEnhancement Program
` \ ,c 2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
Date: December, 2008
Monitoring:
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
P. O. Box 176
Fairfield, NC 27826
-?osvteni
"Aft
N NOS
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project
Hyde County, NC
2008 Annual Monitoring Report
Year 1, Baseline
•
NCEEP Project Number D06001
Tar-Pamlico River Basin
Submitted to
NCDENR/Ecosystem Enhancement Program
2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
Date: December, 2008
Monitoring:
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
P. O. Box 176
Fairfield, NC 27826
2TI
G'E9JMi 'v 'r I` Y,L!i
y r fM
• Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................... 1
1. Project Background ............................................................................. 2
1.0 Project Objectives ............................................................... 2
2.0 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach ......................... 2
3.0 Location and Setting ............................................................ 3
4.0 Project History and Background ............................................... 5
5.0 Monitoring Plan View ........................................................... 6
II. Project Condition and Monitoring Results .................................................. 9
1.0 Vegetation Assessment ......................................................... 9
1.1 Vegetation Discussion and Problem Areas ...................................... .9
1.2 Vegetation Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) ............................. 10
2.0 Wetland Assessment ............................................................ 10
2.1 Wetland Discussion and Problem Areas ...................................... 10
2.2 Wetland Problem Areas Plan View (Integrated) ........................... 11
3.0 Project Success Discussion ..................................................... 11
III. Methodo logy Section ........................................................................ 11
List of Tables
Table E-S 1. Project Success Summary .........................................................1
Table I. Project Restoration Components ....................:::........................... ..3
Table II. Project Activity and Reporting History . ..5
Table III. Project Contacts .........................................................................5
Table IV. Project Background .................................................................... 6
Table V. Species for Each Community Type ...................................................9
Table VI. Hydrology and Vegetation Success by Plot ...................................... 11
Table C-1 Hydrologic Monitoring Results ......................................... Appendix C
List of Figures
Figure 1. Composite Vicinity Map ............................................................... 4
Figure 2. Monitoring Plan View: Wells and Vegetation Plots ............................... 7
Figure 3. Monitoring Plan View: Soils, Contours and Plant Communities ................. 8
Figure 4. Composite Vegetation and Wetland Problem Areas Plan View..... Appendix D
Appendices
Appendix A. Vegetation Data
Appendix B. Geomorphologic Raw Data - N/A
Appendix C Hydrologic Data Tables
Appendix D. Integrated Problem Area Plan Views
•
ii
• Executive Summary
The Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Site is a riverine and non-riverine wetland restoration
project located on U. S. Rt. 264 at Rose Bay in Hyde County, North Carolina. It was constructed
by Albemarle Restorations, LLC, under contract with EEP to provide compensatory wetland
mitigation credits in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Construction activities, in accordance with
the approved restoration plan, began March 14, 2007, and were completed on May 14, 2007.
The resulting features include a main swamp run and adjacent areas of lower elevation that retain
flood water for extended periods. Tree and shrub planting on the project site occurred in May,
2007 using bare-root seedlings and containerized stock from a species list that produced a
diverse species mix across the site and throughout the various elevations. Due to insufficient
planting in 2007, monitoring did not begin until 2008 after stocking levels were increased.
Six water level monitoring gauges were installed in May, 2007 at varying elevations throughout
the site to measure subsurface water elevations. Two other gauges were also installed at
reference sites for hydrology comparison. In 2008, all of the monitoring gauges met the
hydrologic success criterion of maintained groundwater levels within 12 inches of the soil
surface for 21 consecutive days during the growing season.
Four vegetative monitoring plots were installed and permanently monumented, one coincident
with each of four of the monitoring gauges. Their locations ensure an accurate sampling of the
entire vegetative community. Each plot is a IOm X IOm square, as recommended by the CVS-
16 EEP Protocol for recording vegetation sampling. In this first year of monitoring, two out of the
four plots met the Year 3 success criterion of 320 living planted stems per acre and two of the
four met the Year 4 success criterion of 288 stems per acre. The inadequate survival rate is
directly attributable to the extreme length of time standing water remained on site and heavy
herbaceous competition. As a result, replacement and supplemental planting will occur in 2009
to replace those stems that did not survive.
Table ES-1 shows the levels of success attained by each of the water level monitoring gauges
and the vegetation plots since monitoring began. Success criterion for the vegetation plots is the
year 3 level of survival.
Table ES-1. Project Success Summa
Gau a
Percent Vegetation
Plot
Percent
1 2 3 4 5 6 Success 1 2 3 4 Success
Year 1 2008 Success Y Y Y Y Y Y 100% Y Y N N 50%
•
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring -Year lof 5
Final
• I. Proiect Background
1.0 Proiect Obiectives
The goal of the Mason Property Mitigation Project was to create both riverine and non-riverine
wetland systems that will accomplish several goals. Primary among those goals is the
establishment of functioning wetlands that will aid in flood attenuation and improve water
quality on site and downstream. The project is to serve as compensation for wetland loss in the
Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The restoration plan was developed and implemented to eliminate
pattern drainage and restore topography and hydrology that more closely resembled that of
similar undisturbed land. Construction resulted in the development of a broad, frequently
flooded swamp run following the historical path as evidenced by aerial photographs and
signature topography. Subsequent planting was designed to restore a wetland forest ecosystem
that is typically found in the immediate area characteristic of similar soils, topography and
hydrology.
The specific project goals and objectives include:
1) Provide floodflow attenuation.
2) Water quality improvement through sediment, toxicant, and nutrient retention and
reduction.
3) Slow over bank flow rates and provide storage and desynchronization of flood waters.
4) Alleviate downstream flooding issues by lessening the effect of pulse or flashy flows.
• 5) Provide shading through forest cover to reduce algae growth and associated low
dissolved oxygen levels in surface water moving through the site.
6) The production and export of food sources.
7) The creation of wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities.
2.0 Proiect Structure, Restoration Tyne. and Approach
Table I lists the estimated wetland acreage by community type to be restored on the Mason
Property. The mitigation plan provides for the restoration of 16.0 acres of riverine wetlands and
20.0 acres of non-riverine wetlands. The 36.0 acre easement area is located within the
boundaries of the larger Mason farm which has been used for row crop production. The project
area was bisected by a deep drainage ditch that acted as a stream that ran from north to south
through the property. Degradation to the channel and surrounding areas by past agricultural
activities, including channel straightening and planting of row crops up to the channel edges had
eliminated any significant natural habitat on the site and allowed excessive nutrient and sediment
accumulation in the channel. Construction, in accordance with the approved restoration plan,
began in March of 2007 and was completed in May of 2007. The resulting features and
topography allow for frequent over bank flooding of the newly created swamp run, which in turn
allows for adjacent areas that are lower in elevation to retain water even after stream flow returns
to normal.
•
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project 2
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year lof 5
Final
E
Table I. Project Restoration Components
Mason Prop rty a Wetland Mitigation Site/EEP #1306001
Post
Community Pre-Existing Construction Credit Ratio Mitigation
Type Acrea a Acreage (Restoration WM Units
Riverine
Wetland 0.0 16.0 1:1 16.0
Non-Riverine
Wetland 0.0 20.0 1:1 20.0
Total 36.0
3.0 Location and Setting
The Mason Property Mitigation Site is located in Hyde County, on the north side of U.S.
Highway 264, approximately 1 mile northwest of Rose Bay, NC (intersection of Turnpike Rd.
and U.S. 264). The easement area is situated in the center of the Mason property and lies along
the mid and upper reaches of an unnamed tributary to Rose Bay, referred to locally as the
"Mason Ditch." Downstream from this site, the tributary flows almost exclusively through
wooded areas containing extensive wetland communities before joining the main run of Rose
• Bay Creek. The surrounding area is primarily forest and agricultural land with residential
properties as a minor component.
C
Figure 1 is a location map for the project area. Directions to the site are as follows: travel west
from Rose Bay on U.S. Hwy. 264 approximately 1 mile and turn right (north) onto the property.
Access to the site is via a farm path.
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project 3
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring -Year I of 5
Final
NA bINIA
C090Q ;? 17dJNO?', all
VcJ IOWV HWN 7J'fl("j IM I
S11?v 0 07
AN-W N0,V%[A JhVIN WMNON
qjN 0 91
11Kn V NO'1OJA IVU M ?NINa/Ild
. , ' ... • -3Aow4o-W1W pw-¦ ML-aso (olt) and .oo9L-Ze9 (Ott) rot-1.2c (M) xvd erzo-m (m)
C tWLZ P-1V¦01 ?u+¦1N+al' ¦ P°oa ¦N 4¦PFe "ZI - S --e •0'd KOLZ ON'3TMMV0 • 133X15 1WW tOt
a 1J??,yti(.),), I 6 1ol;D101B°8 wo¦,?S NO V3ao 1VIISVN 3-4ncnvl v
u ,v po¦?puu u¦Ma 1¦¦d NOLLVNOIS38 MIV3lLLS
' I¦¦O 3p 6up11 d' Mnr+o'J I01iwwu0111u3 'NOLMOISM ONYM3%
.3 N/ "-]N,01 0 3 _? -l `SN011 V 01 S3a 37aVkV839W
A
. = l f'
¦-
J' f r
I-
4
' , ?:? ICI t• 14
?i t lrr??f
I• { 11 _ ?
N\ 7?
h • • >
illo
1 I. ?
75
75 0
L
!lam 1 ` r ?I ?' M' ?' •'"° \ X 1' s L
C* 7s
?rJ?`r/ I 11 _I ' f I'r 1 l1' ' aZa r _ t 3L
J , of v' a {{ S L 6 p? Q
'lI y'1 r 1' I 1 --ice f 1 i) / R 1U N
L
'"l f !fir ?: '`{Igyi' . i ? ,/'~"'? {r --1 rr • ?t I ?If?l 0 ? ? ? ?
r ?? I ?i Yr 1 F r U U>
.41
.F \ I + ?' t r + 1 I t r r
.i 1' IT t r o c Y q s I `U ? p
l .? cy-° `1 1! r ? N
i r- I ?1. °j l r 1?I ?1 a , I. 1 a I O L
m a l 1 I L 6
?d r •? i. 3 f jl S L
-"?f,,.-??P?`?? ? ? i •tJ I: ? ? i? 9? s - t',Lr ' ?a' '??(i° 1 V O ? ? ? ?
, I 1 •' I I S 7 f ?y ? S L ?
N a r I i i f+ f, t l I I,M I, ' i ,... f r -v1 CF , m
\ a? t t y ?Ilr?l I ?il fi 1 tali' I I' _O u 0 0
- - ?a \ \ } , ? tij' § ,? ' 11 ?, ?? I, ,Ir i r i ? •I 1 ? Z 16 ?U
\ . 1 N 1?1? 9 ?I ?. 4fJl ??' .p i y'' Z_ + N +? C
Aq I? ? ? y. ? i s ? c +.?I +\ i 1?1 ' 1? I I I?i f¢, '? ?i "'1 1 / ? '' `U ? ? ?? 11
If 4 ?I I 1 s N
I._{ 7?. i?'Ilf4?rc'?;"?,'tii L
M +.I +'.r?.'. t' I.?•II I. IIIr sl. 'f+ vim', I. 14- 'U
III}i,f v
eJt L t o 4 Y?' I f I m fn'r7 14
I11` F,:''i 1 I'' II,tt It Z ! Q N
° G - 3 3
VIA
L
{ ?_x-? '!} t {,. • i ?`r-'h- .?4: •4141 ,tII }II I1,yi1 f I I??"? i,?llla' : i
a'?' I '.I. 1 'D'IY .7 Y :.! 14i, ¦
{,•tp
? ? ??.?. ? •r ? e ;? 1. Imo' , Ilfl i+'. 1 s f i
.Y ,I I,,? I ?41? h ',NI I;1 Ali ?I •i 71 ?{
?t T ,ly, liI ??
• 4.0 Proiect History and Background
•
•
Table II provides the history of data collection and actual completion of various milestones of
the Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Site.
Table II. Project Activity and Reporting History
Mason Property Mitigation Pro'ect/EEP #D06001
Activity or Report Data Collection
Complete Actual Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan June 2006 Novermber 2006
Final Design -90% June 2006 Novermber 2006
Construction N/A May 2007
Temporary S & E mix applied to entire project area N/A May 2007
Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area N/A May 2007
Containerized and Bare Root Planting N/A May 2007
Mitigation Plan/As-built Year 1 monitoring - baseline) Oct. 07/Se t. 08 December 2008
Year 2 monitoring
Year 3 monitoring
Year 4 monitoring
Year 5 monitoring
Points of contact for the various phases of the MPWMS are provided in Table III.
Table III. Project Contacts
Mason Pro ert Wetland Mitigation Site/EEP #D06001
Designer Ecotone, Inc.
Primary Project design POC 1204 Baldwin Mill Road
Jarrettsville, MD 21804
Scott McGill 410-692-7500)
Construction Contractor Armstrong, Inc.
Construction contractor POC P. O. Box 96
25852 US Hwy 64
Pantego, NC 27860
Tink Armstrong (252-943-2082)
Planting Contractor Williams Forestry Service, Inc.
Planting contractor POC P. O. Box 189
Millville, PA 17846
Christian Duffy 570-458-0766)
Seeding Contractor Carolina Silvics, Inc.
Seed planting contractor POC 908 Indian Trail Road
Edenton, NC 27932
Mary-Margaret McKinney (252-482-8491)
Seed mix sources Earnst Conservation Seeds, LLP, Meadville, PA
Nurse stock suppliers Williams Fores Service, Inc., International Paper, Inc.
Monitoring Consultants Woods, Water and Wildlife, Inc.
Wetland and Vegetation POC P. O. Box 176
Fairfield, NC 27826
Ashby Brown (800-509-0190)
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project 5
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring -Year lof 5
Final
• Project background information for the MPWMS is provided in Table IV.
Table IV. Project Background
Mason Property Wetland Miti ation Site/EEP #D06001
Project Coun H de Coun
Drainage Area 36.0 acres within easement boundary
Drainage im rvious cover estimate (%) 0
Ph sio hic Reion Coastal Plain
Ecore ion 8.5.1 Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Ros en Classification of As-built N/A
Cowardin Classification PEM, PSS, PFO
Dominant Soil Types Stockade sand loam, H deland silt loarn? Brookman loam
Reference site ID Rose Bay, Hyde county, NC
USGS 1 UC for Project and Reference 03020105
NCDW Sub-basin for Project and Reference 03-03-08
NCDWQ classification for Project and Reference C
An onion of any pro se ment 303d listed? No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a
303d listed segment?
Yes, Pamlico River
Reasons for 3034 listing or stressor? A g, Urban Runoff, Septic
of project easement fenced None
• 5. Monitorina Plan View
In May of 2007, six water level monitoring gauges were installed at key locations across the
property in order to assess the groundwater levels throughout the year at various elevations and
topographies. These gauges are suspended in two-inch pvc pipe that is set approximately four
feet vertically into the ground. Two reference gauges are also installed offsite to provide a
means of comparison to naturally functioning wetlands. In addition, a rain gauge was installed
to capture and record on-site precipitation.
Vegetation monitoring was accomplished by the installation of four permanent sampling plots.
Each plot is referenced by one of four monitoring gauges which serve as the plot origin and as a
photo station for that plot. The plots are ten meters square and are situated to give an accurate
sample of the planted and natural woody vegetation. For each site, the data recorded matches
that required of the CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, v 4.0, 2006, level 1-2.
Figures 2 and 3 provide plan views of the site showing all monitoring features including gauges,
sampling plots and the rain gauge, soils, contours and plant communities.
•
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project 6
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year lof 5
Final
100
# Y00) A,
904 -"wtQw*NLq 1- L' QL-Ze9 (Olt) m! ODSL-369 (Ott) ZE9Y-L4f (Z9Z) %V! l?ZD-M (M)
1\
1
?N 1'?LI'!J dON uN110.? a;i?1N ?" 190tZ P_K on *W jjgjml` • pwkl J1n WV.PPe YDZI •9 me 'D•a KSLZ ON ITMS YO • 13MI INIDO tft
' // - / 'UoRDlol"8 WODAS NOUY30 1VIISVH 3jncnLm v N
? 6.JI 'P:;. r1 J'dC 5 ?0
OZ I t 14.? i??L?? , ; uollosi Pu ??loM ? h-!
rrouo
D
uawua
u
?
?
6D
uuo
' u
'u6 NOLLVUOIS38 MUHIS
'
?16? -W N011bJ?V JNd?? INIMAI&NON O l
l
H
3
1
0
P
llll
d
lll NOUV80Mu ONVl13%
?
I & 0 N `? N 010 0 „ 'SNOl MOM S3N ?,adWa
39W
1
I? 0 NOI1H?A QWlw
VJAd ?
j -
5,101d NONd;VA JNN SZ'O A va?arn a Kn(-Wi 4
o
O O O O
K\ K\ K\ K\ K\ K\ K\ K\
6 N N N N N N N N
7s????
?NN?NNNNN
RCN ?S\
4S\ ?S\ 4S\ ?
Kl Kl
? Kl Kl Kl K\ K\ K\
Z
0
N Kl ? ? `D
# # # # #
z o
o ?
f
r
z
z n :s
z _
H
o
NZ
z
?z 0
?O
CQD?_
z ?r
V
A/I
N
Jl4 1
r?
f?
i
Z
?S
U
C?1
4_ W
Z z?
oQ
z
z ?
Q
z
O
1
?i
O
O
Q
z
0 0 0
90OZ d SON
S?I11NI1WW071M11d QNN '5,IgOJNOY1105
VVyVU ' # 1JVd,IIVJJ did
NN11W ?'ydON 'I?NnO? ?GhHI
5TIN OU
AIN-W NOU&P QNVI;W ?N' AU-NON
SWv 0 91
111K1 V NOW1 I)Jfl QNNI'A "aMd? U
} I _] { (
.j
l 1 ! i wog Wwlo-ON9 WW- COGL-Zsg (0N) m! -om-E69 (om)
»OIL P-V-f1 '-IW+33OJ(' • P-M IUM W-PPB tMI •9 -B '0'd
ry
(
I
ILI?.?S'AS0, l-
l
v -I3 o31J P oal M ? d
'
u61ea0 V bulillLU-Ad uNl??? Io3?wuaNu3
?..? 'ON J `-?NO100_
b9Z SI1 -
L?
# J
z
n
z
N
?Z z
?
?z
o
5 z w
zp
F
OQ ?
ff
1? 1S
Z
z
G ?-
O?
O
'J
s -
#
q ?
0 ?
>J
J Z _
z`?
?
S
S
A O?
Ze"-L9c (L9z) xve 4?Lo-M (m)
9COL9 ON '9TW.-MV0 • IMM ISWO *0
TI `SNOU M01S3a 318Ma3EIV
n z
z ?
S x Q ?2 O ?
I
01?`
>r-
O
c?
U
ui I
?Q
Z
n%
Z
O
bhH
s ° ?Qp fi Vic
Q
?
s
z lS
d Z ?_
Z
°
?l
Rx-
1
i
i
i
i
0
v
z
L?
0
V
O
O
0 0 0
9 II. Proiect Condition and Monitoring Results
1.0 Vegetation Assessment
is
The vegetation success criterion was developed in accordance with the CVS-EEP protocol. The
Mason project was planned to include various topographies and a contiguous plant community
consistent with those found naturally occurring along swamp runs and associated broad
hardwood flats. The species mix was based on the vegetation noted at the reference site and all
species are classified from FAC to OBL (Table V). The site was planted at a rate of 275 stems
per acre in May of 2007. In February of 2008, an additional 175 stems per acre were installed
bringing the total stocking at the start of the 2008 growing season to 450 stems per acre.
Table V. Species b Vegetation Type
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Pro'ect/EEP #D06001
Trees
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum OBL
Red Maple Acer rubrum var. Trilobum FACW-
Water tupelo N ssa a uatica OBL
Swam Black Gum N ssa biflora FAC
Willow Oak Quercus hellos FACW-
Swam White Oak Quercus bicolor FACW+
Water Oak Quercus ni a FAC
Shrubs
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status
High Tide Bush Baccharis halimifolia FAC
Swam C rilla C ilia racemiflora FACW
Sweet Pe erbush Clethra alnifolia FACW
Virginia Sweets ire Itea vir inica FACW+
Button Bush Ce halanthus occidentalis OBL
Tag Alder Alnus serrulata FACW
Wax Myrtle M 'ca cerifera FAC+
Sweetba Ma olia vir iniana FACW+
1.1 Vegetation Discussion and Problem Areas
Two of the four monitoring plots met the Year 3 success criterion of a minimum of 320 stems
per acre after the first growing season. Over the entire project, the survival rate averaged 243
live stems per acre, a survival rate of 54%. Those stems that were planted in 2007 and did not
survive were replaced in 2008. In addition, the stocking level was raised to 450 stems per acre
across the entire site, but due to almost constant inundation, survival was poor. Water oak (Q.
phellos) and Bald Cypress (T. distichum) proved to be the hardiest species. Replacement and
supplemental planting is planned for the winter of 2009. Dead stems will be replaced and the
overall stocking level will be increased to approximately 600 stems per acre. There are few
• options for site maintenance beyond herbaceous competition control to improve tree survival and
herbaceous competition is thought to be a secondary problem. Selecting the most hydric species
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project 9
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year lof 5
Final
for replanting appears to be the best approach to achieving the required stocking levels, because
although there is a cumulative rainfall deficit for the year, the site has remained inundated for all
but approximately 2 of the 8 months in the 2008 growing season. The site was under an average
of 6 inches of water when planting was done in 2008. Water levels on site began to recede in
June, which allowed the herbaceous cover to expand and cause some competition. If it is
possible and if deemed necessary, maintenance of herbaceous competition will take place during
the 2009 growing season
1.2 Vegetation Monitoring Plan View (Integrated)
Figure 4 in Appendix D illustrates the general inadequate survival of planted stock due to
standing water during the planting and growing season.
2.0 Wetland Assessment
The hydrologic success criterion is to achieve a minimum of 21 consecutive days where the
groundwater level is within 12 inches of the soil surface during the growing season. The
growing season for this site is from March 11 to November 27, a period of 261 days (WETS
Table for Belhaven, Beaufort County, NC). Success for any particular monitoring location is to
show soil saturation to within 12 inches of the surface for 21 consecutive days during that period.
Six continuous monitoring gauges were deployed across the site and two more were installed in
• reference areas. All six gauges met the success criteria for the site in 2008 as did the two
reference gauges. The onsite gauges averaged 198 days where the water table was at -12" or
higher as compared to the two reference gauges which averaged 202 days during the growing
season. The hydrologic charts in Appendix C also show that the water level on site remained
above the ground (the zero level on the charts) for extended periods both early and late in the
growing season. The swamp run held water for most of the season as well, as evidenced by the
photos in Appendix A.
2.1 Wetland Discussion and Problem Areas
Drainage from the project area can only occur during times when water levels onsite are high
enough to overcome the level of the retaining structure at the outfall end of the project and the
level of the water beyond the outfall end is low enough to accommodate additional flow which is
dependant on daily tidal fluctuations. This combination causes the site to retain water for long
periods and apparently even during seasons when rainfall is less than average.
The project site was moderately dry for approximately two months during the summer until
Tropical Storm Hannah brought enough rain to inundate the site. It remained either inundated or
saturated for the remainder of the growing season despite low rainfall.
r?
?J
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project 10
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year lof 5
Final
a 2.2 Wetland Monitoring Plan View (Integrated)
As illustrated in figure 4, Appendix D, the site remained very wet for almost the entire growing
season. While this is important for successful hydrology, it creates problems in establishing
woody vegetation. There were no micro-scale problems.
Table VI. Hydrology and Vegetation Criteria Success by Plot
Mason Pro r Wetland Miti ation Pro'ect/EEP #D06001
Well Hydrology Success
Met Hydrology
Mean
Vegetation Plot Vegetation
Success Met Vegetation
Mean
1 Y 1 Y
2 Y 2 Y
3 Y 3 N
4 Y 100% 4 N 50%
5 Y N/A N/A
6 Y N/A N/A
7 Y Re Reference Well Reference Well
8 Y (Ref), I Reference Well Reference Well
3.0 Proiect Success Discussion
Construction and planting on the Mason project was completed early enough in 2007 so that the
project was monitored in that year but due to insufficient planting an official report was not
submitted to EEP. The rainfall data from 2007 indicated moderate to severe drought conditions
which, along with heavy herbaceous cover, caused some tree and shrub mortality. Although
drought conditions continued in 2008 (see Figure P-1 in Appendix D), the Mason site was not as
severely affected. The monitoring gauges and visual inspections throughout the year confirm
that wetland hydrology has been restored. The site was totally inundated for all but
approximately two months of the growing season in 2008.
The result of this constant inundation, however, has created a problem with seedling mortality.
Replacement and supplemental planting was done in winter of 2008 under conditions of constant
standing water. The site remained generally inundated until late spring which did not allow the
planting stock the proper conditions for root establishment and development. Consequently,
additional replacement and supplemental planting is planned for the winter of 2009. Barring
invasive, extensive mechanical site preparation to create elevated root zones, little can be done to
enhance tree survival beyond replanting and herbaceous control if conditions warrant and allow.
III. Methodology Section
Year 1 (baseline) monitoring for the Mason project occurred in 2008. Monitoring and vegetation
sampling procedures were established in the mitigation plan for this project and no deviations
• were made.
Mason Property Wetland Mitigation Project 11
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring -Year tof 5
Final
0
Appendix A
Vegetation Data Tables
Vegetation Photos
is
0
•
•
loop. w
0
0
'
o
?
>
d
U'
d
C
C
o
?
d
b
?
C
m
?
a
A r?
e o
O m
m
a
O ,?
C
T
A
s
14'
m
3
'
'
?.
`
A
!A9
t/ IQ
to
o
c
ti
e
AC
.
A
°
C
?ey b a 4 y o
= m o y a
rA ro b
s
Xo?
y
r* a
A a
A y
A A
?" w.J m
? A
y
A O Z , '7
? D+ ra ? Q C6
rA
H
3 ?
1
y
? x
?• ' f3. ? (OD (?D
A
?
W
V1 yr ?n , tD ? •p ? G'
(D
O
CD CA
y
o c c o °- I o
a Fo .
cr .
c' I
n. ts
CD' ? co 0 0 < ? b ?
tT l
0 (D
o
,
CD
ro
(D CD
N '*
¢ +
N
CL y
5 CD p-
4 co
g
0 y ? ? A
.5 W f1 w' G.
CL
•0
A & Co
X .?•'
Q1
co
V M can
to
C
fD
?D
d
y
m
0
•
•
Table 2. Vigor bS ecies
Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing
Ce halanthus occidentalis 1 1 I
Itea vir ' ica 2
Quercus bicolor I
Quercus hellos I
Taxodium distichum 2 2 2
Unknown 8
M 'ca cerifera 1 2
TOT: 7 4 3 17
Table 3. Dama e b Species
Species All Damage
Categories
no damage)
Site Too Wet
Ce halanthus occidentalis 3 3
Itea vir inica 2 2
M 'ca cerifera 3 3
Quercus bicolor 1 1
Quercus hellos 1 1
Taxodium distichum 6 6
Unknown 8 1 7
TOT: 7 24 16 8
Table 4. Damage b Plot
lot All Damage
Categories
no damage)
Site Too Wet
D06001-ABET-0001 9 6 3
D06001-ABET-0002 8 5 3
D06001-ABET-0003 1 1
D06001-ABET-0004 6 4 2
TOT: 4 24 16 8
C
•
0
Table 5. Stems b Plot and Species
pecies
Total
Planted
Stems
lots
avg#
stems plot
D06001-
ABET-
0001 plot
D06001-
ABET-
0002 plot
D06001-
ABET-
0003 plot
D06001-
ABET-
0004
Cephalanthus
occidentalis
3
2
1.5
1
2
Itea vir inica 2 1 2 2
M 'ca cerifera 3 2 1.5 1 2
uercus bicolor 1 1 1 1
Quercus hellos 1 1 1 1
Taxodium distichum 6 3 2 3 2 1
Unknown 8 3 2.67 3 2 3
TOT: 1 7 24 7 9 8 1 6
Stems per acre 364 324 243 40
Table 6. Vegetation Problem Areas
Feature/Issue Plot Probable Cause Photo #
Poor Survival 3,4 Excessivle Wet VPA 1
Poor Health and
Growth
All
Excessive) Wet
VPA 2, VPA 3
0
•
0
RC 4Y `.V?
I
kit .1r4
f rte',..
VPA 1
Excessively wet conditions
Seat. 08
ec it ?
ti gyn.- r,
VPA 2
Excessively wet conditions during planting
March 08
•
•
E
VPA 4
Excessively wet conditions and heavy herbaceous cover
r
t
IC-1
s i
..
Tb + k
Y i.
N,
VPA 3
Excessively wet conditions during planting
March 08
0
•
Swamp Run 2 months later in Sept. 08
0
0
Swamp Run at driest time of year, July 08
•
•
Plot 1
,.i. au• ?J'1F
r"2TF ?? ern a ? ?,
-t ,
Plot 2
¢'. yal
Vp?
1y I
?
? i j
?2+IrLa , ttr ,. t e. k'
r V« fifi '4, r u.1 1.
0
•
Plot 3
•
0
Plot 4
4 .4
J?,? t
..:,>h? ,? y f
-04
a1j fir.;
a
s ` 3 ya t
v +?,? ? ? i ?., SSA
i?
o .y d
X ?{,.yy?)S d W ?7d1
•
Table C-1. H drolo is Monitoring Results
Gauge
# days within 12" (% of
growing season) # days within 12"
(during growing
season)
Hydrologic Success
1 80% 210 Yes
2 71% 186 Yes
3 79% 206 Yes
4 70% 184 Yes
5 76% 198 Yes
6 77% 201 Yes
7 Ref. Gauge 92% 241 Yes
8 Ref. Gauge 62% 162 Yes
Average for wells 1-6 198 days (76%)
Average for wells 7 & 8 202 days (77%)
•
2007 Reference Precipitation
12
11
C
a i
0
`
'a
v
L
a
-Normal Preciptiation
-Actual Precipitation
Cumulative Deficit
0
•
Appendix B
Geomorphologic Raw Data
Not used in this report
•
0
•
Appendix C
Hydrologic Data Tables
•
n
LJ
•
•
W)
W)
co
co
N
r
r
a?
m
O
C
O
c
O
N
R
(sa43ul) IewJON pue len4oV Ileluleb A143uoW
Un U? u?
N N r ?- O O
I
i
m
U
O a)
N
f0
c
i
U
? t
rn
w
0
c
m
O
M
a)
0, -
00
CO) o
Z5
U
O
CO)
0
rn
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008 j m
w
9/22/2008
O
9/8/2008
8/25/2008 i
c'
8/11/2008
o?
7/28/2008 3
w ?
7/14/2008 I
i o
6/30/2008
6/16/2008 m
U
6/2/2008 in
a?
5/19/2008 'S
5/5/2008
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
o
N CO I.
(zeal) aaejjng puna!D 04 an14e1021 lanai JaIeM
•
(sayoul) IeuUON pue lenl*V Ilel<ulea Aly;uoW
U U?
N N e- r O O
•
co
11
to
co
N
r
N
d
m
O
O
0
N
ea
2
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008
9/22/2008
9/8/2008
8/25/2008
8/11/2008
7/28/2008
m
7/14/2008
6/30/2008
6/16/2008
6/2/2008
5/19/2008
5/5/2008
4/21 /2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
IT
,c
Q:
N
c
O
C
O
ca
W
N
I
I?
I
c
0
i
_>m
w
0
m
U)
a?
cu
i
r' O N M
(zeal) aoe}jng punaE) 01 anlJelaa lana-l JaIeM
U
U
m
m
N
T
T
v
tv)
d
m
C
0
O
0
H
to
(say*ul) Ieu.uON pue len;ob Ilejule}I A14luoW
U? U? U?
N N r r O O
? c
y
Ii U O
I N ?
O W ?
r
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008
9/22/2008
9/8/2008
8/25/2008
8/11/2008
7/28/2008
cv
7/14/2008
6/30/2008
6/16/2008
6/2/2008
5/19/2008
5/5/2008
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
r O r
N ch ,
(1991) 9:)e}jng punojo o; 9Allelatl 19n9-1 JajeM
C
a?
c
O
c
O
I
w
v
a?
i
a)
c
0
m
w
coi
m
m
?I
I'
•
•
N
m
co
N
r
m
ea
O
c
O
c
0
H
C?
G
(sayOul) leu,uoN pue IenjoV Ilejule21 A14;uoW
U? U? U?
lV N ?- ?- C O
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008
9/22/2008
9/8/2008
8/25/2008
8/11/2008
7/28/2008
m
7/14/2008
6/30/2008
6/16/2008
6/2/2008
5/19/2008
5/5/2008
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
c!
'm
a?
c
O
c
0
?I
w?
a?
a?
III
c?
0
mi
wf
U
`I
_I I
C) N Cl)
(1091) aoelung punor!D 01 anlIelab lanai aa;eM
•
(sa43ul) leuuoN pue len;*d lle;ulea A143uoW
U? U? V?
N N r r O O
•
m
w
0
0
00
T
T
v
W)
d
O
O
g
c
O
N
2
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
?i
10/6/2008
I?
a)
9/22/2008 w
c
O
9/8/2008 I
8/25/2008 Ic
'm
I >
8/11/2008 w
v
a)
7/28/2008
7/14/2008
O
6/30/2008 = '
= I
as
a?
6/16/2008 aa)
UI
6/2/2008 )
a?
w
5/19/2008
? co
5/5/2008 I
J
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
O r N cn
(1991) a:)ejjng puna!D 01 anlJelaa lana-l Ja;eM
•
(sG43ul) leuuoN pue len;od Ilejuleb A14luoW
Un Un U?
N N O O
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
•
0
0
OD
m
O
0
O
C
O
N
t6
G
10/6/2008
Q:
9/22/2008
0.
9/8/2008 I
8/25/2008 ci
:rz
m
8/11/2008 w
7/28/2008
7/14/2008 I
6/30/2008 C
O
>I
m?
6/16/2008
U
6/2/2008 cin
a?
5/19/2008
i m
5/5/2008 I
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
•
3/10/2008
IT
N r O r N ch
(laal) soepng punaE) of anlleft Iana-I J04eM
? 0
•
•
N
a)
as
0
co
r
ti d
? C1
3
e? d
? v
c
c L
O
? O
O
c
O
H
CR
L
(sa43ul) IeuuoN pue len;:)d Ile te21 A143uoW
Q? 4? U?
N N r r O O
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008
9/22/2008
9/8/2008
8/25/2008
8/11/2008
7/28/2008
7/14/2008
6/30/2008
6/16/2008
6/2/2008
5/19/2008
5/5/2008
4/21 /2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
IT
,c
m
a?
w
.N
Ic
O
c
0
cc
(D
a?
?i
I
S?f
co
a?
W-
0 I
(0
N
I
O r' N M
(;eel) aaejjng punoj!D o; anlieloN lana-1 JaJeM
? 0
•
•
N
O
0
0
ao a
CM
'nom ?
V V
O
O
c
O
N
R
2
(sayou!) IewJON pue len;od Ile;ulea A14iuoW
U? U? U?
N N r O O
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008
9/22/2008
9/8/2008
8/25/2008
8/11/2008
7/28/2008
d
7/14/2008
6/30/2008
6/16/2008
6/2/2008
5/19/2008
5/5/2008
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
V
i
c
'm
Q:
:N
c
O
o
'm
w
O'
a)
0
a)
w
a?
U
N
7
a?
m
I?
N M
(;aal) eoepng puna!D o; and;elaa lanai Ja;eM
•
Appendix D
Problem Areas Plan View (Integrated)
11
0
C 090) # y9.+lho- j ?°7•UOI?•Ool4 No--. r%L-zee (Olt) W.4 OOec-zee (ow) zeer-csc ME) xv3 erzo scc (zsz)
yNl'O?f? N y0N h1N G? ?QJd 1. -
i "MLZ v-if-n tinwlw?r • via nn wvpe rozI • s -e 'O 'd aeecz ON SlW31V9 • pus IN= ro?
rte
1 .
?f 'U0Nujoaaaa wooils NOLkV3NO 1VIIeVN 3inQllM v
0 0( ? ?SAS( ?` 1
t t oP uopoeio Puo?3aM 8 leaJoj NOLLV2101S3a WV32LLS
;ir?'?NO??Juiwaw';wva i NGN I
i •u6lea0 8 fiullllwwod ' uplncu03 WluawuoJlsu3 'NOLLYNOIS38 ONYU3M
000Zd? BV nON
Sdlad Uoad ?)M 0, 91
?,1IW af dvW Vd??,1?M ?NIa?AI?
11111?-51? NOI11?
' J N / ??NOI 00?
?7 `SNOlIV801S38 3?aVkVaJMV
WWM NOM
O
U
N
0
? O
z
? z
x O
z
9 0 0