20060981 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_20090212

06-0M
• Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project
Martin County, NC
2008 Annual Monitoring Report
Year 2
•
NCEEP Project Number D050241
Roanoke River Basin
0
Submitted to
NCDENR/Ecosystem Enhancement Program
2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604 ' Yo `
Via!
Date: December, 2008 FEB 200 ?
Monitoring: DENk ,;, -0) U I Y
1AVLANDSAND STORP'ik?:1TEF
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
P. O. Box 176
Fairfield, NC 27826
l} ()? T Stelll

Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project
Martin County, NC
2008 Annual Monitoring Report
Year 2

NCEEP Project Number D050241
Roanoke 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
1
vt?
't1S tell]
'?'
•
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 ............................................... 3
5.0 Monitoring Plan View ........................................................... 7
II. Project Condition and Monitoring Results .................................................. 10
1.0 Vegetation Assessment ......................................................... 10
1.1 Vegetation Discussion and Problem Areas ....................................11
1.2 Vegetation Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) ...............................11
2.0 Wetland Assessment .............................................................11
2.1 Wetland Discussion and Problem Areas .......................................12
2.2 Wetland Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) ..................................12
3.0 Project Success Discussion ......................................................13
III. Methodology Section ..........................................................................13
List of Tables
n
U
Table ES-l. Project Success Summary ..........................................................2
Table I. Project Restoration Components .......................................................3
Table II. Project Activity and Reporting History ...............................................4
Table III. Project Contacts ........................................................................6
Table IV. Project Background ....................................................................6
Table V. Species for Each Community Type ..................................................10
Table Vi. Hydrology and Vegetation Success by Plot ...................................... 12
Table C-1 Hydrologic Monitoring Results ......................................... Appendix C
List of Figures
Figure 1. Composite Vicinity Map ............................................................... 5
Figure 2. Monitoring Plan View: Gauges and Vegetation Plots ............................. 8
Figure 3. Monitoring Plan View: Soils, Contours and Plant Communities ................. 9
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. Monitoring Plan View (Integrated)
ii
• Executive Summary
The Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Site is a riverine wetland project located on Poplar
Chapel Road near Jamesville, in Martin County, North Carolina. It was constructed by
Albemarle Restorations, LLC, under contract with EEP to provide compensatory wetland
mitigation credits in the Roanoke River Basin. Construction activities, in accordance with the
approved restoration plan, began October 13, 2006, and were completed on March 12, 2007.
Tree and shrub planting on the project site occurred between April 1St and 4th, 2007. An emergent
wetland seed mixture was sown at the end of April, 2007. The planting plan produced three
distinct plant communities. The lowest, wettest zone which surrounds the drainage course is an
emergent wetland community dominated by hydrophytic herbaceous species. The next step up
in the flood plain is a shrub/scrub zone planted with woody shrubs and trees. The highest and
largest community is a forested wetland ecosystem consisting of both trees and woody shrubs.
All planting was done in accordance with the approved restoration plan.
Four water level monitoring gauges were installed on April 23, 2007 at varying elevations
throughout the site to measure subsurface water elevations. Three additional backup gauges were
installed in September of 2007, two onsite and one offsite. The three backup gauges were
installed upon recommendations of EEP personnel in case of failure of one of the primary
gauges. This year, two of the six onsite 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. Of the gauges that were not successful, gauges 3 and 6 experienced
• hydroperiods of 27 and 37 days respectively, but each was interrupted by short periods where the
water level briefly fell below the -12" required level for success. Gauge 4 experienced a 16-day
hydroperiod in April. The average number of days when groundwater was at -12" or higher
across the site increased from 10 days in 2007 to 79 days in 2008, evidence that the soils are
regaining wetland functions. Though there were few occasions of heavy rainfall, groundwater
levels responded rapidly to precipitation but due to infrequency, the levels were not sustained
long enough to give complete hydrology success. Evidence of active water and debris movement
in and around the drainage course was observed during a site inspection in September of 2008.
Four vegetative monitoring plots were installed and permanently monumented, one coincident
with each of the original monitoring gauges, such that both forested and shrub/scrub vegetative
communities are represented. Each plot is a 10m X 10m square, as recommended by the CVS-
EEP Protocol for recording vegetation sampling. After poor survival in 2007, the site received
both replacement and supplemental planting in the winter of 2008. All four plots met the year 3
success criterion of 320 living planted stems per acre, a success rate of 100%.

Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 1
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
• 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-l. Project Success Summa

Gau a
Percent Vegetation
Plot
Percent
1 2 3 4 5 6 Success 1 2 3 4 Success
Year 1 2007 Success N N N N N N 0% Y N N IN 25%
Year 2 2008 Success N Y N N Y N 33% Y Y Y Y 100%
1. Proiect Background
1.0 Proiect Obiectives
The goal of the Modlin Property Mitigation Project was to create a riverine wetland system
typically found in the middle to upper reaches of first or zero order tributary systems. The
project is to serve as compensation for wetland loss in the Roanoke River Basin. The mitigation
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 Type, and Approach
Table I lists the estimated wetland acreage to be restored on the Modlin Property. The mitigation
plan provides for the restoration of 40.0 acres of riverine wetlands. Prior to construction, the
40.0 acre easement area was used entirely for row crop agriculture, primarily soy beans and
cotton. A drainage ditch, built in the 1970's, divided the project area and provided drainage of
the seasonally high water table to allow the agricultural uses. Construction activities, in
accordance with the approved restoration plan, began in October, 2006 with the removal of
existing hedgerows from within the project area. Some of the whole trees found in the
• hedgerows were placed along the length of the restored swamp run to facilitate water retention
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 2
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
• and to provide wildlife habitat. Also included as part of the water retention strategy is a low
berm, approximately three quarters of the way down the swamp run that functions like a natural
ridge within a swamp by creating a "pinch-point", which helps create back-flooding across the
restored floodplain. In its entirety, the project functions as a broad hardwood flat that is subject
to seasonal periodic flooding. The lower end of the swamp run retains water for longer periods
which contributes to the vegetation diversity, as does the increase in site elevation moving
laterally away from the run. Other topographical features include vernal pools that remain
flooded or wet for most of the year.
Table I. Project Restoration Components
Modlin Pro ert Wetland Miti ad n Site/EEP #D050241
Post Wetland
Restoration Pre-Existing Construction Credit Ratio Mitigation
Type Acreage Acreage WMU Units
Riverine Wetland 0.0 40.0 1:1 40.0
Total 40.0
3.0 Location and Setting
The Modlin Property Mitigation Site is located in Martin County, approximately 4.5 miles
southeast of Jamesville, NC on Poplar Chapel Road. The easement area is situated in the middle
of the Modlin property, also known locally as the Cooper Swamp Farm and lies along the mid
and upper reaches of an unnamed tributary to Cooper Swamp. Downstream from this site, the
tributary flows almost exclusively through wooded areas containing extensive wetland
communities before emptying into the main run of Cooper Swamp. The surrounding area is
primarily forest and agricultural land with residential properties as a minor component.
Figure 1 is a location map for the project site. Directions to the site are as follows: travel east
from Jamesville on US Hwy 64 approximately 3.8 miles and turn right (south) on Poplar Chapel
Rd. Access to the site is approximately 1.5 miles south of US Hwy 64, on the left via a farm
path.
4.0 Proiect History and Background
Table II provides the history of data collection and actual completion of various milestones of
the Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Site.
•
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 3
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
•
•
•
Table Il. Project Activity and Reporting History
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Pro'ct/EEP D050241

Activity or Report Data Collection
Complete Actual Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan Feb. 2006 June 2006
Final Design -90% Feb. 2006 June 2006
Construction N/A March 2007
Temporary S & E mix applied to entire project area N/A Aril 2007
Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area N/A Aril 2007
Containerized and Bare Root Plantin N/A Aril 2007
Mitigation Plan/As-built (Year 1 monitoring - baseline) Oct. 2007 December 2007
Year 2 monitoring September 2007 December 2007
Year 3 monitoring
Year 4 monitoring
Year 5 monitoring
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 4
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
ww•ay.wi?iol4 PW-° EML-reg (Olt) ¦°j oOfL-Leg (010 raft-19C (LSZ) xvi Hro-fff (r11r)
-?Z0606 ; NU7 d?? I MIZ PQ'P'N "I0W1101W • P-V IYfl y'PPB IMI •g "9 '0•d KOLE ON '3TINsavo • imms iww tot
AMY NIKON WO) NI1dv'dl! U0110JOI°°N WO°ils NO v3NO 1VIIGYH 3in(nvA v
111?I I Isb4? V ljt l?;ll??? / } uB 6ull?w?J°PuolIu°Mn°V 1°° U°WUO?
Iv°4 1P Rll d 6 Illuo 1O3 Nu3 NOLLVWiS3N ONVl13M
S L ?? l
9COZAIMWV " NIA AZM NOMIUW QNCIR INIMAIJ
3NO1,0D? e
hldIJDad NI'lQOW 'Dq 01-7 `SN071 b 2101S321 3l2/HW213fl1
?wulNw? ? -
^'l 'A.'J u?'dd?: IQd'Id
Ill ? _ ... _w-??" ? ?' .ate f? ... - ?11r
l'1 f j 1 ?
Y j lQ - 1 ? ? [f` S?
1 `? s ? ll z O
r
?: 1L? ... frrf S f •1?':.. L ? N ? ??
f 1t? G 6
/ w / o a
L, ,.? .i .. •e' S o U
V\A
n1 Z L ?4
A'
f
• ? ?e•??f ? r,l _ ? ? oo S ; ? !Z
9 ? i f ? t I ? N ,? s i1 _U
f + f a
4
4?? o
J + ?
LP N
:J >t ? ? a J% tit 5? 6 3
A/ L
son
ij L'
p ?u
' Y . 11f 1} o n
Q O c u p
rs lr?. ??, Y - 1lt r°r r 4,-
;L
r L i .ate»bv U
.• #
It 4,
1 Vrl # O
f
75
1 ?
i •.
I
Y t(? 1 1'r U 7? 4-
.?7 '7n rn 73
€? ' _ _ .... .^t, - f t •1 t 1 ' (? r . 1 h ?i,?\y. ??,rf O 4- -1
32' E
._ r
V. ' 1 t' 1
y _ J. S
wn Q
V <
S s i O
--A VF ?J
a ? 1 1 ?
i
• lA t a d
•
. 4 ? ? 1? S ._ { 'f .',.,n `4! _A•-•M14r'?w"'TI-?-- ? . ,.?T.... ". ^' ?,
,
.r
j(j , _
?

•
L
•
Points of contact for the various phases of the MPWMS are provided in Table III.
Table III. Project Contacts
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Site/EEP #D050241
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
Miliville, 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 252482-8491)
Seed mix sources Earnst Conservation Seeds, LLP, Meadville, PA
Nurse stock suppliers Williams Forestry 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)
Project background information for the MPWMS is provided in Table IV
Table IV. Project Background
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Site/EEP #D050241
Project County Martin County
Drainage Area 40.0 acres within easement boundary.
Drainage impervious cover estimate 0
Ph sio hic Region 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 Bethera loam, Lenoir loam
Reference site ID Cooper Swam , Martin County, NC
USGS HUC for Project and Reference 03010107
NCDWQ Sub-basin for Project and Reference 03-02-09
NCDW classification for Project and Reference C
An portion of any ro'ect segment 303d listed? No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a 303d listed
-segment?
No
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor? N/A
of project easement fenced Gate at access path
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 6
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
• 5.0 Monitoring Plan View
There are six water level monitors installed at key locations across the property. These loggers
are suspended in two-inch pvc pipe that is set approximately four feet vertically into the ground.
The loggers have been located to assess the groundwater levels throughout the year at various
elevations and topographies within the site. In addition, there is a rain gauge on site to capture
and record onsite precipitation.
Vegetation monitoring is accomplished by resurveying the four permanent sampling plots. Each
plot is referenced by a monitoring gauge which serves 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.
•
E
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 7
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
bZ0606 # 1 M1NO d3J PW- co9L-E09 (Olt) -j eo9L-LEo (Olt) zm-LOC (LSL) xvi erzo-m (ESL)
i I 1901E P-?-N tilWll?+?l• PWH INA 4-PPS *0Zl •S -9 .1.1 9[9LZ ON JnVSMVO • 133ULS 1N(g0 tot
V410d)QOWA1NU)NQN6 lO.) I u011010189a wooilS q
1a11r11 1 7, NO VNO NOIS38 3i 8 ff- V uoll010jo Puo9laV1 lppjo NOLLVNOlS3l1 Wd3&S
1 "" S??id?Jh i'u61pp4 ?PBullluupd ulllneuo3 101upwuaNu3 'NOLLYtlOlS3iJ ONYlU3
13M vj
9O( )Z a AIAON 1^JX-N N011'601 QNVIV '%XAlc'' 3N0.10D3 017 `9N0l-LVY01S3Y 3lYVH 139-lV ,
Wld NO?WVIA A ?11'W WW?W RIJOA Lw?m -
z a z Q
z
S
o ???1? a? I I i
IT
? LkG
to
5 E <3 d.
in \\
ad'
I
C
N O? 1
N 1 I
N
K ? K1
IK\NK\? rcvv z? I
S S? ?s l 1 l -
?I T? \Z lz?z
°
nr ?
0.7 ° i V f SZ
oNV-ON T
?? O '??? 111 ' ( ,?1 x
I I -_
In 75
I
I
t
i
- ?? /- Yawb
5f 1 ?! J/l / v
\ z , M
l ?V,
-'#
ill" z?z ? ?
`'
xSl?u, \
i.
0 0 0
ww k"Wt?l4 row-. 0091-169 (010) ¦uj -0091-Z69 (M) raft-19f (Egg) xVd 4no-m (m)
bZO?OQ '# 17N?1N0? d'a k I MIZ PwKI m ?IIW1Y? • Pma Ian wpo roll •9 Moe •0•d 9ce19 ON Irmsmyo • Lmms imm to
AWN) "N AU) NjNfi j ??? ????C)?r U011DJolsom wuaAs
N i NO Y3N0 1VlIBVN 3dnalVA ?
J ^ ) u8 as UOI10orJ Puo?loM u'NOLLVll0L WV38,S C?
S ?OG4 i j 0 W bu1331uUJod ullVwuuO 10)uawuouNu3 'NOILVNOlS32! ONY113M ?.?
9002?W ON JlW-5VNOIZAJNVI M AXAIC'; ?? f ???????? 31? `SN0l-LVS01S33 3.72IVNYIRIV
-'t ':A? Q1Ndd?? Nd
z
N N IV
LS ?S ? l
4
#
C_ i •s ' I i
1
I
r ? o 0
1 ti-
. a _
??? # i P iy J
.? i
i, 1 #
i '1 Ji +
j
i I
i J•y .. # 1
,# 1 1 `
V • t\ - V
;- ` 5 10
i V
l flzcr? •. xi' • . ? ? ?z ?1
to
w i > u z# 3 # f 5 ?(1
f y
y ,
,r
f v
2 y,/
\ o . ?... of n
?jj
•
o -z
o. /
v ?LS?s ?S ?
• II. Proiect Condition and Monitoring Results
1.0 Vegetation Assessment
•
•
The vegetation success criterion was developed in accordance with the CVS-EEP protocol. The
Modlin project was planned to include various plant communities. The Palustrine emergent
(PEM) wetland zone immediately adjacent to the drainage course and other isolated depressions
are populated by vegetation consisting primarily of herbaceous material, grasses, sedges and
other hydrophytic plants. The photos in Appendix A show both the colonization of this area by
appropriate vegetation and the frequent, almost constant ponding of surface water over much of
the zone. Beyond the emergent zone is the Palustrine shrub/scrub (PSS) community consisting
of a mixture of woody shrubs interspersed with trees. The emphasis in this zone is on the
shorter, scrubby vegetation typical of lower areas of native branch bottoms and poorly drained,
broad hardwood flats. The outer, largest Palustrine forested (PFO) zone was planted to a mixture
of trees and shrubs, but with the emphasis on trees. The species mix was based on the
vegetation noted at the two reference sites and all species are classified from FAC to OBL (Table
V). The site was planted at a rate of 350 stems per acre in the spring of 2007. Due to poor
survival attributed to the drought conditions experienced during the first growing season,
replacement planting and supplemental planting took place in the winter of 2008. The species
used were chosen from Table V.
Table V. Species b Community Type
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Pro'ecVEEP #D050241
Forested Wetland 18.5 Acres
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum OBL
Red Maple Acer rubrum FAC W-
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 uercus ni a FAC
Hi hbush Blueberry Vaccinium co bosum FACW
Swam C illa C ilia racemiflora FACW
Sweet Pe erbush Clethra alnifolia FACW
Virginia Sweets ire Itea vir inica FACW+
Button Bush Ce halanthus occidentalis OBL
Shrub/Scrub 11.85 Acres
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status
Button Bush Ce halanthus occidentalis OBL
Tag Alder Alnus serrulata FACW
Wax Myrtle M ica cerifera FAC+
Black Willow Salix ni a OBL
Gallberry Ilex labra FACW
Swam C rilla C illa racemiflora FAC W
Hi hbush Bluebe Vaccinium co bosum FACW
Sweetba Magnolia vir imana FACW+
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 10
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
• 1.1 Vegetation Discussion and Problem Areas
All four plots met the Year 3 success criteria of a minimum of 320 stems per acre after the
second growing season. Over the entire project, the survival rate averaged 607 live stems per
acre. A total of 11 different species were tallied in September of 2008. Willow oak (Q. phellos)
and Bald Cypress (T. distichum) showed the best survival rates.
Rainfall data for the area show the rainfall drought continues. For the period from March 1,
2008 through November 30, 2008, there was a cumulative rainfall deficit of 9.34 inches. This
deficit occurred during the time of year when evapotranspiration rates were at their annual peak.
The lack of rainfall continued to have a severe effect on seedling development as the stock
planted in 2008 exhibited generally poor health overall. As can be seen in general site photos in
Appendix A, the project area continues to support a complete and heavy ground cover of
herbaceous material that may contribute to the poor survival of planted woody material through
competition for scarce soil moisture in the root zone of the very upper soil horizon.
There are no obvious micro scale problem areas. Although the problem of seedling survival
appears to be under control, the droughty conditions affected both the shrub/scrub and the
forested communities in a broad way. The emergent zone faired the best as it was able to retain
moisture for longer periods after rainfall due to drainage patterns and its lower elevation. While
walking the site, some volunteer tree species were observed such as sweetgum (L. styraciflua),
FAC+ and red maple (A. rubrum), FAC. There is a sufficient seed wall on two sides of the
• project site that should continue to supply volunteer seed.
1.2 Vegetation Monitoring Plan View (Integrated)
Figure 4 in Appendix D illustrates the dryer areas of the site where the observed herbaceous
cover was much lighter. Seedling survival in these areas was good, though growth was minimal
even on two-year-old stock. There was better growth on two-year-old stock, in the lower wetter
areas even where the herbaceous cover is extremely dense and tall.
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 10 to November 20, a period of 255 days (WETS
Table for Williamston, Martin 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.
There are six continuous water level monitoring devices deployed across the site (Gauges 1-6) to
monitor fluctuations in the water table within the project area. A rain gauge is also kept onsite
and its data are compared to that collected at the NOAA cooperator site in Willimaston, NC. To
further gauge the affect of seasonal and annual variations in precipitation in restored wetlands,
hydrologic success of the site was assessed in relation to the reference wetland site (Gauge 7).
U
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 11
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
• 2.1 Wetland Discussion and Problem Areas
Combined rainfall in March and April was above normal due to a single rain event in April that
totaled 2.76". This one prolonged event recharged the water table, but subsequent rainfall was
insufficient in both duration and frequency to maintain it. Beginning in May rainfall fell into a
deficit that increased as the growing season progressed, finally totaling 9.34" for the period
between March 1, and November 30, 2008. June was a particularly dry month with only 1" of
onsite rainfall as opposed to the expected normal 4.55".
The wetland problem areas are generally the floodplains out beyond the drainage course. The
lower areas of the emergent zone were able to retain water for longer periods, but the upper
reaches of the floodplain were not due to lack of rainfall. The hydrographs in Appendix C show
the how the soil moisture levels recharged quickly after rainfall but a high water table was not
maintained due to insufficient frequency and duration of rainfall. Gauges 2 and 5, both of which
are within the boundaries of the drainage course, achieved hydrologic success with a hydroperiod
in excess of the minimum 21 consecutive days. Gauge 6 measured a hydroperiod of 18
consecutive days. The longest hydroperiods measured by gauges 3 and 4 were 15 and 16 days
respectively. These hydroperiods all occurred from March to May before rainfall events became
sporadic and light.
2.2 Wetland Monitoring Plan View (Integrated)
• Figure 4 in Appendix D provides an overview of the site. The area shaded in yellow on the plan
view indicates the driest areas during the growing season which was mostly the forest plant
community. Much of the emergent zone was inundated for some time during the growing season
as evidenced by the site photos in Appendix A. There was evidence of debris movement at the
internal berm toward the outfall end of the project. This berm slows the movement of water
offsite and appears to be functioning properly as evidenced by the deposition of woody debris at
its lowest spot in the berm. In contrast, those areas higher in the flood plain remained somewhat
droughty for most of the summer and fall.
Table VI. Hydrology and Vegetation Criteria Success by Plot
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Pro'ect/EEP #D050241

Gauge
Hydrology Success Met Hydrology
Mean Vegetation
Plot Vegetation
Success Met Vegetation
Mean
1 N 1 Y
2 Y 2 Y
3 N 3 Y
4 N 33% 4 Y 100%
5 Y N/A N/A
6 N N/A N/A
7 (Ref) Y* N/A N/A
*Gauge 7 is on the reference site
LJ
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 12
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
• 3.0 Project Success Discussion
In the time since the Modlin site was restored, the Jamesville area has been almost continuously
classified as being in a moderate to severe rainfall drought according to the United States
Drought Monitor. Because of the drought conditions, the groundwater table has been below
normal, thereby hindering normal wetland hydrology from becoming established on the site. But
the data suggest likely success in the event of normal precipitation. The success criterion for
hydrology is based on 8% of the growing season (21 out of 255 days). Two of the groundwater
monitoring gauges (#2 and #5) did meet the success criterion and three others met the USACE
minimum wetland hydroperiod of 5%. Gauge 3 measured a 15-day hydroperiod in April, 2008
(5.9%), Gauge 4 measured a 16-day hydroperiod in April, 2008 (6.3%), and Gauge 6 measured
an 18-day hydroperiod (7.0%). Table C-1 in Appendix C illustrates the dramatic increase from
the previous year in the number of days that groundwater levels held at -12" or greater, despite
the rainfall drought that only moderated by 3.9" during the growing season (compared to the
2007 growing season). Despite not meeting the 8% success criterion (21 out of 255 days),
technical hydrologic success of 5% (13 out of 255 days) was met in all but one gauge (Gauge 1).
The site is regaining wetland functions, showing rapid recharge of groundwater, and longer
hydroperiods.
Vegetation criteria have been met for monitoring year 2, with 100% of surveyed plant material
being FAC or wetter. The survival of the planted species, colonization of the site by wetland
• pioneer species, and the presence of herbaceous hydrophytes indicates that although wetland
hydrology parameters have not been met for the year for three of the gauges, the data suggests
wetland hydrology will be met in a year of normal precipitation.
III. MethodoloQV Section
Year 2 monitoring for the Modlin project occurred in 2008. Monitoring and vegetation sampling
procedures were established in the mitigation plan for this project and no deviations were made.
•
Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 13
Albemarle Restorations, LLC
2008 Monitoring - Year 2 of 5
Final
•
Appendix A
Vegetation Data Tables
Vegetation Photos
•
0
•
•
•

p ?J

p
0

D
o

?
o

1?.

y

I
0

y
°
0
0
0

C

C

c

0
w

0
^'

??

?

O
O

d
m

?
A
w
? 7d
O d
? ? n d d r ??t ?
~ r ?c?r c?•? ,?,7i -- y
m ?
CL O
? A p
C ? ? N
,•. cD (
D in
,••' ? ?'
A ?'
A G. Cyr Q` ]"
R
O N O. '* w w ?pn c?D +cpD M y ? ?
o-'3 N ?

?.A A O
CL O
p

y v", N tD'

A
00
cp ' C C '.
vi
vi
v. N
p, .
.. CD
N
?? j
O

coo Or a'
a ° 1
7
. . ?y n n' pp
H
w
C
?
0
<
<
y ?y-
7

,A'
'•?•'
CD
CD CD
A
O
O
a y
b
" F?
Crf

a o o w y o ' O
y C Z

y (D OrD
o

,
Z
-3
C
D CD

?. ?5•
y
y. ^*

O
. 0 y (D C
CO C1. p r?

S
A 102.
<
'
~
Z a k
f7 CD y

S3 j CD

CD ? .d
a
C
y
'
o
w CL
n
a fD ? ?
a cr
w
a ? a 0

vQ sy

CD O

r
ID
fill
V
d
Q
•

Table 2. Vegetation Vigor bSpecies
Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing
Alnus serrulata I
C 71a racemiflora 1
Ilex labra 3
N ssa biflora 1
uercus bicolor 5 1 1
uercus hellos 12 9
Salix ni a 1
Taxodium distichum 12
Vaccinium co mbosum 4 2
Magnolia vir iniana 4 1
Acer rubrum 3
Unknown 1 1
M ica cerifera 1 I
TOTAL: 13 1 33 26 3 2
Table 3. Vegetation Damage b Species
Species All Damage Categories no dame e
Acer rubrum 3 3
Alnus serrulata 1 1
C illa racemiflora 1 1
Ilex labra 3 3
- -Magnolia vir iniana 5 5
M ica cerifera 2 2
N ssa biflora 1 1
ercus bicolor 7 7
Quercus hellos 21 21
Salix ni a 1 1
Taxodium distichum 12 12
Unknown 2 2
Vaccinium co mbosum 6 6
TOT: 13 65 65
Table 4. Vegetation Damage b Plot
lot All Damage Categories no damage)
D050241-ABET-0001-year: 1 15 15
D050241-ABET-0002-year: 1 18 18
0241-ABET-0003-year: 1 17 17
D050241-ABET-0004-year: 1 15 15
TOT: 4 65 65
?J
E
•
Table 5. Stem Count b Plot and Species

pecies

Total
Planted
Stems

#

lots

vg#
stems plot
D050241-
ABET-
0001-
ear:2 plot
D050241-
ABET-
0002-
ear:2 plot
13050241-
ABET-
0003-
ear:2 plot
D050241-
ABET-
0004-
ear:2
Acer rubrum 3 1 3 3
Alnus serrulata 1 1 1 1
C illa racemiflora 1 1 1 1
Ilex labra 3 2 1.5 2 1
Magnolia vir iniana 5 2 2.5 3 2
M 'ca cerifera 2 1 2 2
N ssa biflora 1 1 1 1
uercus bicolor 5 2 2.5 4 1
Quercus hellos 21 4 5.25 3 2 9 7
Taxodium distichum 12 3 4 2 7 3
Vaccinium
co bosom
6
3
2
1
1
4
TOT: 11 60 11 15 15 15 15
Stems per acre 607 607 607 607
Table 6. Vegetation Problem Areas
Feature/Issue Plot Probable Cause Photo #
Herbaceous Dense herbaceous
competition/Poor to cover, insufficient
moderate growth All rainfall VPA 1, 2 and 3
0
r1
LJ
2. Vegetation Problem Area Photos
VPA 1
Indicative of lower elevations on site
t

a
•
0
V ,tray

V Ch R??,,Jp, 4l. ". },
kwi 'y/i, ?yY'
J:X °Yx ,y4 iXr '" l >'?,'°l,,,w •t t*
? a q£•. e; : '`7' iw "?
y
w ?.c 'g r Abp', 1*???yo -rt?`,aC? "+ 'fi`t ?' ^? kcr', e
.q t3 S W .M Y i ? ? ?."? ¦ ? AM. ?. i F Yti
w •?` ? .tiff , z,?;° ?y '°.,? ? ?J ?y?s yf?:'? ` ? i 11,
: ?lam 1. i.' a'' - ,.• r x'`?`. ' "x?/? `1r''? d - . ?.h?'xx'.,/,? w 5 ??
VPA 2
Indicative of lower elevations on site (Sept. 08)
? } 'R1
1 µ
°
M
s mod` ?•/'?: -. yr ; a - n
vZ-
A t s '?. .?r ~Jx r: F,w?aPf?S. yy $ t'y°
a
F?la.7.` y" V".- w '?`:`'X' "K ,rb!':. "? ??•.: E a„?3 a'k ?'?? +?i??'qa
1«' ? ? A Ott, a ??/ . 4 yi ? •rf,? A 1'd ?/ le6.K ?_ Y;?vF J}' '*'. ?F,"
,. W 6
t hK y 4
r
r:
VPA 3
Indicative of upper, dryer elevations on site (Sept. 08)

Y?Y
. I F , 13

i

• 3. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Plot 1
¦
d? At
y
r .g$yp
Y 4 1V"' ??, y rp? f
0
?` Y1• 4-
+ v
•
•
Yk ?a

Plot 2
Plot 3

?
•
•
•
Plot 4
v" t ti I; r t

0
•
•
0
A bb

y.
Early Season Flooding (April 2008)
?.
AN,
,f ,) M Skz.
ad
•
0
0
Early Summer (July 2008)
flb j. aw
i'a,.

•

Early Summer July (2008)
I

k4

S
a2`
k 4
?`f a Y tk ,
? r? ,
•
Appendix B
Geomorphologic Raw Data
Not used in this report
•
0
•
Appendix C
Hydrologic Data Tables
•
0
•
10
•
LO
co
co
N
r
m
O
c?
O
O
2
c
O
(SO4oul) Sju0n311e1<uleki
M N N r ?-
O O
1
C

0
rn
r --
o i

I

? 1 -

i
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008 m
C
cc
9/22/2008 aa)
Y
N
9/8/2008 0
I
8/25/2008 c
O
>
8/11/2008 0
w
7/28/2008
r ?
7/14/2008 p I
6/30/2008 0
ia!
a?
6/16/2008 w
a>
U
a3
6/2/2008
m
5/19/2008
5/5/2008 I
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
r O r
N IT
(jeel) eoe}ing punoa jD 04 GA14810H lanai J04eM

? 0
•
M
W)
co
co
N
v
N
c?
O
c
O
C
'v
CO
G
(S040ul) s4uan3 IleJulea
I
M N N r r
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 p
6/30/2008
6/16/2008
6/2/2008
5/19/2008
5/5/2008
4/21/2008
417/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
m
c
c
O
0
m
>
w
v
m
a?
III
c
0
m
w
U
Im
m
N
m
i
r O ?- N co
(Joel) 93e}jng punoa!D 01 anl;elGN lana-l JaleM
•
•

cc
m
N
M
d
ns
O
O
c
O

(S043ul) e;u9n3 Ile;idea
M 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 p
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 M
(1981) eoejjng punojE) 04 enl;e19a Iene-1 J84em
•

0
a
co
co
N
T
T
?r
d
ea
L
O
O
c
.a
O
2
r O t N M
(3991) aoejjnS punoj jD of GAIleIGN Iana-1 Ja;eM
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
a?
7/14/2008 p
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
r
c
O
s
Ali
o!
N
>
wi
a?
N
w,
?I
m
m
w
(D
U
U)
a? I
i
(SG43UI) s;uan3 Ile;UIL-N
co N N r r O
•

r?
L
n
o
0
0
co
T
T_
0
d
vs
c?
O
O
c
.a
O
2
(S043UI)SIuan3 Ilejuletl
M N N r
O O

l U

CD

L
",-rkp4Ci,c`A'A

Q

CO
U

c
o

(fl - _?
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008 m
c
co
9/22/2008 a?
0
9/8/2008 p
8/25/2008 c
0
>
8/11/2008 w
a"Di
7/28/2008
7/14/2008 p I
6/30/2008 0
'm
>
a?
6/16/2008 w
a?
I U i
(6
6/2/2008
L
5/19/2008 m
5/5/2008 III
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
o N M I.
(zeal) aaejjng punojE) o; anllelaa lana-1 J048M
•
(s04:)ui) s;u0A3 Ile;uiea
?n LO U?
M N N e- r- O O
•
•
0
0
0
co
ca
m
R
c
L
c
O
c
V
O
2
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008 ? 3-2
c
m
9/22/2008 N

c
O
9/8/2008
8/25/2008
o
m
8/11/2008
Wi

7/28/2008
(D

7/14/2008 p I
6/30/2008 0

m
6/16/2008 W
U
U
6/2/2008

W I
5/19/2008
5/5/2008
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
IT
O r N M
(Joel) aoe}jng punaE) 01 OAII810N J0n0J J04eM
•
(sayaul) s;uaA311e;u1e21
M N N r r O O
r 1
U
•
0
0
co
r
? O
d
c?
C9 ?
0) d
c
.` c
o i
c m
O
2
C
O
11/17/2008
11/3/2008
10/20/2008
10/6/2008 4-
1.c
m
9/22/2008 a)
.N
c
9/8/2008 0
1
8/25/2008 c
0
w
m

8/11/2008 I>
w
a?
7/28/2008 s

7/14/2008 p
6/30/2008 0
m
>
0
6/16/2008 w
a?

6/2/2008

m
5/19/2008
5/5/2008 I
4/21/2008
4/7/2008
3/24/2008
3/10/2008
IT
N M
(;aa;) aoe}ing punaE) 01 anl;elaa lana-1 aa;eM
•
Table C-1. Hydrologic Monitorin Results

auge % of growing
season water
level within
12" of
surface
# days during
growing season water
level within 12" of
surface

urrent Year
Hydrologic Success
Current Year Year 1
1 15% 37 6 No
2 52% 133 32 Yes
3 25% 65 1 No
4 26% 67 2 No
5 35% 90 n/a Yes
6 36% 83 n/a No
7 17% 43 n/a Ref Gauge (Yes)
Average 79 10
not incl. ref gauge
2008 Reference Precipitation
n
L
H
iv 1
U
a ?
.C
C
O ?
'a
u
a?
i
a ?
-a
Normal Preciptiation
Actual Precipitation
Cumulative Deficit
0
•
Appendix D
Monitoring Plan View (Integrated)
•
0
P.- [M-z09 (Olt) ?e vosL-ze9 (Ott) cost-ac (m) xve e?zo-m (Egg)
-b706GQ ' # ?Jd?INOj XI ` I ? ? 1 i tBOIZ Puo o Y
1, ?(??,Jn IIV!7 I n ^ r??,' & N INhi?i+W' • P-ti IAN N.Ppe YOZI •9 -e '0'd 9fOLZ ON Trms3LVD • mas lano0 too
VN Y?CIVJ IU?IVN /LLI?IIOJ NJ Vy _ ?' •WIjDjOj" f WDYJ;S
S
lr,:,? - NG9>?;1 ?;u1 T ( f NO v3u0 1VLeVN 3jnm?M A
l t?.?,1 l,?\? f i v ?I1DOrJ Pu, y9M v }aa0j
?V r?I' 6 'u81990 ?p 6ulpluu9d '? pln9uo0 ID)u9wuay,u3 NOLLVNOIS38 MV381S
Srly 00' u NOLLYU01 M ONY LL3M S
C
900ZAIMTON "NIU11NOW NOllV%W JWII M INIAAI ??? 3?O-LOD3 D-1-7 `SNO71HNO-L.-M 37NVkV 13934
?,!rl oaro?? rrd
-Al
r z
z vz z ?z o
n
l tiLY j
X ?• ! n., jilt ?.
j .J.
IX/
l?
0 ? Q? Tt
u)
-? i ?? to ?c\ H\ o s ? ? j
t<l r'J e(\ ?Y s
i \f ?r \f \f , S 1-5 z \ 10
00
\s'
a ?t\ O \r\ ? a ? ? 1 '? '
M? NY My K\ ? ? ? .. U ? 1
eE N?
N Y
ij
L
Cf i ?
? ? D1
CSI M'?I V ?' • 9 i t i a 9 ??
j
j j Y \
d ? ?rJ j . 1 I 'C?
4 ) ? ?
V
v' -?(•° r j i a 'i
10
v ?' + 45
J: / ^
,, .
M Y
44
\ n. z
D >1 j ,.l' LS :?F
1 ? 3 j iC.)
if
-77
v {S
v PS
n
0 0 0