20051690 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20090212

05-4??
CARBONTON DAM - DEEP RIVER WATERSHED
RESTORATION SITE
2008 Annual Monitoring Report (Year-3)
KECEIV--
t:D
NOV)0fj8
KHAN ,EMENT PROGRAM
rY
cos%stem
vre ?uanm
Y'.,, tai)
rid I ?' 23 1-j
OENR-WATER-CkXITY
'J'r` , LANDS AND STORM'S I TER BRANCH
ran
aft r. o= D
NNR CSist `_ "' GGRA3 1 ZI I (6(c)"
?w?
CARBONTON DAM - DEEP RIVER WATERSHED
RESTORATION SITE
2008 Annual Monitoring Report (Year-3)
Chatham, Lee and Moore Counties, NC
NCEEP Project No. D-04012A
Design Firm: Milone and MacBroom, Inc.
Prepared for: NCDENR - ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1619
Prepared by: ECOSCIENCE: A Division of PBS&J
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
rY
ti?co Will
November 2008
1
1
CARBONTON DAM - DEEP RIVER WATERSHED
RESTORATION SITE
2008 Annual Monitoring Report (Year-3)
PREPARED BY:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
PROJECT MANAGER: GEORGE HOWARD
1101 Haynes Street Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
F oScience
A division of Mr
ECOSCIENCE: A DIVISION OF PBS&J
PROJECT MANAGER: MATT CUSACK
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27604
AND
The
Catena
Group
THE CATENA GROUP
PROJECT MANAGER: TIM SAVIDGE
410-B Millstone Drive
HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
Dam removal projects performed pursuant to the guidance released by the North Carolina Dam Removal
Task Force (DRTF) are required to quantitatively demonstrate chemical and biological improvements to
restored in-channel ecosystems in order to achieve compensatory mitigation credit (DRTF 2001). The
following monitoring report documents the latest efforts of Restoration Systems, LLC, on behalf of the
N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), to document changes in the study area of the
Carbonton Dam removal project (Cape Fear Hydrologic Unit 03030003). The suite of ecological
evaluations performed and described herein establishes new standards for mitigation monitoring. This
standard is in keeping with the goal set forth by state and federal agencies to provide functional ecological
gains to North Carolina watersheds through the efforts of the NCEEP and its contract partners.
The site of the former Carbonton Dam is approximately 9 miles west of Sanford, North Carolina at the
juncture of Chatham, Lee, and Moore Counties, North Carolina (Figure 1, Appendix A). The on-site dam
removal activities restored unhindered flow to approximately 126,673 linear feet of the Deep River and
associated tributaries from the impounding impact of the dam. The limits of the former Site
Impoundment have been identified as any stream reach of the Deep River or associated tributaries located
above the former Carbonton Dam with a thalweg elevation less than 227.6 feet above mean sea level
(MSL), prior to dam removal. Impacts to water quality within the former Site Impoundment (i.e., river
and stream reaches formerly impounded by the dam) were manifested in the form of lower dissolved
oxygen concentrations, higher temperatures, and increased sedimentation. The character of the aquatic
communities within the former Site Impoundment shifted from a free-flowing (lotic) river system towards
an impounded (lentic) condition following construction of a dam at the site. Rare and endangered mussel
and fish habitat, which depended on free-flowing lotic conditions, was absent or greatly diminished
within areas of the Deep River impounded by the former dam. These affected stream reaches will be
hereafter referred to as the former "Site Impoundment."
The dam was removed in a manner that minimized impacts to water resources both upstream and
downstream of the dam site. Dam removal began with dewatering (lowering) of the Site Impoundment
on October 15, 2005, followed by breaching on November 11, 2005. Demolition activities continued in
stages until dam removal was completed on February 3, 2006.
Third year monitoring activities began in March 2008. Monitoring is being performed for a minimum of
five years, post dam removal--or until success criteria are achieved. Post removal monitoring data will be
compared to baseline values collected in April-June 2005, Year-1 monitoring values collected in April-
June 2006, and Year-2 monitoring values collected in March-July 2007.
Monitoring Plan
A monitoring plan was developed in accordance with the DRTF guidelines to evaluate the fulfillment of
the project's primary success criteria, which include:
EEP Project No. D-04012A
Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
1
1) Re-colonization of rare and protected aquatic species, 2) improved water quality, and 3) an improved
' aquatic community. Reserve success criteria include: 1) downstream benefits below the dam, and 2)
human values (scientific contributions and human recreation).
In order to evaluate project success for the above criteria, a monitoring network was deployed in 2005
throughout the former Site Impoundment, contributing waters, and reference areas both upstream and
downstream of the former dam site (Figure 3, Appendix A). Within the established network, biological
' surveys were conducted to provide baseline (i.e., pre-dam removal) aquatic community data within the
Site Impoundment, and will be monitored until 2010 to assess community changes following dam
removal. Monitoring cross-section stations were also established to assess changes in bankfull channel
' geometry, channel substrate composition, and aquatic habitat. Water quality data within the former Site
Impoundment and at a downstream reference area were obtained from North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ) Ambient Monitoring Stations (AMS).
' Third Year Monitoring Results
' Water Quality
Ambient Monitoring Station (AMS) data indicate that dissolved oxygen concentrations within the former
Site Impoundment continue to persist above the established threshold required to meet the success criteria
' (mean value is 4.62 mg/L higher). Additionally, water temperature has remained below the state standard
during Year-3 monitoring. Fecal coliform within the former Site Impoundment exceeded the state
standard of 200 colonies/100 ml twice during Year-3 monitoring. It should be noted that for both events
' that resulted in high fecal coliform measurements, reference data from the Ramseur station were not
sampled on the same day. Additionally, greater than 1-inch rain events occurred the day before the date
of sampling for the Site Impoundment for both outlying data measurements. Therefore, it is expected that
' the reference station would have also shown similar spikes in fecal coliform data if they were available.
The Year-3 mean biotic index (used as a proxy for water quality) for formerly impounded stations is
slightly more than (0.46) one standard deviation of the reference mean. Year-1 data show that following
dam removal, the success criterion was met by 0.21, suggesting that some variability may be present
between years.
' Aquatic Community
Based on habitat reconnaissance performed prior to mollusk sampling throughout the restored reach of the
' Deep River, it appears that much of the former reservoir pool has reverted to lotic conditions.
Riffle/run/pool habitats have formed at varying intervals throughout the restored reaches, promoting
aquatic species recolonization. Morphological features at many of these sites have created various
' hydraulic conditions and, in turn, multiple microhabitats which correspond to potentially high quality
habitat for aquatic species. A total of eleven freshwater mussel species, three aquatic snail species and
one freshwater clam species were found within newly formed riffle habitats in the former impounded
' reach.
Recruitment of freshwater mussels was evident in the newly established riffle habitats in the upper
1 (upstream) sections of the former reservoir pool, while lotic-adapted aquatic snails were found to have
colonized riffle habitats throughout. Benthic data from stations within the former Site Impoundment
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
ii

indicate that the number of EPT (Ephemeroptera [mayflies], Plecoptera [stoneflies], and Trichoptera
' [caddisflies]) taxa and the number of total taxa has decreased in Year-3 Monitoring. This negative shift
also occurred for the same metrics among reference stations, suggesting an altered benthic community
composition and abundance throughout the Deep River watershed, likely due to persistent drought
conditions.
The NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet was completed at each station in order to evaluate the
quality of in-stream habitat and to provide a comparable score that describes the available habitat.
Compared to baseline conditions, the mean total score of the formerly impounded stations quantitatively
increased in Year-3 monitoring from 42.39 to 59.56, indicating improved aquatic habitat.
¦ Rare and Protected Aquatic Species
Rare and Protected Aquatic Species success criteria within the former Site Impoundment is based on the
' documented presence of any rare species throughout the monitoring period. Success criteria were met last
year when a total of 41 specimens of the endangered Cape Fear shiner (Notropsis mekistocholas) were
collected. These individuals were identified throughout the former Site Impoundment at eight of the
sampling sites, while an additional six sites continue to develop favorable habitat for future colonization
Year-3 monitoring indicates that freshwater mussels are also re-colonizing habitats previously impounded
by Carbonton Dam. A total of eleven freshwater mussel species, three aquatic snail species and one
freshwater clam species were found within newly formed riffle habitats in the former impounded reach.
The surveys documented several mussel species of conservation interest associated with lotic condition,
including five state listed species: yellow lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa), creeper (Strophitus
undulatus), triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata), eastern creekshell (Villosa delumbis), and the notched
rainbow (Villosa constricta). The presence of notched rainbow is especially significant because this
species is extremely rare and has only been collected once in the Deep River in the past 100 years.
Reserve Success Criteria
Reserve Success Criteria have been achieved based on the implementation/refereed publication of
scientific research related to the removal of Carbonton Dam, and the establishment of a public park at the
location of the former dam. The Carbonton Dam removal project provided funding to the University of
' North Carolina at Chapel Hill to support original research by Adam Riggsbee, PhD, and Jason Julian,
PhD. Dr. Riggsbee has published three papers with one in revision from his dam removal research while
Dr. Julian has published one paper pertaining to the restored reach of the Deep River.
r Furthermore, a new public park has been established at the site of the former dam that consists of vehicle
parking, picnicking sites, bank fishing, and improved access to the river for kayakers and canoeists. RS
i formally transferred the new park to the Deep River Park Association during a ceremony held on the
grounds on November 22, 2008.
' Summary
After the third year of monitoring, the removal of Carbonton Dam has resulted in the continued
restoration of lotic conditions with functional improvements recorded in water quality, fish and mollusk
' abundance, and sediment transport. Mitigation success has been demonstrated for the following criteria:
Re-introduction of rare and endangered aquatic species, water quality improvement with respect to
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
iii

t
dissolved oxygen concentrations and benthic biotic indices, scientific research, and public recreation.
Continued monitoring is necessary to confirm success for the convergence of benthic EPT taxa to
reference data. See table below.

11
11
1
1
1
2008
Criterion Parameter Anticipated Chan e/Result Success
Primary success Presence/absence of
criteria: Re-colonization of rare/protected Unknown Yes
d
d individuals
rare an
protecte
aquatic species Rare/protected species Improvement/expansion Yes
habitat
Benthic biotic indices Decrease (= improve) Yes

Improved water Increase within former Site
quality AMS dissolved Impoundment (must be >
oxygen data 4.0 mg/L or consistent with Yes
reference station data)
Ephemeroptera,
Plecoptera, and Increase (i.e., converge with Ongoing,
Improved aquatic Trichoptera taxa, total reference station data) Improving
i number of benthic taxa
commun
ty
Demonstrated shifts in
Fish, Mussel, and communities from lentic to Yes
Snail community data lotic character
Reserve success
criteria: Downstream Deep River bankfull

benefits below channel within Narrowing/increased
Ongoing
dam formerly eddie/scour stabilization of channel
pool areas below dam
Scientific value Published research Successful completion Yes
Public recreation Construction of Successful completion Yes
planned on-Site park
I EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
iv

1
' TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................i
' 1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................1
1.1 Location and Setting ......................................................................................................... ..1
1.2 Restoration Structure and Objectives ...................................................................... ..1
' 1.3 Project History and Background ............................................................................. ..2
1.4 Project Mitigation Goals ......................................................................................... .. 3
2.0 PROJECT MONITORING AND RESULTS ................................................................................ .. 5
2.1 WATER QUALITY ......................................................................................................... .. 5
2. 1.1 Biotic Indices .......................................................................................................... ..5
2.1.2 Ambient Monitoring Station Network .................................................................... .. 7
2.1.2.1 Dissolved Oxygen ...................................................................................... ..7
' 2.1.2.2 Temperature ............................................................................................... .. 8
2.1.2.3 Fecal Coliform ........................................................................................... .. 8
' 2.2 AQUATIC COMMUNITIES ...........................................................................................

2.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates .................................................................................... ..
9
.. 9
2.2.2 Fishes ................................................................................................................ 13
2.2.3 Mollusks ................................................................................................................
13
' 2.2.4 Habitat Assessment ................................................................................................. 14
2.2.4.1 Sediment Class Size Distribution ............................................................... 16
2.2.4.2 Channel Cross-sections .............................................................................. 18
2.2.4.3 Flow Velocity ............................................................................................. 20
2.2.4.4 Photography and Videography ................................................................... 20
2.3 RARE AND PROTECTED SPECIES .............................................................................. 20
' 2.4 RESERVE CRITERIA ..................................................................................................... 20
2.4.1 Public Recreation .................................................................................................... 20
2.4.2 Scientfic Research ................................................................................................... 21
' 2.5 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 22
3.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 23
Appendix A: Figures
1. Site Location
2. Functional Benefit Area
3. Monitoring Network Deployment
4 Monitoring Cross-sections
5 North Carolina Drought Monitor Data
Appendix B: Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data
Appendix C: Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Fish Monitoring Report Provided by The Catena Group
Appendix D: NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Appendix E: Monitoring Pictures and Videos (data DVD)
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Stream Mitigation Units (SMU's) Generated by Removal of the Carbonton Dam .....................2
Table 2. Project Activities and Reporting History ................................................................................... ..2
Table 3. Project Contracts ........................................................................................................................ ..4
Table 4. Project Background .................................................................................................................... ..5
Table 5. Benthic Biotic Indices of Formerly Impounded and Reference Stations ................................... ..6
Table 6. Dissolved Oxygen Summary Data ............................................................................................. ..7
Table 7. Water Temperature Summary Data ........................................................................................... .. 8
Table 8. Fecal Coliform Summary Data .................................................................................................. ..9
Table 9. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Summary Data ................................................................................ 1 l
Table 10. Mollusk Sampling Results ....................................................................................................... 13
Table 11. Habitat Assessment Data of Formerly Impounded Stations vs. Reference Stations ................. 15
Table 12. Sediment Class Site Distribution .............................................................................................. 17
Table 13. Cross-section Bankfull Channel Geometry ............................................................................... 19
Table 14. Mitigation Success Criteria Summary ...................................................................................... 22
LIST OF GRAPHS
Graph 1. Mean Biotic Index of Formerly Impounded Stations vs. Reference Stations ..............................6
' Graph 2. Recorded Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations on the Deep River ................................................ 8
Graph 3. Mean Total Taxa of Formerly Impounded Stations vs. Reference Stations ..............................12
Graph 4. Mean EPT Richness of Formerly Impounded Stations vs. Reference Stations .........................12
1
EEP Project No. D-04012A
Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
vi

' 1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1 Location and Setting
' In order to provide stream restoration in the Cape Fear River Basin (Hydrologic Unit 03030003),
Restoration Systems, LLC (RS) has removed the Carbonton Dam formerly located at the juncture of
Chatham, Lee, and Moore Counties, North Carolina (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A). The former
' Carbonton Dam was located on the Deep River approximately 9 miles west of Sanford, North Carolina,
immediately downstream of the bridge crossing of NC 42 (35.5200N, -79.3485W). The Deep River is a
41n-order river with a watershed upstream of the former dam location of approximately 1,000 square
' miles. For the purposes of this document, the 5.5-acre land parcel that supported the dam will be
hereafter referred to as the "Site." All construction activities mentioned in this report occurred on-Site,
unless specifically mentioned otherwise.
' The on-Site construction activities freed approximately 126,673 linear feet of the Deep River and
associated tributaries from the impounding impact of the dam. These benefited stream reaches will be
' hereafter referred to as the "Site Impoundment." The limits of the Site Impoundment have been identified
as any stream reach of the Deep River or associated tributaries located above the former Carbonton Dam
with a thalweg elevation less than 227.6 feet above mean sea level (MSL), prior to dam removal.
1.2 Restoration Structure and Objectives
' The Site Impoundment formerly covered approximately 116 acres with water depths up to 25 feet and
bank-to-bank impoundment widths from 150 to 260 feet. The former Site Impoundment occurred within
the channel of the Deep River, which is characterized by steep banks with occasional areas of bank failure
in locations where mature trees have been toppled by storms or flood flows. The lentic flow that
characterized the Site Impoundment resulted in a stratified water column, where velocities were low near
the surface, and stagnant at depths below the crest pool elevation.
' Site restoration efforts consisted primarily of the physical removal of the Carbonton Dam. Construction
activities associated with the removal of the dam were phased in order to minimize disturbance to aquatic
' resources upstream, downstream, and in the immediate vicinity of the Site. Furthermore, throughout the
dam removal process, construction best management practices were utilized to prevent/minimize potential
impacts to aquatic resources.
t The demolition and removal of the Carbonton Dam is expected to generate at least 90,494 Stream
Mitigation Units (SMUs) for use by the NCEEP. The majority of the credits generated by this project
' will be validated by evaluating the ecological benefits that occur in the Deep River over the five-year,
post-removal monitoring period. Bonus factors (reserve success criteria) include downstream benefits
and human values such as recreation and scientific research. Table 1 displays the amount of SMU credits
' that are proposed for this project. The primary success criteria are being monitored in accordance with
the Dam Removal Task Force (DRTF) guidance. The mitigation ratios have also been derived from the
DRTF guidance (DRTF 2004). The amount of restored channel was determined through methods
described in Section 1.1.2 of the Restoration Plan (Restoration Systems 2005). The number of SMUs
were determined by multiplying the amount of channel returned to lotic condition (linear feet) by the
' EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
1
mitigation ratios. While up to 114,356 SMUs may be potentially created in accordance with the DRTF
guidance, the project will only be evaluated for the amount of credit that is committed to NCEEP.
TnhlP 1 CtrPnm Mitiontian iTnitc tCMiisli Generated by RPmovni of the Cnrhanton Dam
Primary Success Criteria Channel Restored (feet) Mitigation Ratio SMU
1) Water Quality
2) Improved Aquatic Community 126,673 feet of free-flowing
3) Rare and Protected Aquatic Species river and tributaries under 0.7:1 88,671
the crest pool
Reserve Success Criteria Channel Restored (feet) Mitigation Ratio SMU
Downstream Benefits - 500 feet below dam 0.7:1 350
Below the Dam
Human Values
20 percent
1) Human recreation ----- Up to 25,335
bonus s
bo
2) Scientific value
Total Potential SMUs 114,356
Total Committed SMUs 90,494
Primary success criteria will be monrtoreo to verity ana confirm positive enanges to eacn runcnonai criterion as ouumeu m uus
report and in the Dam Removal Guidance. Reserve criteria will be monitored for possible augmentation of the primary SMUs.
If all primary criteria are successfully met, these reserve criteria should result in excess, unsold credits becoming available at
the end of the monitoring period
1.3 Project History and Background
Table 2. Project Activities and Reporting History: Carbonton Dam Restoration Site

Activity Report
Scheduled
Completion Data
Collection
Com lete Actual
Completion or
Deliver
Restoration Plan Jul 2004 N/A August 2005
Final Design Jul 2004 N/A August 2005
Construction February 2006 N/A February 2006
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area February 2006 N/A February 2006
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/se ments February 2006 N/A February 2006
Installation of Trees and Shrubs March 2006 N/A March 2006
Mitigation Plan January 2005 N/A June 2006
Minor repairs made filling small washed out areas N/A N/A N/A
Final Report N/A N/A N/A
Year-1 Vegetation Monitoring N/A N/A N/A
Year-1 Stream Monitoring September 2006 Jul 2006
2006
September
Year-2 Stream Monitoring Se tember 2007 Jul 2007 November 2007
Year-3 Stream Monitoring September 2008 October 2008 November 2008
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
2

1.4 Project Mitigation Goals
The desired result of this project is ecological improvement within the former Site Impoundment through
restoration of natural, lotic flow conditions.
' The specific goals of this project include:
• Restoration of approximately 126,673 linear feet of impounded river and stream channels to
' natural free-flowing riverine conditions.
• Restoration of previously inundated shallow water habitat for the Cape Fear shiner (Notropis
' mekistocholas), a federally endangered freshwater fish.
• Reduction or elimination of thermal stratification, which results in seasonal declines in dissolved
oxygen concentrations below levels measured in reference reaches.
' • Restoration of appropriate in-stream substrate.
• Restoration of upstream and downstream fish passage, and reconnection of currently disjunct
populations of rare aquatic species of concern.
• Restoration of lotic mussel habitat.
' • Improvement in the diversity and water quality tolerance metrics for benthic macroinvertebrate
communities.
• Provide public recreational opportunities at the site of the former dam.
' • Support independent academic research, resulting in peer-reviewed publications regarding the
ecological consequences of large dam removal.
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
3
Table 3. Project Contacts: Carbonton Dam Restoration Site
Designer 307B Falls Street
Milone and MacBroom, Inc. (MMI) Greenville, SC 29601
[phone]
Construction Contractor P.O. Box 1654
Backwater Environmental, Inc. Pittsboro, NC 27312
[phone]
Planting Contractor 908 Indian Trail Road
Carolina Silvics, Inc. Edenton, NC 27932
[phone]
Seeding Contactor P.O. Box 1654
Backwater Environmental, Inc. Pittsboro, NC 27312
[phone]
Seed Mix Sources 1312 Woody Store Road
Mellow Marsh Farm Siler City, NC 27344
[phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers 1312 Woody Store Road
Mellow Marsh Farm Siler City, NC 27344
[phone]
Coastal Plain Conservation Nursery 3067 Conners Drive
Edenton, NC 27932
[phone]
Taylor's Nursery 3705 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
International Paper Nursery 5594 Highway 38 South
Blenheim, SC 29516
[phone]
Ecological Monitors
EcoScience: A Division of PBS&J 1101 Haynes Street Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27604
[phone]
The Catena Group (TCG) 410-B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
[phone]
Stream Monitorin POC Matt Cusack
Vegetation Monitoring POC N/A
(project does not require vegetation monitoring)
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
n

1

Table 4. Project Background: Carbonton Dam Restoration Site
Project Count Chatham, Lee, and Moore Counties NC
Drainage Area Approximately 1000 square miles
Impervious cover estimate (%) <10%
Stream Order 4` -order
Ph sio ra hic Region Piedmont
Ecore ion (Griffith and Omernik) Triassic Basin
Ros en Classification of As-built N/A
Cowardin Classification R2SB3/4
Reference Site ID Dee River
Dominant Soil Types N/A (stream restoration project only)
USGS HUC for Project and Reference 03030003
NCDWQ Sub-basin for Project and Reference 03-06-10
NCDWQ classification for Project and Reference WS-IV HQW, WS-V HQW
An portion of an project segment 303d listed? No (NCDWQ 2006)
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a 303d
listed segment? Yes, Deep River, Sub-basin 03-06-11
(NCDWQ 2006)
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor MS4 NPDES
Percent of project easement fenced N/A
2.0 PROJECT MONITORING AND RESULTS
The monitoring results described herein document the Year-3 (2008) monitoring activities performed to
determine the project's success in meeting the stated mitigation goals. Monitoring activities occurred at
fifty-one (51) stations established prior to dam removal in 2005, as part of the monitoring deployment
network (Figure 3, Appendix A). One (1) additional station was added in Year-I (2006) monitoring for a
total of fifty-two (52). Pre-removal baseline data (2005), Year-1, Year-2 and Year-3 monitoring data are
compared to evaluate improvements in water quality, the aquatic community, rare and protected species,
and human values within the former Site Impoundment.
2.1 WATER QUALITY
2.1.1 Biotic Indices
After identification of collected macroinvertebrates, the North Carolina Tolerance Values or Hilsenhoff
Tolerance Values were assigned to each of the collected species. These Tolerance Values range from 0
for organisms intolerant of organic wastes to 10 for organisms very tolerant of organic wastes. The biotic
indices of each station sampled for benthic macroinvertebrates were tallied, and then summary data were
generated for comparison between formerly impounded and reference stations. Success for this particular
mitigation goal is defined as follows: the mean biotic index of the impounded stations must be within one
standard deviation of the mean biotic index of the reference stations. Table 5 presents the summary data
for benthic biotic indices of both formerly impounded and reference stations.
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
5
Table 5. Benthic Biotic Indices of Formerly Impounded and Reference Stations
2005 (Baseline) 2006 (Year-1) 2007 (Year-2) 2008 (Year-3)
FORMERLY
IMPOUNDED
STATIONS
REFERENCE
STATIONS FORMERLY
IMPOUNDED
STATIONS
REFERENCE
STATIONS FORMERLY
IMPOUNDED
STATIONS
REFERENCE
STATIONS FORMERLY
IMPOUNDED
STATIONS
REFERENCE
STATIONS
Biotic Index Biotic Index Biotic Index Biotic Index Biotic Index Biotic Index Biotic Index Biotic Index
High 7.97 6.91 8.58 7.62 8.52 5.71 8.19 6.36
Low 5.67 4.78 5.76 4.29 4.28 3.92 5.13 4.66
Mean 6.83 5.9 6.99 6.16 5.86 4.94 6.52 5.56
Median 6.79 5.99 6.72 6.02 5.3 5.02 6.40 5.60
Standard Deviation 0.83 0.75 0.95 1.04 1.52 0.62 1.05 0.50
Standard Deviation
of Reference mean
(Success
Criterion)

.65

.20

.56

.06
The mean biotic index from Year-3 monitoring in the formerly impounded stations (p=6.52) is more than
one standard deviation of the reference station (p=6.06). Although the formerly impounded dataset was
0.46 above the reference station's standard deviation, the Year-3 reported value is within one standard
deviation of the reference station's baseline value. Moreover, the Year-1 data show that the success
criterion was met by 0.21. Therefore, some variability between years may be present. The following
Graph 1 depicts the change in biotic indices from 2005 to present from both the formerly impounded and
reference stations.
Graph 1. Mean Biotic Index of Formerly Impounded Stations vs. Reference Stations
with Standard Deviation
Note: A lower index value is indicative of less tolerant species (= higher water quality)
8
7
6
x 5
a?
r;
4
0
P? 3
2
1
0
Impounded Mean
Reference Mean
- +/-1 Standard Deviation
2005 (Baseline) 2006 (Year 1) 2007 (Year 2) 2008 (Year 3)
Monitoring Year
EEP Project No. D-04012A
6
Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report

2.1.2 Ambient Monitoring Station Network
Aside from the in situ sampling occurring at each monitoring cross-section, physical water quality
parameters are currently collected at an Ambient Monitoring Station (AMS) located within the former
Site Impoundment at NC 42 (135575000), immediately upstream of the former Carbonton Dam. A
reference AMS is located on the Deep River at Ramseur, NC (135070000). These data have been obtained
from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), and data coverage exists on a monthly
basis for at least the last 10 years. AMS data dating back five years prior to dam removal are used to
provide a historical record of water quality and compared to post-removal sampling. Due to time delay
between collection date and public availability, the most recent AMS data available from NCDWQ is
through December 5, 2007 at NC42, and through June 30, 2008 at Ramseur. Data collected by the AMS
are not standard for all samples, but are always sampled at 0.1 meter depth and can include: water
temperature (°C), dissolved oxygen (mg/L), pH (field measured), conductance at 25°C (µmhos/cm),
turbidity (NTU), fecal coliform bacteria (number of colonies/100 milliliters), suspended residue (total
suspended solids) (milligrams/Liter), ammonia as nitrogen (milligrams/Liter), total Kjeldahl nitrogen
(milligrams/Liter), nitrite and nitrate as nitrogen (milligrams/Liter), total phosphorus (milligrams/Liter),
and assorted metals. AMS data are used to evaluate physical water chemistry and associated parameters
throughout the project's monitoring period. Water quality trends from AMS data are utilized in
determining the project's overall success, using state standards established by NCDWQ's "Redbook".
2.1.2.1 Dissolved Oxygen
In order to achieve success, dissolved oxygen concentrations within the former Site Impoundment should
not fall below the minimum NCDWQ standard for Class WS-IV waters (unless a similar failure is
recorded at the reference station). The NCDWQ standard is an instantaneous value of no less than
4.0mg/L (daily average no less than 5.0 mg/L). Table 6 provides the minimum, maximum, and mean
instantaneous values for dissolved oxygen recorded within the former Site Impoundment, as well as the
number of samples that fell below the state standard for all monitoring years.
Table 6_ nissnived nyvapn Cnmmnrv data
Baseline Year-1 Year-2 Year-3
Minimum Value (m ) 1.10 7.20 5.20 5.40
Maximum Value (m /L) 15.00 13.90 10.60 14.30
Mean Value (m ) 8.07 10.87 7.41 8.62
Number of Samples Below State Standard 6 0 0 0
Graph 2 depicts the AMS dissolved oxygen concentrations measured at a 0.1 meter depth within the Site
Impoundment (135575000), and at the reference location (135070000), from December 2000 through
December 2007. Since the removal of Carbonton Dam, instantaneous dissolved oxygen concentrations
within the former Site Impoundment have remained at or above 4.0 mg/L.
Throughout the five-year monitoring period, it is expected that mean dissolved oxygen values recorded at
NC 42 will continue to demonstrate success as the river has returned to its natural lotic condition. It is
also expected that dissolved oxygen levels within the former impoundment will stay above the state
standard as free-flowing conditions persist.
' EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
7
Graph 2. Recorded Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations in the Deep River
(Green line indicates state standard of 4.Omg/L)
16.00
15.00
14.00
13.00
12.00
11.00
10.00
9.00
8.00
v 7.00
0 6.00
A 5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Dam Removal
- l 11
N m r', It v-? kr) Ic 11C r`
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o R R R R
r r` r r` r` r r` r r r r r` r r
N N N ?J N N N ?1 !` I N N N N N
(`J ?O N ?C N ?O N ?O N ?O N ?D N ?D
Date
?¦ NC 42 (135575000) ¦ (Ranncw-) B5070000
r
0
r`
N
2.1.2.2 Temperature
In order to achieve success, the water temperature within the former Site Impoundment should not exceed
the NCDWQ standard of 90 degrees Fahrenheit during the monitoring period. Table 7 provides the
minimum, maximum, and mean values for water temperature recorded within the former Site
Impoundment during all monitoring years, as well as the number of samples the recorded value exceeded
the state standard.
Table 7_ Water TemnPratnrP Cnmmnrv data
Baseline Year-1 Year-2 Year-3
Minimum Value (de F) 65.48 41.18 45.32 41.36
Maximum Value (de F) 87.62 64.58 85.82 84.02
Mean Value (de F) 63.26 52.76 67.57 63.99
Number of Samples Exceeding State Standard 0 0 0 0
Water temperature within the former Site Impoundment has remained below the state standard of 90
degrees Fahrenheit since dam removal on February 3, 2006.
2.1.2.3 Fecal Coliform
In order to achieve success, fecal coliform concentrations within the former Site Impoundment should not
exceed an average daily count of 200/100 ml in any 30-day period. Table 8 shows the minimum,
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
8
maximum, and mean values for fecal coliform recorded within the former Site Impoundment during all
monitoring years, as well as the number of samples the recorded value exceeded the state standard.
Table 8. Fecal Coliform Summarv Data
Baseline Year-1 Year-2 Year-3
Minimum Value (count/ 100 ml) 3 22 26.0 14
Maximum Value (count/100ml 6300 47 160.0 5800.0
Mean Value (count/100ml) 369.7 35.7 62.6 782.3
Number of Samples Exceeding State Standard 31 0 0 2
Fecal coliform within the former Site Impoundment exceeded the state standard of 200/100 ml twice
during Year-3 monitoring. The two events that exceeded the state standard both achieved significantly
elevated levels (1700/100 ml and 5800/100 ml) and consequently raised the mean value to more than ten
times the previous year's value. With the exception of these two events, all other daily fecal coliform
values recorded during Year-3 monitoring were significantly lower than the state standard (<100/100 ml).
It should be noted that for both events that resulted in high fecal coliform measurements, reference data
from the Ramseur station were not sampled on the same day. Additionally, greater than 1-inch rain
events occurred the day before the date of sampling for the Site Impoundment for both outlying data
measurements. Therefore, it is expected that the reference station would have also shown similar spikes
in fecal coliform data had been collected on the same day (Ward 1990).
2.2 AQUATIC COMMUNITIES
To determine success for the aquatic community's habitat criterion, the former Site Impoundment was
monitored for baseline data and included benthic macroinvertebrates, fishes, mussels, and snails, as well
as the quality of available microhabitats that developed. Benthos, fishes and mussel and snail sampling
following dam removal will be used to demonstrate an increased abundance and quality of aquatic habitat
within restored reaches of the Deep River.
2.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled within the former Site Impoundment, as well as in the
reference reaches both within the Deep River and its major tributaries. Stations were visited prior to dam
removal (2005) and subsequently sampled in 2006, 2007, and 2008 at the same locations. The
comparative metrics utilized for the success evaluation include the total number of organisms collected,
the total taxa represented in the samples, the richness (diversity) of taxa from the Ephemeroptera
(mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), and Trichoptera (caddisflies) Orders (hereafter referred to as EPT
taxa), and the biotic index of organic waste tolerance. Benthic macroinvertebrate data, located in
Appendix B, are based on laboratory identifications of benthic macroinvertebrate taxa by Pennington and
Associates, Inc. (P&A) of Cookeville, Tennessee. P&A is a NCDWQ-certified benthic identification
laboratory.
Table 9 provides the baseline and Year-1 through Year-3 summary data for the benthic macroinvertebrate
collections. The summary data shows that the mean value for the biotic index was the only metric that
improved at impounded stations in Year-3 monitoring. Mean total organisms, total taxa, and EPT
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
9
richness within formerly impounded stations worsened during Year-3 monitoring. This negative shift also
occurred for the same metrics among reference stations, suggesting an altered benthic community ,
composition and abundance throughout the Deep River watershed. Extreme and severe drought
conditions within the Deep River watershed during benthic sampling (April 3-23) contributed to low flow
conditions and may have contributed to degraded benthic macroinvertebrate collections. The North ,
Carolina Drought Management Advisory Council reports that drought conditions of this degree have not
been recorded in North Carolina in the 100 years of modern records. Drought conditions in the Deep
River watershed during Year-3 monitoring represent a progression of rainfall deficits experienced almost ,
continually since dam removal. Figure 5 (Appendix A) displays drought conditions in North Carolina
during Year-3 monitoring and shows the progression of drought intensity in the Deep River watershed,
with the longest persistence of Exceptional Drought (Level D4) occurring in November through March ,
2008, just prior to Year-3 benthic sampling. Continued sampling is recommended to ensure that data sets
are more reflective of normal ambient conditions without the influence of extraordinary factors such as
100-year droughts. 1
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
10
1
1
1
Table 9. Renthic macrainvertehrntn snmmnrv data
Graph 3 and Graph 4 depict the change in mean total taxa and mean EPT richness from 2005 to present
from both the formerly impounded and reference stations. The graphs show that mean total taxa and
mean EPT richness decreased across all stations in the current monitoring year.
Impound ed Stations Reference Stations
2005 Total
anisms
[ Total
Taxa EPT
Richness Biotic
Index Total
Organisms Total
Taxa EPT
Richness Biotic
Index
High 40
3.00 62.00 10.00 7.97 1168.00 70.00 24.00 6.91
Low 97.00 18.00 1.00 5.67 237.00 41.00 14.00 4.78
Mean 223.33 39.78 5.89 6.83 549.75 54.88 19.13 5.90
Median 207.00 43.00 6.00 6.79 404.00 56.00 19.00 5.99
Standard
Deviation
96.69
12.02
2.76
0.83
340.66
10.33
3.14
0.75
Impounded Stations Reference Stations
2006 Total
Organisms Total
Taxa EPT
Richness Biotic
Index Total
Organisms Total
Taxa EFT
Richness Biotic
Index
High 360.00 49.00 15.00 8.58 546.00 61.00 21.00 7.62
Low 55.00 17.00 5.76 89.00 33.00 5.00 4.29
Mean 177.50 33.00 7.70 6.99 220.63 42.63 12.50 6.16
Median 160.00 33.50 6.50 6.72 155.00 37.00 12.50 6.02
Standard
Deviation
87.71
11.65
5.85
0.95
158.86
10.76
5.81
1.04
Impounded Stations Reference Stations
2007 Total
Organisms Total
Taxa EPT
Richness Biotic
Index Total
Or anisms Total
Taxa EPT
Richness Biotic
Index
High 1168.00 83.00 36.00 8.52 1242.00 83.00 38.00 5.71
Low 117.00 31.00 1.00 4.28 506.00 59.00 14.00 3.92
Mean 466.40 55.30 20.30 5.86 849.63 68.75 27.75 4.94
Median 475.00 60.00 24.50 5.30 861.50 66.50 31.00 5.02
Standard
Deviation
318.14
18.76
13.00
1.52
250.69
8.01
8.28
0.62
Impounded Stations Reference Stations
2008 Total
Organisms Total
Taxa EPT
Richness Biotic
Index Total
Or anisms Total
Taxa EPT
Richness Biotic
Index
High 342.00 73.00 20.00 8.19 687 66.00 27 6.36
Low 21.00 16.00 1.00 5.13 246.00 41.00 10.00 4.66
Mean 160.80 36.90 8.10 6.52 384.25 55.13 19.25 5.56
Median 145.00 34.00 6.00 6.40 339.50 58.50 20.50 5.60
Standard
Deviation
106.57
17.21
6.30
1.05
157.35
9.45
6.07
0.50
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
11
Graph 3. Mean Total Taxa of Impounded Stations vs. Reference Stations with Standard
Deviation
100
Impounded Mean
Reference Mean
- +/-1 Standard Deviation
80
60
c?
F-
0
E- 40
20
0
2005 (Baseline) 2006 (Year 1) 2007 (Year 2) 2008 (Year 3)
Monitoring Year
Graph 4. Mean EPT Richness of Impounded Stations vs. Reference Stations with
Standard Deviation
40
35
30
25
a?
c
20
E-
W 15
10
5
0
Impounded Mean
Reference Mean
- +/-1 Standard Deviation
2005 (Baseline)
2006 (Year I ) 2007 (Year 2) 2008 (Year 3)
Monitoring Year
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
12
2.2.2 Fishes
Fish surveys were not conducted during Year-3 monitoring due to the overwhelming success of sampling
efforts during Year-2 monitoring. A total of 34 fish species were collected at the fifteen fish monitoring
sites. Survey collections demonstrate that riffle adapted species continue to colonize in newly restored
habitats that were previously impounded. Additionally, at least ten of the sampling sites contain
emerging fish communities that emulate reference conditions found beyond the former impoundment.
Overall, a greater number of fish species were documented throughout the former impoundment during
Year-2 monitoring relative to baseline and Year-1 surveys.
2.2.3 Mollusks
Year-3 monitoring emphasized mussel, snail, and clam sampling to support success evaluation for the
aquatic community and threatened and endangered aquatic species criteria. Mollusks were last sampled
by The Catena Group (TCG) preceding dam removal to obtain baseline data. Since these fauna are slow
colonizers due to their dependence on host fish species, 2008 represents the first year for mollusk
sampling since dam removal. Freshwater mollusks were conducted at 14 monitoring locations throughout
the restored reach of the Deep River (Figure 1, TCG Report, Appendix Q. Habitat reconnaissance was
conducted in the entire restored reach, and observations of in-stream habitat conditions and bank stability
were recorded. At least 12 substantial riffle habitats have developed in the Deep River and a general
progression towards a lotic community continues throughout the restored reach. Mollusk collections
indicate a recruitment of freshwater mussel species in riffle-adapted habitats (primarily in the upper reach
or the former reservoir pool), while lotic-adapted aquatic snails have colonized throughout. When
comparing the mussel fauna observed during the pre-removal surveys with the 3-Year surveys, it is
evident that the fauna has transitioned from one comprised of habitat generalists and lentic-adapted
species, to one comprised of habitat generalists and lotic-adapted species. A total of eleven freshwater
mussel species, three aquatic snail species and 1 freshwater clam species were found within newly formed
riffle habitats in the former impounded reach (Table 10).
Table 10. Mollusk Samnling Recultc
Scientific Name Common Name TCG Sites
Freshwater Mussels
Alasmidonta undulate** triangle floater 1,1a, 7, 8,9
Elliptio an ustata Carolina lance l,la,3,8
Elliptio complanata Eastern elli do All except 12 and 13
Elliptio icterina variable spike l,la,3,4,57„8,9
Elli do lazarus Atlantic delicate spike 1,3,5,8
Elli do roducta Atlantic spike 2,3
Lampsilis cariosa** yellow lam mussel l,la,2,3,4,5,8,9*,10*
P anodon cataracta Eastern floater 10*
Strophitus undulatus** creeper 4,7,8,9
Villosa constricta** notched rainbow 2
Villosa delumbis** Eastern creekshell 1a,4,8,9
Uniomerus carolinianus Florida pondhom 8*, 10
Freshwater Snails and Clams
Cam eloma decisum pointed cam eloma 2,5,8,10
Elimia catenaria ravel elimia All
Helisoma anceps two-ridge rams-horn 2,5
Corbicula uminea Asian clam All
* F--
Relict shell only ' EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
13
2.2.4 Habitat Assessment
Habitat assessment data were collected at all 52 monitoring stations to evaluate the potential for changing
aquatic habitats to support changes in community populations. The NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Field
Data Sheet was completed at each station in order to evaluate the quality and character of the sampled
habitat niches and to provide a comparable score that describes the available habitat. Table 10 displays
the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet scores from baseline and Year-3 monitoring. The
categories channel modification, light penetration, and riparian vegetative zone width typically did not
change in the span of a single monitoring year. Other categories including in-stream habitat, bottom
substrate, and bank stability showed improvement within formerly impounded stations. Compared to
baseline data, the mean total score of the formerly impounded stations quantitatively increased in Year-3
monitoring from 42.39 to 59.56. The mean total score for reference stations remained relatively
unchanged with an increase of only 1.55. Success evaluation is defined as a perceived progression of the
former Site Impoundment habitat values toward those of the lotic reference stations. During Year-3
monitoring, the mean total score for stations in the former Site Impoundment increased 1.65 percent
compared to last year, and shifted to within only 1.55 points of matching Year-3's mean total score of the
reference stations. Thus Year-3 scores of stations with the former Site Impoundment are equal to the
reference station's total score during baseline monitoring.
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
14
04 w
9
O to
\O en
to oc
IT h
b h
oo M
to .r
?O N
co
,a
00
to
?d
in M
to rr
in h
M to
b h
R e'
to et
m co
m to
IT N
M M
to O
to h oo
? O
? ?
h O
h O
?c to
,O ,O
to
00
i ao
t- O
h 00
Vl N
b -4
to to
,0 t`.
,O M
to N
M oo
R O ?O
to O?.
try .?
h 00
h 7
00 do
h O
R ?
O V
i b
F VJ

d
.c G
O
0
0
0
t.,
Op
0
0
0
pp
d.
O
O
O
,
0
0
pp
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
p
O.
O
O
p
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
,~.i
a N ON d

C
O
OiA y 0 0 N N N O O N N N N 0- t` O N l+ O O O O Op O pp O pp W O O O ? X 0 0 N N t`. N N h N O? 0 0 co 0 t, t- 00 0 cV 0 Opp
a 40 to
a
1 ?' 7 H
N. M N 7 M tt V - 7. 7 N. N N O N O O ? M 7 M 7 N N M .. N N <I' ? <f O V ? ? ? 7 ?. V ?7 ?f N N ? ?O p V ?
^ y

0 y
6J

0

0

0

0

0

0

,?„

t`

O

O

O

O

O

M

O

O

O

O

0

0

0

O

„?,,,

P

"

0

0

O

O

O

C
Fy C ?y
W 7 T I T
to
a
o .?
,

~7 L O 00 O p O O p o0 0 0 0 Op 0 0 0 O ?O O O O O O O O O Q V ?D 00 O. 00 ?O ?O 00 7 W 00 O O 00 O O. O O O O p p
.
O 6, O
a to ?o

en y

Q y y o0 00 00 M M M M M O M 7 M 00 R
W O p . 7 h

ye
%
,.

i. N v'1 V1 D\ V1 v, O to O O O M t`
O? b
O? ?
V1 C ?n O O
O vl h 7. O O ?: O ?0 ?3
O
h
h O V'f 7 ?0 ?O O
O N
N -i N N N N
M rl rl

T w
C u
R ty
V
7
?n
V
7
7
7
7
In
7
It
?n
Vn
Vl
?.
Vl
h
In
tft
7
-It
7
In
N
h
W)
?n
v1
In
vJ
'7
Vi
to h
'R
C'
V
of
V
V
7
7
V1
W)
In
?f
vJ
to
7
7
7
V
?n M
M
'
? Q !1
U o

++

--i
N
M
to
l-
00
Q\ O O N
M

^J
t__
ON
O
..?
N
:V
?O
00
O
N
?
M
'
t?
00
a\
O
'.
tl?
N
7
?

y
R
+
0o
CT.
v,
iD
M
h
t`
Cr
7
h
N
M
7

? ,?
?
N
N
N
N ( N
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
?
t
d
It
V
?
W)
to
to

W . - r --
N
N
M
M M
M
e
7
v1
vl v1

W

a'
O O 00
N pp
M tIJ
e to
IT M
IT h
M ?O
M h
v a?
m a1
Vl M
to 00
N 00
N O
M
try h
R M
.tt M
to 00
v 00
m O
to .-+
m O
W) .-+
to N
ef. Q1
IT N ,O
to ,O
eP ,a
T H
to O
to
Z M tIJ
h O?
M d0
to ON
to kn
to rt
4 IT
to 00
to ?a
h N.
eT kn
,o m
to M
4 rl
4 b
h VO
h M
to
IT in
F v?

Q O O O O h 00 G O O N 00 ?. O O O Q O O 0O O O O O O O O O C O p O O O O O ?p O 0 0 0 0 p D\ O O O O p
a N
a a a,
0
00 y 0 0 N N N O O N N N N 0 0 0 N h 0 O 0 0 0O O 0p 0 00 0 0 0 "h r h o I N N h N N r- fV O O O Op O h t? o0 0 N O Opp
a" c to Rn
a.
.'L ?
? N ? a ? N N V ? 'd? ? ?. ? ? ? O N N ? N O d' ? v'i 7 N N O V N N N N ? er ? O N N O N N 'd' M O B N. M N V N M 00
.
r
V] US
O
N
N O O O O 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0. O O O C O C O o 0 0 0 0 0 C O O 0 O O [-- C o o M M 0 0 0 0 r- C: M OI h '! O
w °
WWW 1 1 1 I T l
w
00
W
Qo? ?. O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
I c V 00 00 ' ,o ,0 00 00 00 e m W 00 ?0 ?c dt 00
A. Q C
Qa ?

y C
O
C7 R
^r m - N N ^r ey - - - .-- .ti C M 00 N N: 00 ? 00 cn N 'D ? 00
O A
a N tip

?
^
'?
y A

? ti

•--i N

-- [1'

.-? N

'r O O

..-, N

.-. O

.-- ?p

.--,

,-.

[?

?

t/1

Q\ .-.

...r:

O,

to M

? C

,-.

to ..r

.-.

?

ON
^'
D
O
?C
'-
?U
vJ
O
O N
?

0
?w

U o ? ?

o z z
N M V' ,A (? 00 Q? --? NO _
N N N N N N _
M _
M M M M M _
d" V V V O V; V?j Gi .Nr } L' 00 O? f/1J N M fin t??1 V t? VM} Vf1 w

?A zz
w?c ao

paF wF.,
W

N
0
0
Q
z
'o^
a
a
w
w
rr rr rr rr rr rr rr rr rr rr r r r r rr rr rr rr rr
2.2.4.1 Sediment Class Size Distribution
Sediment grain size distribution was analyzed at 38 monitoring stations in 2008 (24 formerly impounded,
14 reference). At each of the 38 stations, 100-count pebble counts were performed consistent with the
Wolman method (Wolman 1954). As expected D16, D50, and D84 values from stations within the
former Site Impoundment continued coarsening during Year-3 monitoring. Values for D16, D50, and
D84 have increased in each of the three monitoring years following dam removal. The medium grain size
(D50) for impounded stations sampled in 2008 is 9.30 mm coarser than dam pre-removal substrate
(2005). The 1316 and D84 size class indices also coarsened within impounded stations. Reference
stations showed only minor changes in sediment size class following dam removal. Table 12 provides
baseline, Year-1, Year-2, and Year-3 sediment grain size distributions attained by pebble count method
for both reference and impounded stations.
Sediment grain size classes are defined as follows (per Wolman 1954):
Particle Size Size Class
<2 mm Sand/silt
2-8 mm Fine gravel
8-16 mm Medium gravel
16-32 mm Coarse gravel
32-64 mm Very coarse gravel
64-128 mm Small cobble
128-256 mm Large cobble
>256 mm Boulder
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
16
EcoScience staff performs a pebble count in a restored riffle at Station 12.
z
0
a
x
oq
0
0
00
0
0
N
id
O
E
O
x
E
Q
C
O
G
O
Q
N
U
Q
?Q?r+
fi
N
rl
.Q
c?
E?
E E E E °

b o N
M N
M D D
00 E E
N
N E
N E
N N
M N
M D
N v
N i
N N 00 E E N
M N
M N E

N
^
?D
,O
N^ N
^ V V V V V
N
V
V
V
C
V
V
V
V
p
?'p ,?
V
N

M
00

N
ao

N ,? ^

4 ,

M N N

V N

V .c

00 N

V N

V

b ? N

v

00
g E E E E E E E F E E E E E E E E
4 v N 00 M N
M t Ey C E E
N

C N

C N E

C b

C M M ? 4 4 00 E 00 E E
00
E E

N
N
M V V V V V V
V
V
V
N
00
00
b
00
M
M
N
V C
N
V
V
C
(V
N
M
V
E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E

' N E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
d N
v N
V 00
ry N
v M
6 N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V Cl
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V 00 N
V 00
N N
V N
V N N N N N N N cal
N
00 V V V V V V V V
Q E E E
E E
E E E
E E E E E
E E E E E
E E E E E E
E E E E
00 o

W) N

M o

h N

M D

h

V

C,4

cq

'o

N

ov E

C E

C E

N

N

'IF E

N N

M N

M

? It

? 00

1" 00

:! °O E

N

N N

M 00

E!
E
N
^ O n n V V 00 V v V V V N V p z V N oo N 4 V C C V %O N V
M N M 4 4 M
S
O
..

°

E

E

E

E

E

E

E
E
E
W o N 00

N

N
V

C

N
V

Op

N
V

C

N
V

C

V

C E

N
V

C

N
V

N
V

00

N

C

M

M

M

M

C

00

C E
E
M M N N V p b D N
M b V N V N fV 1c v
E
E E
E E
E I E
E E
E E
E E
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E E E E E E E
.,
'b N E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
N
V N
V N
V N
V M N
V N
V N
V
C N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V N
V 00
N 00 N N N N N N N N
C N N
N V V oo V V V V V V V N V
E E E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E E
E E
E E E E E E E E
i
c N C4 WS oc
E
E
c
E
N
v
i
E

A N D N V V V
00 V C V C V C V C e
N C M
?O
N C 00
N M
?D N
w A
N
N N
V O C V
p
0 N
V
- en ? N m M 00 00 0
N

" o E E E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E E E E E E

E E E E

E E
E
E E

E

E E E
E
E

00
00
00

C E E

rq E

Cl E E E

0? E

N E

0
N
1

1
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
N
00
N
00
N
V
V
fV
V
V
V
C
V
C
V

V

V

C

0

N

V

C

0

o
?
N
?
p
9
N

V

V

V

N

V

V

V

V

V
0 o 0 M ,;
E
E E
E gg
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E i E i E

N

<V

(V
N
V
N
N
V
N
v
N
v

C
N
V

C
N
V
N
V
N
V

C1
N
V
N
v
N
v
?.{
V
N
V
Op
N
V

C
00
00 E

C E
c? E
N E

C E
c-4 E
o? E
eq
N N N V N V V V V V V N V

a00 E
E
N E
E E
E E
E E
E E
E c?g
E E
E E
E
E E E E E q,^? E Cj- E

N
V
N
V
M
N
V N
M
N
V
C
N
N
N
?y
N
C
N
N
N
N E
N E
C.1 N
M C m p D v s E
N E
N N
M E
N
M o0
N 00
N E

V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
N
A4
C9
M
V
V
C
V
v ,
., N
v
M
b
8 N
v
°n E E
N E
E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E E E E E E E E

E E

N
V

N
V

M

N
v 10

r.

N
v

C

N
v

(V

N

N

N

N

N

C

N

N

N
E
N
E
N

N
E
N

N

O
eq
M
00
N

00
v

`"
E
N
E
N

00

N
E
N
E

R
00
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
V
v
v

V

N

N

N

V

V

N

V

V

N N

V
R7 CO ? M M 00 a0 M

4

E
E

E
E

E
E

E
E

E
E

E
E

E
E

E
E

E
E

E
8

E

E

E

E

E U
N
o

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E
'b V V N
M
p N
v 00
N N
V N
V N
V
C N
V c?yy
V N
V N
Y N N E
N N E
N N E
N E
ccVV E
C C U E E E 00 E
C14 E E
rq eq E
C11 E E E
C,

V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V

0 V V V 00 V C V V V C V V
0 00
O
M tt \O 00 N N N N N M M M M M M 7 V V 7 VT In h W) N 00 CT N N M M m h N W)
Vj 7 h h
Q?QAIflOdL1II d'RI?Y1RI03 d?PId2Id3diI
U
N
O
Q
z
U
N
a
a
W
W
t-
rr r r? r r? r? r r r r r ?r ?r ?r r rr r ¦? ¦?
2.2.4.2 Channel Cross-sections
Cross-sectional surveys of channel geometry were performed at all 52 monitoring stations during 2008.
Thirty-four (34) permanent cross-sections were revisited throughout the former Site Impoundment and on
' tributaries where functional restoration is expected to occur. Eighteen (18) permanent cross-sections were
revisited on reference reaches above and below the former Site Impoundment. Cross-section locations
are displayed on Figure 3 (Appendix A). All monitoring years' cross-sectional surveys are displayed on
' Figures 4A-4D (Appendix A). Table 13 provides bankfull channel geometry including bankfull cross-
sectional area (Abkf), bankfull width (Wbkf), maximum bankfull depth (Dmax), mean bankfull depth
(Dbkf), and width-to-depth ratio (width:depth).
' In general, bankfull channel parameters were largely unchanged compared to conditions assessed during
Year-1 monitoring. Only minor scouring and erosion of bank material was detected at formerly
impounded stations, with an associated, minor increase in bankfull areas. High flow, bankfull events that
occurred during Year-3 monitoring (April 28, 2008 [2,220 cfs] and August 27, 2008 [8,470 cfs]) have
further demonstrated that the Deep River channel is geomorphically stable, and that erosion is episodic
' and localized. Station 55 was established following dam removal and therefore no baseline (2005)
bankfull channel geometry data are available for this station. At Stations 7, 15, and 17, only one of the
original benchmark pins was recovered and a new pin was established in 2006. Hence, the discrepancies
' in cross-sectional dimensions and bankfull channel geometry between the baseline and Year-1 monitoring
data at these locations.
JEEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
18
EcoScience staff prepare to perform a Total Station cross-sectional
survey of the Deep River at Station 8.
z
x
?n
0
0
00
0
0
N
O
N
C1i
A
G
O
G
O
A
t
u
O
0
O
U
w
C."
M
C
O
Ski
U
ri
C1i
F*
N h h M 00 00 10 M O ? h 0 1,: o0 ? O N O ? O d oo -? O V) -mo d V? ?. h CT 01 tn N ?t ? t? 00 ?D O d 00 ON N 00 00 V) 00 10 ?
O 06 O 3? O N C )W) c0 , C? tri M OO 4 ?O ?D ? ?O vi - h o0 oo ?0 ? .?-, M
3 -

.-.
M
00
?
h
M
00
M
?
DO
--?
\p

10

N

V1

1?

00

1?

0

oo

O

M

M

01

M

N

C?

l?

M

?

h

V)

O?
?
00
•--?
?O
?
?
M
?-+

tn o? 00 V)
N
O

-Q w
.--?
OO
OO
OO
h
h
Vj
00
-
N
00
N
N
M
M
--?
N
M
M
V)
trj
N
V)
\D
OO
OO
CY
?
V1
0?
%C
IO
V)
"t
M
m
h
M
h
0
?0 ? Jj
0 n N 0 0 10
m
M
M
iw
?
V)
OO
h
M
00
-+
IO
N
Oo
01
0
m
0
C?
O
M
d
'n
c
O,
N
O,
oo
'n
N
w
.-.
en
d
N
N
?O
V1
v)
V
M
OO
d
p
oo
?O
N
?O
•-+
^
?
>.4 W
N 10
N 'i
N 4
N M
N N
N 0
N 10
N rt
.-+ 00
- V)
N
V)
V)
?
00
M
?
6
t/)
00
?
4
01
00 •-
r O
mi
l`
h
00 M O
-
00 --
.- oo
-- h
.. -
N tn
N h
-- M
N N
A .?
N
N
-.
M
[`
-+
d\
00
0T vi
? N
N
M
00 A
O
N -, o0 "t -- 00 h O M tn r? C+1
h
N
N
N
M d' 01 o0
? h "t tn tn -- 1o N 00
-
N
V?
-? ? M
O 10 N a, m w 0 N
. M N
' h N Q\ ?

N
0
100
0M1
1?O
?
OM1
001
?
01
01
?
0
d0
M M
N \O
? M
N
N O?
? M
O ?t N O
v ?
O? cV
O ?t
?O6
t?
v?
6
in
M
N
N
?
ON
oo
N
-
? N
N ?
I
? O
ON V
)
OM O?
O C?
in
v7
O
D
r
I N N ? ? n M m

^ h

? ?O

O M

h 00

00 00

N 0?

v) o0

h M

10 ?

10 M

? -

?

O

t?

10

t?

T

?

?

0

00

M

B

.-+

l?

O?

V?

N

t?

?

0

I?

00

O

0

-+

\r ?

W)

) M

OO l?

V) --

1C M

0 N

W) O

r
m

-
00

1:

O

)

P?

?D

?n OW

O N

N

h
O o00 0?1 100 0M1 ? 0?1 ? O d

I
0
10
-
?
N
?
0?0
?
0?0
?
?-
N
d
?
?
?
M
?
M
M
N
VN
?
?
?
Ln

In
r-
?
N
I? I
N
O
?
N
M
M _
?
'-
V) M N M N M N M N N M M N to M N m •--? N N N
M V) ? 10 0 M 0 0 01 0 h 0 ^- 01 01 tn _ m V) N "t N 10 tn M et h m M 01 00 M 00 0 N 01 tn ? tn ?t O0 10 M h O ? h M 00 00
b -- O o0 0 0 0 M O "t h 0 0? ?+ M N ri O ? 0O Wn M all ? 11p1 .O 11p Vj ?n - h h o0 ?p ? d N a m -+ h 0
. r- r- tn o6 ?O 6 h 0 h N ?
.-» •? - ,, .-. '-, .-? .-- ? .. - N .--? .-. N . ? - - M -- r -+ . , - N - - .
- 00 r1 10 0 0T zt 0 10 01 00 10 ? ? o0 0 m 00 0 r- 01 01 - N d. N ?O I- M ?.O V) ?O .O ? d N - m xn r- ? M ? C? z
0 01 00 00 1D OO W) OO - - OO N M M N -- N ? M W) *t tn l6 o6 o6 tn tn v) O1 h 10 V) It It It 0
0 m r- 0 'n ? 0 -- M 0 z 10 tn N N --
N 00 O

cl 0 - V1 ^? h I? d d 0? O? 00 N 00 c-, h -- C- V? a,, ?D w [ 0, 00 0 _ 11R r: `O N [ M O I? -' M ON (- w h l-
"R
OR

h
A v N N N N N N ON N ? w N 4 4 ? 6 N ?n ?O ,D h 00 M d? h '?. ? h 00 00 o0 0 ? ? N n ; N c -i -4 ci t- -4 G\ o0 00 ?_ ? N

O

O N r? N 0? O N 00 0\ ? 0? 0? V) 00

-? OO N 00 10 00 V) t "t "D - 00 ?

N h tp

? V)

-•

O O M tn N ct ? CT h 01 m 01 "t m M 17
O D\
N ,?

3 tn
M -c
O ol
V) -?
01 rn
10 rn
00 N
01 ?
00 lD
h O1
01 oo
01 ,?

? N

V1 oo

M -

m f
00 "t
X0 lG
0 l-
01 oo
V) -•
oO v)
r-+ 01
O C?
d
l
^'
n
O 10
N
O
\O
O
h
d
V) 00

V) 06

M 1o
m M
-? -t
V) N
O r-
OO N
O 't
I? \?O
?C
O
N V)
f? ?
0 01
00 0
^? N

.
N
V)
r'
N O
N V)
?0
0
N N -, ? -- -- -- - -. N - M N , - N -,t t m N N "t N - N - .-+ ? N N mo d N .
01 0 to V) O M 01 et N M .-r V) h
RM "R - -t C O F`- V) OR ?n N 1D V1 -- V) 00 '71: '-+ M r? V) C?
w r.
o0
00
0
00
M ?
?0
Q t?
?n
t O
z
O h
00
? h
0N
0 "t
m
t et
01
O -1
v) 10
0
h .6
0 q?
01
01
- '
0 m
'-+ q
110 ? ? O
? t
?n r
?0 01
? C
vD h
oo p
N ,t
h z
0
00
?- + N00 v1j
j? 00 000 z N
t 10 z
VI) N
%.0
% .4 ,. ?n •-"
? m
h M 0 ?o

0
d
00
M
\
N

M
0
N

M
0
N
C
M

N
M
N

M
.-
-
.
0
10
-r
C
h
M
y
N
`?
?
'•-
-
M
\D
e1
M
N
?
M
O
M
?
,
o
10
M
n
N
V)
M
r_
-?
c
N N
N
N
M
MM
00
N
•--
N
--
.

? 00 "
t` M
01 N tn M N oO h •-? V) o0 v) h O
10
10
t?
M
01
0
ch
10
v)
?O
?n .?
10
?
O
N V) O ? N h h 0 01 O "t
?
•-, o0
CT
^? OR ', :
?
:C Q - O 00 O ? O O O ? Q N M h _ N . " tom V) M O0 ? 16 4 16 V) 0 [" 01 0', 10 ? W N N ? o
0 0 N N 10 1-: In vi 00 0 r- M
3 - - - -
. . ? ?
O N N oo OR n O N 0 tn Z '1: 01 - Do ? M O ^+ 00 0? 1? 1p -- V) "o r_ r__ ? tn 10 00 z 00 ?t N h r: 10
A w 0 01 00 00 16 00 \0 00 N N 00 N N M N ^- N 0 N tn 4 N tn M OO 0 d to vi 01 '.6 16
tn
?
"t
'
01
,n
0
0
M
0
10
10
V)
N
„-
--
I
9
9
9
9
i
..
-- h O M ? N OO et 10 10 ?
4
4
wi
W
?
z
O
N
M
0 1C ?
O
r
O - C` O v1 1D Q1 1p (? N tp
M
b0
0
M 10 M
?
w
A N N N N N N
N 0
N 00
N Wn
-••r o0
- "t
N V) tn N ,t
d z
1D 1A 10 00 ? 01 00 0
x M 1? h 00 M
- O
-- ,6
00 11 1 -+
N 1
N 1o
-+ N
N N
-? p
N N O M 10 ? 00 o0 01 ?
^, ?
„y N
1o
O
N ^ 0 0 00 r- OR r-: OR N V) 0\ M ? oo to -- 10 ? Cr (3? l?
'-+
[?
M
N
-.

M

V)

?

N

10
?
O
10
O
M
0
to
1C?

t-

h

?

O?

d

OH

O
D\
h

..,
3 w tn
N lO
a1 OO
? M
D\ V)
10 h
o0 N
? tn
o0 M ")
Q\ °1
01 ?
d h
h lo
tn 4
M h
M 00
N 10
-- 01
N 0o
N V)
--+ 00
•- -+
N O
It M
W) OO
't N
M ?
m 1p
V) 01
10 01
V) 01
V7 V)
M
N
00 _M N
0 O M
? '-'
O ?
h Ih O
N N
.-
? 1D
N ?
? 0
et -
tn ,c
V o
I) o
N N - 9
r-:
N
--?
h -
N V)
N Q\
0 h
01 '7
? 0
O0 10
N 01
O 00
?}
?
4
tn
l-
wi
w
163
-: M
10 N 00 01
10 00
1o h
N o0
0 to
<6 10
06 ? 10
? M
fA 01
? N
M --
N 1U
1C M
l- 10
?
?
01 0R
0 V)
N M [`? A CT

"
N
h
00
10
?'
O?O.
M
O
Ct N
r
?
00
00
p
V'1 m
h
1p
~
d'
K?j -
.-r
V)

N
M

?
N

V1
V)

*-
1-

--
•?.

M
M

10
00

M
00

M

0
N

M

0

01

M

\O

0

N

?

-? N

?
.-

?

'N N

M (.

N 0,

?

~
d M N M N M N M N N M M M V) M N M A N N --+

.b OO O
0 ? ,? O
-" tn \O !}' 00 .-r N M
N ?
10 -+ M
M O
O ? ?y ,--i 'Cr Ct •-1 0 10 01 01 10
"-" [? Vl V) V) Q? ? ?
tn OR
O ri
M r-
01 \CJ
0 ^'
00 N
0 O V) OO
• p V)
N OO .h
V m
? 01 00 -
i ? CT ? ? r^ N
N
N
-
N
.-+ V) M 10 M 0\ 4 r- 00 V) \C V)
.- h 1?1 01 r?
Z
--
N
_ 01
_
1
N V) 00
0o
--r 10 06
-.
h
-
f
.i 1D
3 b "
0 10 *- 00 171 01 (n ? 0 N O l- 10 0 V1 V) V1 0\ o0 \O O N N N 10 V1 M M V) N m m V) M ? O tn tn ? M 1D Ow N 00 ? Q h
N V) t- 10 h N OO

-- - N N N -+ N N 10 t1 N V) 10 10 00 tf V) V) 01 01 \O
9

N
11
w,
-4

O

M

O

1CJ

10

OP

M-

-•
9 1 .
?'
CO CSC
?+
"
? N

(`-' O

OO CT

M C,

01 0

M 0

N 0

01 -

-t O

V) O

00 M

'ct'
10
10
00
(?
o1
CT
o0
o0
tn
t(?
--
N
10
N
?
O
1-
00
?
r:
h
°O
Q
?
10
h
M
M
-1

C7i

N

M

O

M

-+

Oy
O

l?
.? .
...
A N N N N N N - 6) -- - N M N N N ? 00 1p h ? 01 00 00 10 1p h ? M h 4 Z N N ?.c N N N cV O cv lp - O 06 06 10 N N
tn
;
N in N 1M0 N0 N t eID N OOO D tn O V)

N \O CT V)
-t
M V)
[?
V)
N M
M
O1
?
V)
01
00
01

?

00

00

N

h

V)

V)

CT

?

--

--

M

O

?

00

-

h

3

M N

0?1 1

.-? 10 n

00 ? f

. h ? DO

00 ?

--t

x - N

r- ? ?

- 01

- C\ t.1

d h

W) 01

't O

M 0\

m ?

N m

? N

N O\

N V)

«. 00 --

N M

"t M

tn O

W) O

M O\

N

's
O N

l- 01

tn CT

W' d1

Mm
?
j
N
N M

01 [0

60 D
N
CT
-
00
[-
,D a M O

[? 00

N ^-

_ N

t 01 01

t ? ?

1 0,
. r ? n N -
w
W
w 0
r
0 0
r
M 0
a-,
1 -?
I
N ?
M
00 tn
N
10 N
N
? K
0O
00 O
ct 4?,
-
N M

O?
N
N

? 0\

°0
1Q
K5
10
kr
M
i
N N

C, N

-
^+
V
?
h cM (? N O', d

0\ 0?

W.) ?/

o O

v) d

Ci O?

o0 Vi

0N
Q
? h
om r
- n
O M
? O
N O
t-
r--
C
N
N
?
M
M oo
p? h
tp
h

`-'
h
oo
00
N
h
m
It
o
•
N
tn
h
?
h
?
?
?
? f
h
m
?
N
m
?
m
?
m
?
?
m
?
z kn
o -
- ?
N t?
m 1D
oo N
h rt
lo c
i N
'n
C; N
16
000
?
cc
m N ? N m N M N h l M M <' , M N N - N N M N N N
0
O
ro N M 11Y tn 1O 1- 00 01 0
t--? 4 N 0 ffI*1 N
N eq
N N h

N C?

N O
M --i
M N
M
M ?0
M 00
M 0
t7 ?--i
? N
?! M !
? 00
? 01
? O
V t--
?I tn
? N
•• "T in lC h o0 01 V1 10 M Rol h 01 7 Vs
41 N m
) ) ?
t ? ? ? .i .. ,..i N N M M M M 7
cn
L 1 suo.1 IS papunodtui Xjjawao3 suol;e;s aauaaaJag

rn
Q
N
0
0
A
0
z
U
O
t.
a
a
w

' 2.2.4.3 Flow Velocity
Flow velocity was not measured during Year-3 (2008) monitoring because a substantial increase in river
flow was demonstrated in Year-1 (2006) monitoring. Surface and stream bottom flow velocities in the
former Impoundment exhibited an increase greater than one order of magnitude in Year-1 monitoring;
thus the success criterion was met. Following the initial increase in velocity from the removal of
Carbonton Dam, stream flow will now fluctuate greatly as determined by drought and precipitation
' events, and can no longer be attributed to restoration efforts.
2.2.4.4 Photography and Videography
' Photography and videography were conducted during Year-3 monitoring data collection to assess
qualitative changes in channel cross-sections and in-stream habitat. Monitoring pictures and videos for
all stations have been included on a digital video disc (DVD) in Appendix E.
' 2.3 RARE AND PROTECTED SPECIES
The documented presence of any rare species within the former Site Impoundment throughout the five-
year monitoring period will constitute success in fulfilling the rare and protected aquatic species criterion.
The federally endangered Cape Fear shiner was found during Year-2 fish surveys by TCG at eight
' sampling sites throughout the Deep River. A total of 41 individuals of the endangered Cape Fear shiner
were collected during the Year-2 surveys. Furthermore, favorable habitat areas for the Cape Fear shiner
have developed at many other locations, and the recruitment of new populations is expected to continue
' over time.
The emphasis of the Year-3 monitoring effort is to document whether freshwater mussels are also re-
colonizing habitats previously impounded by Carbonton Dam. A total of eleven freshwater mussel
species, three aquatic snail species and l freshwater clam species were found within newly formed riffle
habitats in the former impounded reach. The surveys documented several mussel species of conservation
interest associated with lotic condition, including five state listed species: yellow lampmussel (Lampsilis
cariosa), creeper (Strophitus undulatus), triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata), eastern creekshell
(Villosa delumbis), and the notched rainbow (Villosa constricta). The presence of notched rainbow is
1 especially significant because this species is extremely throughout the Deep River. Four collected mussel
species (triangle floater, yellow lampmussel, creeper and eastern creekshell) were targeted rare species
identified in the pre-removal report.
2.4 RESERVE CRITERIA
2.4.1 Public Recreation
In 2007 RS completed the establishment of Carbonton Park as a recreational area in the vicinity of the
former Carbonton Dam. The newly completed park consists of vehicle parking, picnicking sites, bank
' fishing, and improved access to the river for kayakers and canoeists. RS formally transferred the new
park with an endowment to the Deep River Park Association during a ceremony on November 22, 2008.
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
' 20
2.5 SUMMARY
After the third year of monitoring, the removal of Carbonton Dam has resulted in the continued
restoration of lotic conditions with functional improvements recorded in water quality, fish and mollusk
abundance, and sediment transport. Mitigation success has been demonstrated for the following criteria:
Re-introduction of rare and endangered aquatic species, water quality improvement with respect to
dissolved oxygen concentrations and benthic biotic indices, scientific research, and public recreation.
Continued monitoring is necessary to confirm success for the convergence of benthic EPT taxa to
reference data, and the recolonization of mollusks in the newly restored lotic community. See Table 14
below.
Table 14 shows the primary and reserve mitigation success criteria and parameters for this project. The
final column evaluates the success in fulfilling project criteria.
Table 14_ Mitiontinn Snerecc f ritPrin Cnmmarv
2008
Criterion Parameter Anticipated Chan e/Result Success
Primary success Presence/absence of
criteria: Re-colonization of rare/protected Unknown Yes
rare and
rotected individuals
p
aquatic species Rare/protected species Improvement/expansion Yes
habitat
Benthic biotic indices Decrease (= improve) Yes

Improved water Increase within former Site
quality AMS dissolved Impoundment (must be >
oxygen data 4.0 mg/L or consistent with Yes
reference station data)
Ephemeroptera,
Plecoptera, and Increase (i.e., converge with

Improved aquatic
Trichoptera taxa, total
reference station data) Ongoing,
Improving
communit number of benthic taxa
y
Fish, Mussel, and
Demonstrated shifts in
Snail community data communities from lentic to Yes
lotic character
Reserve success
criteria: Downstream Deep River bankfull
benefits below channel within Narrowing/increased Ongoing
dam formerly eddie/scour stabilization of channel
pool areas below dam
Scientific value Published research Successful completion Yes
Public recreation Construction of
planned on-Site park Successful completion Yes
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
22
APPENDIX A: FIGURES
I EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
Appendix A

( i1
? l
V
_ ? t? .
i C`eQ1(
; o
Carbonton Damn
7 s'r ;Sanford `'
> ?'
cw?on
`„H r
T;
1 GORE 7 ?. 1
Q 6 , 12 ! Miles a v'
rL Q
BrAric , r :r, r
..--,,
Site Location FIGURE Drawn By. Date:
MTC - SEP 2006 ,
-_ 11 Deep River- Carbonton Dam Chkd By: Project No:
Restoration Site APS
_ 06-288.03 ,
Lee, Chatham, and Moore SCALE:
Counties, North Carolina AS SHOWN
i7i
?P
III ilem
Greensboro
N
W -4t- E
To-
S
1]
Q¢Jgtkoint ?` GUI
Hill
^ Ra r I Si e? Ci ?? ittsigg PC] r
I
r
ort ion
Den RA O
?Carbonton Dam II
Golds'tbn
py?
.0 1
HINDI
Legend
0 8-Digit Hydrologic Unity Boundary
E3Site Impoundment
Major Rivers
Q River Basins
River Subbasins
0 Count I;
4
030
ylnes 10 0 10 Miles
Major Cities L
Hydrologic Units Drawn By: MTC
EcoScience FIGURE
Corporation Deep River-Carbonton Dam Chkd By: GRM
Raleigh, North Carolina Restoration Site Date: SEP 2006
Chatham, Lee, and Moore Counties, 2
North Carolina Project: 06-288
(0 z 01)
0 00
LU Z w O > N
U O a 20 «?-- O' W O wZJ Z Z H o
?•?,? _ H?=H ?=o0
W00 w U N w
? H
O? ? m W H O N ¢o= Z Fa- 0 p U C) z 0 ?'
I-L
?o"? v ??QN =off OHO
WU? W UpZ di J m m a
J Q' Z H Y U)
U a Q p U w
r ,
^
.
_ 4 +
{ i
V, P 604j
j
ea ?
. ,, * fit`. ? ?t,.,^ • ?„ ? '`.^d ? + n
•?. ft ?- . ..-•?!..,? ,i' „# `+ t is ? ??"? ?«` ?' ' - At -
ff ? • er
L ls' ? 5
1 1
N T7 c (1-1
X §
+r r i"
_ ,,/" 'y,w r • .? ?}V Ste'} .??'"'"`\'? ^ r ?„ ? ?--"t ?
_._ ., Zt 1
Q.Q
'F S
,
9 ? At '
`y
f C)
%
peob pia;uogae? u04spIO!E) r `o
,.
f'Af N w
d { ? C LO •M
f ? a O M >' t
(! ? ? ? "516' t' \k;.
..
00
ry
+,? M
(V
1 r; 1.. i / ? ?'+ ?, tom, • -
+s+ 0? ,?, ,» -"
-• ti "111
r?
,
7Y -?
oa
CL
cc m U a+ .? a N r
U) ) V- O? ?t
1
a) t:
Z in >
_ n ., .• r
W N L U U) C1
w U U- 2 c _ 7 'U '? a "F .- G p r o!-
W ?' r` ° z•
m cc fi
o o
- r'
J m y > . 4 ]
L) L)
U) U)
o rn o
m c?II ' f ` [ yd t (n z; m = = m m i r = mm m m = I

o

"
Y ` ¢ O Lr) OZ OZ O Z _ U >,W
N ? N2 Np N0 ZW Iof
p) O O??0 Ox Owz P": 0 EL
>- aX i-m >-m >-m t?nx wLf

z
w m
J
0 0 0 0 0 0 ?n O in
rn rn m O r r' 20 0 O O 0 O LO O 0 O
rn 00c) W r n
n
N
0
I
?
0 N N
(O O
0 L' O O
N 1 N N
Z C
IL
C
=a o 0
(? O
C N N
w'L
-

Z
0
00
0
co
I
O
?
F.
O
o
I

I
o0
00?
I? m aD
V O rn
U
Z
O
F O Z
°N O
`"° F O Z
° _N 0
° F
Q
F O Q
-
C F O Q
F
-
C
VI /
^
U V/
N
O '^
'
H VI
O

YX
O _
i
Ili O
O
co
S
?f
O
O
O
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 in
m m w m h h c0
UOl}Ona13 anl}olaa
c
a

c

- )'- _ c
N
v
z
0
Q
N
N
V -IC
I Ic
1 ISO
1°

('};) UOgona13 ani}ol;

N

0

ro

I I°
7 O
-.... _ O
U
C Z
O
N 0
D
O Q
C F'
O VI
O
S
no,no?no?no
? O rn rn m m ? ?
(';;) UOi}Ona13 anl;Ol<
o?W
0 86
j _
Z>
UW z?

v?
Zawo~
? w
,Z

:Z
o W Qfn

co
W
X03 <v

Q
z
- p
I Q
U 10
um
L

n o In O Ln O in
rn rn m w n ? o O o in O o O o O
? ? N o) oo co h h o
(0
};) UOI;On913 anl;Olo °oLO0Ln0Lno
mm roao?n

O
V
C
O Z
o O
O
O
U)
S
0

N
O
N

I
I N
I
O
0

ro

U)

O
N

_.. O
O

O
O
N

U
O Z
o O_
O Q
C
O V)
S
0
U U
O Z O Z
N 0 ? N O
o F ? ?o ?
O F- O Q

O
N V) N UJ
10
_

I O '
O =
O
00
Y
1
I °? O
N

L __----
n ooo,no no n
O O m 01 00 W r r U) 0
('11) UOI;Onal3 anl;Olaa
00 Ln0 Lno LO
rn m w m h f (
UOl;ona13 anl}Olaa
? N
U
C
O Z
0 0
_
r
O A
C 1_
O
S
?, t0
U
O Z
O
o F
O Q
C
O VI
O
S
0
ro
O
(D
at
0
I I 1co

1°
I r l0
(•};) UOl;onal3 anl;Ol;
O 0 LC) O ?) O in O
m rn .0 co , ,
0
N
0
N
c
N
0
o
0
O
.. O

°
aO
O
O
0
O
N

O
n 0 0 0 0 o?)O o
-i n
IT Uo1;Ona13 and}Ole
u
O
O
C
O
O
S
O
O
C
O
O
S

O
u o o n o o o in O
O O m m m w h h
('};) uoi}ona13 ani}Olaa
0 0? o? o? o?
?rnrnroao??m
0
N
d N
U
C Z
O
N O
D
O Q
N V!
S
U Z O
Z
Z O T m
m = d

U
Y ui N
U O
°
F

r
Q
U cn z i
Z 6 ? o to
O U) m ? c04 a
o O (n
O O in 0 in o p o Ln p 00 O n o n o
Ol O) o? 00 n r cD ? ? Ol O) N OJ I? r

('};) UOl}on913 anl;Olaa
o °oLnoLo o?oo
rn rn ro ro ? ??
°oLO )o r, 0 00 (D w a (D z
?-j °oz oz °o? l Z o moo' Q Z ?a Z o °
W W p ID 0 Z C) m v=i o
W ?C `' O ?° o w L'I
?
QQw°o w Qz z Qz a? a?a . = Z > = 1- ou Q' U $ °u m
!2 6
it w W(L WO O (,g0 w How O- fn q w 2F U N
Z W
o ram r? r? r? ?n? (n (. _ Z a Of LOG ~ ° U °° x
O 0w U) En
?z 26
" v - a` U ° H U o D o w
00)no n o o o n p°)no )noooLn
2 m m w w r n o 2 2 m m w m ? ?)
0
N
Z
0
F
Q
F
N
c
a
a
c
a
cc
O
M,
c
M
C
M
O
O
w
Z
O
Q
0

0
.r
o
i N

0 0
0
N I N
O ifl
O Ln 0 o o p o
m m m m ? h 2 O O u7 o in o n o
F- N i N O O m m I O 0 m m
ro
o
m
O

o
N
Ytl
-"
Y? r

O
ion o if] O )n O to O ifl
O rn rn m m ? ? .n
c
(0
N r
U
C
O
O Z
N 0
o Q
c F
o V)
0
x
u7 o in o m o to
m m m m r, n m
a
c
cc
Uogona13 aAijolaa ( a;) UOiIOAa13 aA!I.la8
o ^
N O M
v N
U o N
U
c
o z
v z
0 N 0
O F p F
Q ! o Q
c
o
N o
O O O
T ?x

O
m Orn
(?Jj) U6I}ona13 a
O in O in o
2 m m co m
N
N r
U
C Z
O
o _0
o Q
c F
o N
x
16,
c
L
V n
(O O
O U
O
Z c ?
a
c
F?
=
c

W c
3
`
w
z0 cc
c
a
c
a
c

1 c
w

C
m
O
N
_
n o Lo o )n O )n O Ln
Dommmm? . O
I
I
I
I
I
III
I
n
O O
O rn O
m
in O

O
O )n
m
00
o^
u N
u
o z
o 0
?
o ?
o (A
N
O O
x
O
O
('I;) Uoi}ona13 aAi}o G,j (;j) UOi}ona13 aAi10ab
O Lo O )n o )n o o U) 0 0 O )n 0 0 0 v
pp m m w w n n )o _2 m m w w ? n u
OD
O1 ?
U
C
O Z
0 0
F
o Q
c F
o N
x
n om2 m22?e 2''
a
N
O ?
C
o F
o d
c f
o U
x
in o
n
O
0
w
CD -?
0
N
0
0
0
N
O O
't x
O I

O
N
0
N
N
0
0

I
g 0
w
0
w

I o0
O

0

0

o0
O

'
,
.
O 0 rn O m 0^ O O
CW UOi;OA013 aAi;Olaa ('};) UOl4OAa13 aAl}olab (??) UOl}OAa13 ai
U
C
N
0
c
0
0
x
('1;) UOI;DAal3 ar
m m r m m m m r m m m
C

C
a
c
I
c
a
c
C
a

cc
Ic
C
n
U
co z
0
O F
o Q
c
0
x
n

C

I a
c

c
v

m

I c
O

O
N
_,... O

OAa13 G,
LO O
m co
('};) UOl}OAa13 aAl}Olaa
0
N
°
p p m O m O Ln O Ln
O C a) m m m h h l0
N
O Q O
x L ?
Z
0
Q
F
U) -1+I
0 OZ OZ OZ I U I JW z 2 O
Npj NO NO NO ZW ZWZ Q 00 cep m N 00
H F- (- O W -< Z H .. o
????., ,go ,ego 6 o aw ao° )e: Z > = I- Z? U Y v o C `1
>- atr >-m >-2 >- 2 ? L, i ao O L O (n
Z = V U) 00 IS ri Z a. W O Z O N
0 Cl or-,, ai Lu CO a w Z? S to
b m W Q (n SF O? m N
A'4
w? r-- N W Q z Q O_
J: W F F- c
b w o °? ° Q o' °-' ?' c no v
rl Q -J + o U U o o w
00
Z
O
H
Q
(n
n o m o
o o
rn 0 M0
o m o 0 0 M o 0 0 Lr) 0
0
00
0
O1
U
o Z
F
ao o Q
C F
o (J)
O
x
O
N
0
^al=
m
N
K)
Z
O
F
Q
(n
I
o 00 m °
I
0
0 0
n rn O
o o o
m
O
U
v Z
0 O Q
o Q
C F
O
O
x
0
N
S o n
0 o rn °rn
co
0
U
c Z
0 O
a ° F-
o ?
o N
`o
x
0
N
(;)) u61 }onal3 anllolaa (}3) uollona13 anilolaa
0
0
v M
U
o z
O
° F
o Q
O p (n
N N
O
S
a o
rn rn
N
N
Z
O
F
F
V)
0
a
d M
U
O O Z
N N O
F
o Q
C
O
0
2
O
0
a
In
U
O o Z
N? O
F
o Q
O (n
0
T
0
0 (Ill) uoilona13 anilolaa (711) uollon913 anllolaa
('7J) uogonal3 a^!lDlaa
0 o ,n
O O m
a

jI O

Lr) o v
O O O
(0
N
C Z
0
O
° F
a <
O (1)
2

n
O O
n n
rn O
(71j) uollonal3 anpolaa ('14) u61lona13 anllolaa
n o n o
0 0 o rn
0
I 0
o
? I
i
0
a
N N
V U
c
0 0 O
m
o F ° F
o F o Q
o V) o o U)
o `o
2 S
O
0
o o rn m
('};) uollona13 anllolaa
I
C)
C) °
n rn O
^al3
m
m ?
03
to o 0 o o
0 o rn rn o o a rn
0 0
0
.. N
U
o Z
O
0 0 ?
o F
o N
0
S
O
N

0 I
0
? e
M

U U
O Z O
o O o

o Q o
C F
O O V) O O
N N N N
o
2 I
O
I O
n
O O
O Ln
rn O
a,
(;)) uol4ona13 anilolaa ('})) uol}ona13 anllolaa
0
0
O
tp
U
o Z
N O
O F
o Q
0 0 V)
N N
O
S

0
o v
a o
rn
c

I
I
I

c

a
r
c
c

Ln
o
m
o
v V)
U
O Z
O
° F
o Q
C N
O
O
2
0 0 "' o
rn rn

I?
I'+
III I
I
o o rn

O
N
0
0
O O
N N
O
S
('j)) uollon913 anyolaa ('13) u614onal3 anllolaa ( j)) uol(ona13 anllolaa
?n O in O to ° in O 0 in O
0 o rn rn o 0 0 m m 0 0 o m m
°
00 ro co
F
I i
i I
O o
O O I
I
Ii
i U U U
° O Z V 4 0 O
O
o F o F o
III o Q o ?
H
o (n o (n _
O o u
x x _
0 0 o
N N l ?' N
l
0 C) C,
Ln o Ln o 0 o Ln o Ln o Ln o
_O o rn rn o_ o rn m _o o rn rn
O)) uollonal3 anilolaa ('lb) uollonal3 a^llolaa ( 1)) uol4ona13 anllolaa

O OZ_ ^ O? OZ_ U ?-W °tli" Wa U 3 g
aQ ? 0 W Z w zW
Z _ .s Q O Z p oZ (' Z r 2
(N N N 0 cN
o> 0 o oo O_ m cn .1
X 1 0 ?Z ?Z ?Z ?g w 20 Z w w H Du z H v o °
?a w ,go 6o ,L5o aw Boa ) +?, p > E U Y u d
ram > >m >- Nwm ~ H u;o 0 0 w 0 V) ac) Z
ZCL wO ° )
0 0 .. s? Gam... ti mw<U) 0U) m N o 3: w
S w < ( Cr d Q' D 20 \ a
0 L)
C) u
X I - C) in no
n o
(O O 1 O O 0 N o O O M m ro °m r r, , rn °rn
0 0
m m m m
o
O O
O
O
D O
00
O v
O 1 0
Z U

C O U
C
o

Q ,
.
?
D Q O
D
VI
O C
7 O
N O
O
N
Q ?
O
N O
N
O O
O 0 m m O O - °Oj tf)
('};) uOi}on913 ani}Olab ('}}) uOl}ona13 anp Olaa
Z
O
f-
In
O 0
O O
O O Ln CD
O O , O
m m
N

l O
O O
O

0 O
00 O

00
O O
(O U G y
O U
Z O Z °
O N_ p N
F O F O
Q o Q v
C ? _
C
O
O
N
O
°
p
O
x I x
i
O
N

f
O
N
O O
(n O (n o In o (O O
O O O O O O O m Ln c in O u-) O O N
uOi}ona 3 ani}O19a uOl}ona 3 and}O a o o m m ro ro °
(}?) (11) 1 a
('}}) uol}ona13 and}Olaa
(n O 'n O n o o° n o
o o m° °° m m O O m°
It
It
Z
O
H
H
V!

O
p I
O
O
O
O
O
0 O
co O
0
tf)
O N d
O N d
'a'
O N
C C C
O Z O Z s °
O
o F- O
0 1- N
o
o Q o Q o
C H
N
G O N C H
O
G N

?? C
O
O N
O O O

O
N O
N O
N

(O O iO o
O O m O (n O in O
O O m
('14)?uOl}Ona13 anl}OlGH 14)?uOllonal3 anl}Olaa ( 11) uoponal3 anllOlay
0 O 0 O in O LO O (O
o O m m w ao r, -? (o
('};) uOi}on913 ani}Olaa
N
O
N
O
N
(0
N
`v
a?
O C
L
O 0
41
0)
w
v
a tc)
v In
O °
N N Z
o O
o ?
o ?
N `^
O V'
O
O
ro
O
V
O
N
O
N O ? O ? O ? O tI]
O O m m O7 W f? r o
(n O n O (n O iO O n
O o m m m m n r-(°
('ll) uOilonal3 an11Ol@?1
00
O
O
N
O
C\I
N
O
O
ro
O -
U
C
O
_N
O
? o
e- C
0
x
O
O
x
O
O
I
0
O
N
N
O It
O
N Z
O
F-
0 (f)
O
LO
0
0
O
O N
ID c
O
O
O
C
0
O H
? O
O
N
O
('}1)?uOl}Ona13 anl}Olaa
C
O
O ?
N _
O
C p 1(7 O if] O if7 O In
O .- m m 00 00 h h (D
N
O
S
O
O
00
LID
O
O
O
L
Z
O
H
Q
I-
_
0 000 0 Z O
09 0? 77- 2 U) U 0
Z TT d
?^• N C14 p 0 Q v 0 0 O m
V) O
Q a Z W 2 a Q Z H
W O W O O? (1) Z CO U cn Z W
Of W J O W w
ZCL WO~ Jo W?? ? po i
1 - c C OWH?U ?w ?Z? 0
t w W z Ur ?O F a
U Q e W' 6 ;d
L
o O v] O ° 0 O n O O o u7 O N O ° n O O N ° u7
M M N N O M M N N O M M N N `-' O M M N N O
N N N N N N N ° V N N N N N N p N N N N N N N O N N N N N N N p
N :J
!
I
I
I
l
O O O
\C; cD t0 t0 t0
N N N N
i O O i O O
v e a a
N ! N N N
i
O O O O
N N N N
N N N N
I I
! ?a
d
O O O O
N N N N
I
I
'0 .0 W
I
!
O O O O
yam(` N M a
Z ! d Z Z Z
O O O O
G H F H !
I a
a a
? N I N Ul
O O O O
m co m m
Q Q I. Q I Q
C K 0
O O O C7
I
O O O O
N N 1 N N
I! e I
I i
!
O O O
O O O
III
8
O O O O
( co 00 co co
O O W W
RR
IY
O O O N O
I
I
N N l N N
o O in O 0 O in ° in O itl O M O n O o O o O u) ° in p o O ?n O ,n O
cMV N N N N N ? N N N N N N O M M N N ? ? O M M N N `- O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
NOI1VA313 N011VA313 N011VA313

9
?iHnoij
:'ON loafoJd
:aluos
I
AS po
ZOOZ "6 aaq-jdac,
11 Ad WIM
vex mu
tui
c.4
:luail?
! ¦ 10 UOIDAiv V
aJU•)l I." 1.1.".

aal.43STp ueau fiTTee
e;ep p--dd. •}o poT.iad _ a9-4asrp unururu fiTTee
aajegasrp ueau fiTree papeuT1s3 aajegasrp unuT%eu fiTTee
seen 9eeZ Wee seen seen ceez [eez
day Tnf fie" JeN eel noN daS
S
+ n
n
dr-
M•
n
a
B'BB9T 0
1 R

n
on
ry
'
a
B
BBB6
3N'an3SW" 1V 83AIN d33a oosooao sosn
9-74"1
0 0 00'0 99'96 Z£'£ 00'0 jg0noAC a}eiapoW 40 Z00Z!£1Z
0 0 00'0 99'96 Z£'£ 00'0 pbnoACayenpoW 4o Z00ZjoV1
0 0 00'0 99'96 Z£•£ 00'0 p5noACajeaapoW 4o ZooZJZWZ
0 0 00'0 9996 Z£'£ OCi 0 }qOnoaC a}eaapo?? 40 ZOOZltr21Z
0 0 00'0 00'004 000 00'0 IgOnwa a}eaapoW 4a ZODZ+4£!Z
0 0 OUCI 00'004 00'0 00'0 NEnoja @j apoW 40 Z00ZJ219
0 0 00'004 000 00'0 00'0 N5noao9aanaS Za 100'?VVq
0 Z4'99 000 00'0 09'0 I{OnwaOA@naS Za ZO0Z14Z19
0 V[9 00'0 00'0 00'0 ?45noao aaanaS ZQ ZGOU9Z19
0 000 00'0 00'0 00'0 Nboja awa) x3 £a Z00Z1tr16
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 p4ftAQ noAV3 £a Z00 4V6
0 00'0 00.0 00'0 00'0 y4Onaaoaw;q} CC LOOM V6
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 jg6noao awajVg CC M006
III 0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 WOnoaC Imildanx3 to Z00ZjDo
0 00'0 000 00'0 00'0 N6noiC jeuoiWaox3 to Z00Z +04
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 N6noAajeuoi}daox3 to LOOM VO4
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 NftiC jeuoi}daox3 to Z00Z!£Z104
Q 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 pftiC awaa}x3 £C Z00ZJO£104
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00,0 y4Onoao awoA}q £C ZOOZl9+44
D 00'0 QUO 00'0 00'o iu6noACawgx3 £C 200Zr£W44
'• , i=i 00'0 00,0 0(1'0 00'0 {OnoaC Jeu010aax3 to Zrim 2144
0 00 0 00'0 00'0 00'0 Nbnoia j6,uol}daox3 to Z00ZlZZ144
0 00,0 00'0 00,0 00,0 y15noAC jeuoi0;ox3 to Z00Zttr1Z 4
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 jgftiC jeuoiydaox3 to Z00zt4 d
0 00'0 00'0 QO'o 00'0 NftiCjeuoi0aox3 to 100Zl9WZ4
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 0go p4bnwa jeuoi0a3x3 to 2009N
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 p0nwajeuogtlaox3 to 900 v
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 pft.iC jeuoi.0aox3 to 900Zl914
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 4UOnoaoleuoi4daox3 to 9009 W4
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 WOnwo jeuoi}d9ox3 to 900N1Z
0 00'0 00'0 00,0 00'0 jgft)Cjeuoi}daox3 to 900Z16Z14
0 00'0 00'0 OO'0 00'0 } 5ma jeuoildaox3 to 900ZlqZ
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 pftiCIeuogdaox3 to 9007 V
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00"o NOmajeuoiydaox3 to 90021 VZ
00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 NEInaaQ jeuol0ox3 to 9002!9212
00'0 000 00'0 00,0 NftiC jeuoioaox3 to 90D21tr1£
Q 00'0 00'0 00'0 oCi 0 WRAC awaa}x3 £C 900'1441£
0 00'0 00'0 00'0 000 }UOnaaoawagq £C 9O0ZJ9W£
0 0170 00'0 00.0 00'0 }4Onoao aw;g3 £0 9002l9ZJ£
0 Ci0'G 000 00'0 00'0 pbnwo;w@q} £0 900 vv
0 0 00'004 00'0 00'0 00'0 WWO aaanag Zo 9002 t
0 Q 00'00 4 00'0 00'0 00,o p0noaQ aaan@S Zo 9O02J9 Vtr
0 0 00'004 00'0 00'0 0010 Nlinwo aaanag ZO 900721tr
0 0 00'0 00'004 00'0 00'0 ItfinoAa ajenpoW 40 9000V
0 0 00.0 00'004 00'0 00'0 y ftAC ayenpoIN 4a 9002l9+S
0 0 00'0 00'004 00'0 00'0 4.I0noAoa}eaapoW 40 9oo2!£WS
0 0 DOT 00'004 00'0 00'0 p6noao a}eaapOH 4a 90003
0 0 00'Q 00'004 00'0 00'0 NftiQ a4enpoH 4a 9002JZDq
0 0 00 '0 00'004 UUO 00'0 {OnoaC a}eaapoVI 4a 90021£!9
0 0 000 0['004 00'0 00'0 pftAC;jmpoVq 4a 900Zj0419
0 0 Z£'Z4 99 Z9 00'0 00'0 PPOAC a}eaapON 40 90MQV9
0 0 ZC:'Z4 99'Z9 00'0 0o'0 pftACayeaapoVq 40 9DOZ+tr2J9
0 0 00'00 4 00 0 00.0 00.0 P45no.iC aaanas M 9002! 412
0 0 9£'6 £916 00'0 00'0 PAtI o 91eaapo4V 4a 90gol
0 0 00'0 00'004 00'0 00'o pftjQajenpoW 4a K09
0 0 00'0 00004 00'0 00'0 pOnoiC a;enpoW 4a 90ODMZ
0 0 00.0 00'00 [ 00'0 0D'0 jg6noAC a}eaapoW 40 900216212
0 0 00'0 00'004 00'0 00'0 N6noAa a}eaapoW 40 P100 A
0 0 00'0 00'004 00'0 00'0 p5noiaaimpoM 4a 9002!2419
0 0 00'0 00'004 00'0 00'0 }L?OnoaCa}eaapoW 40 PO06W9
0 0 DQ'Q 6219 44'9£ 00'0 y16nwo aimpoW 4a 9002J9M
00'0 00'0 000 69' 49 44'9£ 00'0 p5nwC a}ejapoW 40 900M6
' i ' Z0 60 00 MOO uoig !nsa0 janal
pail #uaaJad q suoi0puo3 W noi0 banal W noi0 W0 a 0
PIP(] jg5noaa Aiunoo aa-1
eullOR0 PON
'saqunoo woow pup 'aa? 'weujpg0
ma aoipow p46noaa £ aeaA 6uia01pow
euiloaeo 41aoN
wea uoiuogae3
:011!1 :loafoJd

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
APPENDIX B: BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DATA
EEP Project No. D-04012A
Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
Appendix B
SPECIES T.V. F.F.G. IMPOUNDED
Sta. 1 Sta. 3 Sta. 5 Sta. 8 Sta. 10 Sta. 40 Sta. 42 Sta. 47 Sta. 51 Sta. 55
PLATYHELMINTHES
Turbellaria
Tricladida
Planariidae
Girardia (Dugesia) tigrina 7.2
NEMATODA 6
MOLLUSCA
Bivalvia
Veneroida
Corbiculidae
Corbicula fluminea 6.12 FC
Sphaeriidae 6.6 FC
Musculium transversum *8 FC
Gastropoda
Pleuroceridae 3.4
Elimia sp. 2.46 SC
Basommatophora
Ancylidae SC
Ferrissia rivularis `6 SC
ANNELIDA
Oligochaeta CG
Tubificida
Enchytraeidae 9.8 CG
Lumbricidae CG
Naididae *8 CG
Dero sp. 10 CG
Nais communis 8.8 CG
Pristina sp. 9.6 CG
Tubificidae w.h.c. 7.1 CG
Tubificidae w.o.h.c. 7.1 CG
Branchiura sowerbyi 8.28 CG
Limnodrilus hoffineisteri 9.5 CG
Spirosperma sp. 10 CG
Lumbriculida
Lumbriculidae 7.03 CG
Branchiobdellida
Hirudinea P
Arhynchobdellida
Erpobdellidae P
Erpobdella sp. 8.3 P
Rhynchobdellida
Glossiphoniidae P
Helobdella elongata 9.5 P
ARTHROPODA
Arachnoidea
Acariformes
Arrenuridae 5.5
Arrenurus sp. 5.5
Lebertiidae 5.5
1 1
1
1
1
1
1 3
6 2 1 2
2 1 1 1 5
3 1 2
2
13 1 1
3 1
4 2 3 21 6 2
1
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Lebertia sp. 5.5
Torrenticolidae 5.5
Torrenticola sp. 5.5
Crustacea
Ostracoda
Copepoda
Cyclopoida
Cladocera
Chydoridae
Isopoda
Asellidae SH
Caecidotea sp. 9.1 CG
Amphipoda
Crangonyctidae
Crangonyx sp. 7.9 CG
Hyalellidae
Hyalella azteca 7.75 CG
Decapoda
Cambaridae 7.5
Cambarus sp. 7.62 CG
Palaemonidae
Palaemonetes kadiakensis 7.1 CG
Insecta
Collembola
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae CG
Acerpenna pygmaea 3.9
eaetis intercalaris 7 CG
Plauditus sp. *4 CG
Pseudocloeon sp. 4 CG
Caenidae CG
Caenis sp. 7.4 CG
Ephemerellidae SC
Attenella sp.
Ephemerella sp. 2.04 SC
Ephemerella needhami 0 CG
Eurylophella sp. 4.34 SC
Serratella sp. SC
Timpanoga sp. CG
Heptageniidae
Leucrocuta sp. 2.4 SC
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) : *4 SC
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) a 3.8 SC
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) r 5.5 SC
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) r 2 SC
Stenacron interpunctatum 3.58 SC
Isonychiidae FC
Isonychia sp. 3.5 FC
Leptophlebiidae *2 CG
Leptophlebia sp. 6.2 CG
Paraleptophlebia sp. 0.94 CG
Potamanthidae CG
6
2
2 1
7
1
27 2 3 48
1 1
2
1 2 1 5
1
2 36 8 16
29
3 2
7
2 1
1 1 1 22
1 2
9 3 2 5 1
1 1 1
8 1 1 5
1
2 1
48 2 1 21
1 1
3 1
1
3 1
3 2 15
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
Anthopotamus (Potamanthus 1.5 CG
Siphlonuridae
Siphlonurus sp. 5.8 CG
Odonata
Aeshnidae 5.6 P
Boyeria vinosa 5.97 P
Boyeria grafiana 6.1 P
Nasiaeschna pentacantha 8.1
Coenagrionidae *9 P
Argia sp. 8.17 P
Enallagma sp. 8.9 P
Corduliidae *5 P
Epicordulia princeps 5.6 P
Macromia sp. 6.16 P
Neurocordulia sp. 5
Neurocordulia obsoleta 5.2
Gomphidae *1 P
Arigomphus sp.
Dromogomphus spinosus 5.1 P
Erpetogomphus designatus
Erpetogomphus sp.
Gomphus sp. 5.8 P
Hagenius brevistylus 4 P
Perithemis tenera 9.9 P
Libellulidae 6.7 P
Erythemis simplicicollis 9.7
Libellula cyanea
Libellula semifasciata
Libellula sp. 9.6 P
Pachydiplax longipennis 9.9
Somatochlora sp. 9.2 P
Plecoptera
Nemouridae SH
Amphinemura sp. 3.3 SH
Perlidae *1 P
Acroneuria cf filicis
Acroneuria mela 0.9
Acroneuria sp. P
Neoperla sp. 1.5 P
Perlesta placida sp. gp. 4.7 P
Perlesta sp. 4.7 P
Perlodidae *2 P
Cultis decisus 1.6 P
Isoperla sp. *2 P
Taeniopterygidae SH
Taeniopteryx sp. 5.4 SH
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae
Belostoma sp. 9.8 P
Corixidae 9 PI
Hydrometridae
Hydrometra sp.
27
2
1
4 3
3 3
4
1
1
2 1
1
1 1 1
6
1
1
1 2
7
1
1
1
2
1
1 1
1
2
4
4
2
1
1
1 5 1
2
1 1 12
2 5
1 6 27
9 1
8 1 2 1 9 61
1 1
2
1 1 6 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Pleidae
Paraplea sp
Nepidae
Ranatra sp. 7.8 P
Veliidae P
Microvelia sp. P
Stenovelia stagalis
Megaloptera
Corydalidae P
Chauliodes pectinicornis 9.6
Corydalus cornutus 5.2 P
Nigronia serricornis 5 P
Sialidae P
Sialis sp. 7.17 P
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae *4 FC
Ceratopsyche sp. FC
Cheumatopsyche sp. 6.2 FC
Hydropsyche sp. 5 FC
Hydropsyche simulians
Macrostemum Carolina
Hydroptilidae *4 PI
Hydroptila sp. 6.2 PI
Leptoceridae *4 CG
Ceraclea sp. 2 CG
Nectopsyche sp. 2.9 SH
Nectopsyche exquisita 4.1 SH
Triaenodes sp. 4.46 SH
Triaenodes injustus 2.5 SH
Lepidostomatidae SH
Lepidostoma sp. 0.9 FC
Limnephilidae
Ironoquia sp. -
Philopotamidae FC
Chimarra cf obscura 2.76 FC
Polycentropodidae FC
Polycentropus sp. 3.5 FC
Coleoptera
Carabidae
Chrysomelidae
Dryopidae
Helichus fastigiatus
Dytiscidae P
Hydroporus sp. 8.6 PI
Neoporus sp. (Hydroporus) 8.62 PI
Elmidae CG
Ancyronyx variegata 6.49 SC
Dubiraphia vittata 4.1 SC
Macronychus glabratus 4.58 SH
Microcylloepus pusillus 2.1 SC
Stenelmis sp. 5.1 SC
Gyrinidae p
2
1
1
1
1
1
6 4 1
2
8
2
2
1
1
1
1 1
6
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
3 2
2 8
12 2
1
2
1
19 13 2 12
2
2
6
12
Dineutus sp. 5.54 p
Gyrinus sp. 6.17 p
Haliplidae
Peltodytes sp. 8.73 SH
Peltodytes duodecimpunctatus
Peltodytes sexmaculatus
Heteroceridae
Hydrophilidae
Berosus sp. 8.43 CG
Enochrus sp. 8.8 CG
Helochares sp. P
Hydrochus sp. 6.55 SH
Sperchopsis tessellatus 6.13 CG
Tropistemus sp. 9.7 P
Psephenidae SC
Psephenus herricki 2.35 SC
Scirtidae SC
Scirtes sp.
Staphylinidae P
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae .5 P
Bezzia/Palpomyia gp. 6.9 P
Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia mallochi 7.2 P
Ablabesmyia rhamphe gp. 7.2 P
Cardiocladius obscurus 5.9 P
Chironomus sp. 9.63 CG
Cladotanytarsus sp. 4.09 FC
Clinotanypus sp. *6 P
Conchapelopia sp. 8.4 P
Corynoneura sp. 6.01 CG
Cricotopus sp. *7 CG
Cricotopus bicinctus 8.5 CG
Cricotopus trifascia 2.8 CG
Dicrotendipes neomodestus 8.1 CG
Dicrotendipes simpsoni 10
Diplocladius cultriger 7.4 CG
Eukiefferiella claripennis gp. 5.6 CG
Glyptotendipes sp. 9.5 FC
Hydrobaenus pilipes 9.5 SC
Nanocladius distinctus 7.07 CG
Nilotanypus sp. 3.9 P
Orthocladius sp. CG
Paracladopelma sp. 5.51 CG
Parakiefferiella sp. 5.4 CG
Paralauterborniella nigrohalte 4.8 CG
Parametriocnemus sp. 3.65 CG
Pentaneura inconspicia
Polypedilum flavum (convictu 4.9 SH
Polypedilum halterale gp. 9 SH
Polypedilum illinoense 7.3 SH
Potthastia longimana 9 CG
1
3
2
1
1
2
1 1
1
2 1
28 2
1
5
1 2
3
11 22
1 2
1
9
1
2
1
1
1 3 1
3 1
2
2 3 1 1
1 1
1
1
1 2
1
1
1
2
2
5 4
1 2 1
1 1 2 1 1
2 1 1
1 1
10 1
3 2 1 50
1
3
2 1
13 10 3 1 1
1 3 16 1
9 29 1 3 38 9
1
1
4 1 3
3
4 5 1 5
7 2 6 1
6 1 4 3
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Procladius sp. 9.1 P
Psectrocladius sp. 3.6 SH
Pseudochironomus sp. 5.4 CG
Rheotanytartsus exiguus gp. 5.9
Tanytarsus sp. 6.76 FC
Thienemanniella xena 5.86 CG
Tribelos jucundum 6.3
Tvetenia paucunca 3.7 CG
Tvetenia vitracies 3.6 CG
Unniella multivirga 0 CG
Zavrelimyia sp. 9.11 P
Culicidae FC
Anopheles sp. 8.6 FC
Dixidae CG
Dolichopodidae P
Sarcophagidae
Sciaridae
Simuliidae *6 FC
Prosimulium sp. 6 FC
Simulium sp. 6 FC
Stratiomyidae CG
Odontomyia sp.
Tabanidae PI
Chrysops sp. 6.73 PI
Tabanus sp. 9.2 PI
Tipulidae *3 SH
Antocha sp. 4.3 CG
Hexatoma sp. 4.3 P
Limnophila sp. *4 P
Pseudolimnophila sp. 7.22 P
Ormosia sp. 6.3 CG
Tipula sp. 7.33 SH
15
2
3
2
2
2
5 2
1 1 1
2 131 5
1
7 1
4
1
9
2
1
1
1
2 3 1
1
1
4 1
1
3
1
1
1 1
1 1
1 2 1
1
TOTAL NO. OF ORGANIMS
TOTAL NO. OF TAXA
EPT INDEX
BIOTIC INDEX
Assigned BIOTIC INDEX VALUE
EPT ABUNDANCE
342 87 21 68 287 184 113 256 177 73
73 37 16 25 48 45 22 49 23 31
20 8 3 4 17 4 4 11 1 9
5.60 6.74 5.47 7.02 5.89 7.72 7.44 5.13 8.19 6.06
5.90 6.52 5.60 6.94 5.74 7.69 7.37 5.67 7.32 5.90
145 14 4 5 49 17 9 135 15 16
SPECIES
PLATYHELMINTHES
Turbellaria
Tricladida
Planariidae
Girardia (Dugesia) tigrina
NEMATODA
MOLLUSCA
Bivalvia
Veneroida
Corbiculidae
Corbicula fluminea
Sphaeriidae
Musculium transversum
Gastropoda
Pleuroceridae
Elimia sp.
Basommatophora
Ancylidae
Ferrissia rivularis
ANNELIDA
Oligochaeta
Tubificida
Enchytraeidae
Lumbricidae
Naididae
Dero sp.
Nais communis
Pristina sp.
Tubificidae w.h.c.
Tubificidae w.o.h.c.
Branchiura sowerbyi
Limnodrilus hoffineisteri
Spirosperma sp.
Lumbriculida
Lumbriculidae
Branchiobdellida
Hirudinea
Arhynchobdellida
Erpobdellidae
Erpobdella sp.
Rhynchobdellida
Glossiphoniidae
Helobdella elongata
ARTHROPODA
Arachnoidea
Acariformes
Arrenuridae
Arrenurus sp.
Lebeniidae
T.V. F.F.G. REFERENCE
Sta. 12 Sta. 14 Sta. 18 Sta. 19 Sta. 39 Sta. 45 Sta. 52 Sta. 53
7.2
6
6.12 FC
6.6 FC
*8 FC
3.4
2.46 SC
SC
*6 SC
CG
9.8 CG
CG
*8 CG
10 CG
8.8 CG
9.6 CG
7.1 CG
7.1 CG
8.28 CG
9.5 CG
10 CG
7.03 CG
P
P
8.3 P
P
9.5 P
5.5
5.5
5.5
1
1
1
1 1
6 4
13 6 6 18
1
1
1
4 1
1 17 4
1 3
1 1 1
1
3
5 1
6 6 2 3 16 12 6 8
1
1 1 1
1 1
2
1
Lebertia sp. 5.5
Torrenticolidae 5.5
Torrenticola sp. 5.5
Crustacea
Ostracoda
Copepoda
Cyclopoida
Cladocera
Chydoridae
Isopoda
Asellidae SH
Caecidotea sp. 9.1 CG
Amphipoda
Crangonyctidae
Crangonyx sp. 7.9 CG
Hyalellidae
Hyalella azteca 7.75 CG
Decapoda
Cambaridae 7.5
Cambarus sp. 7.62 CG
Palaemonidae
Palaemonetes kadiakensis 7.1 CG
Insecta
Collembola
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae CG
Acerpenna pygmaea 3.9
eaetis intercalaris 7 CG
Plauditus sp. *4 CG
Pseudocloeon sp. 4 CG
Caenidae CG
Caenis sp. 7.4 CG
Ephemerellidae SC
Attenella sp.
Ephemerella sp. 2.04 SC
Ephemerella needhami 0 CG
Eurylophella sp. 4.34 SC
Serratella sp. SC
Timpanoga sp. CG
Heptageniidae
Leucrocuta sp. 2.4 SC
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) sp. *4 Sc
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) exiguun 3.8 SC
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) modesty 5.5 SC
Maccaffertium (Stenonema) pudicun 2 SC
Stenacron interpunctatum 3.58 SC
Isonychiidae FC
Isonychia sp. 3.5 FC
Leptophlebiidae *2 CG
Leptophlebia sp. 6.2 CG
Paraleptophlebia sp. 0.94 CG
Potamanthidae CG
2
1
1
1
1
1
1 14 8
24 14
1
1 1 1
1
3
3
2
1
5
2 1 6 69 4
2 3 11 7 1 8 18
1
1 1
4 1 1 1 1
8 2
1 2 1
4 2
2 3 1 1 1 7
3 2 2 4
21 20
3 6 1
27 105 56 121 61
4 9 14 20 6 11
5 1 2 15 9
1 4 1 1 1 17
1 1
1 1 1
3
1
4 3
Anthopotamus (Potamanthus) myop. 1.5 CG 4 12 3 20 29 8
Siphionuridae
Siphlonurus sp. 5.8 CG 8
Odonata
Aeshnidae 5.6 P
Boyeria vinosa 5.97 P 1 3 1 1
Boyeria grafiana 6.1 P 1
Nasiaeschna pentacantha 8.1 14
Coenagrionidae .9 P 1
Argia sp. 8.17 P 5 3 2 12 5 6
Enallagma sp. 8.9 P 3 1 1
Corduliidae *5 P
Epicordulia princeps 5.6 P 1 2
Macromia sp. 6.16 P 1 2 1 3 1 3
Neurocordulia sp. 5
Neurocordulia obsoleta 5.2 2 13 1 2
Gomphidae *1 P
Arigomphus sp. 1
Dromogomphus spinosus 5.1 P 1
Erpetogomphus designatus 1 1
Erpetogomphus sp. 2 1
Gomphus sp. 5.8 P 4 1 1
Hagenius brevistylus 4 P 1
Perithemis tenera 9.9 P
Libellulidae 6.7 P 1 1 1
Eeyihemis simplicicollis 9.7
Libellula cyanea 1
Libellula semifasciata 1
Libellula sp. 9.6 P 1
Pachydiplax longipennis 9.9 2
Somatochlora sp. 9.2 P 3
Plecoptera 2 3
Nemouridae SH 1
Amphinemura sp. 3.3 SH 2 13 13 2 1
Perlidae *1 P 1 1
Acroneuria cf filicis 3
Acroneuria mela 0.9 3 3 4 1
Acroneuria sp. P 1 3
Neoperla sp. 1.5 P 26 1 1 7 2
Perlesta placida sp. gp. 4.7 P 3 10 32 7 6 36 95 23
Perlesta sp. 4.7 P
Perlodidae *2 P 1
Cultis decisus 1.6 P 1
Isoperla sp. *2 P 1 3 1 29 76 11 3
Taeniopterygidae SH
Taeniopteryx sp. 5.4 SH 5 2
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae
Belostoma sp. 9.8 P
Corixidae 9 PI 4
Hydrometridae
Hydrometra sp. 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Pleidae
Paraplea sp
Nepidae
Ranatra sp. 7.8 P 1 1 3
Veliidae P
Microvelia sp. P
Stenovelia stagalis
Megaloptera
Corydalidae P
Chauliodes pectinicornis 9.6
Corydalus cornutus 5.2 P 1 1
Nigronia serricornis 5 P
Sialidae P
Sialis sp. 7.17 P
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae "4 FC
Ceratopsyche sp. FC 2
Cheumatopsyche sp. 6.2 FC 2 1 1
Hydropsyche sp. 5 FC 3 2
Hydropsyche simulians
Macrostemum carolina
Hydroptilidae *4 PI
Hydroptila sp. 6.2 PI
Leptoceridae *4 CG
Ceraclea sp. 2 CG 1
Nectopsyche sp. 2.9 SH
Nectopsyche exquisita 4.1 SH 1
Triaenodes sp. 4.46 SH
Triaenodes injustus 2.5 SH 1 3
Lepidostomatidae SH
Lepidostoma sp. 0.9 FC 2
Limnephilidae
Ironoquia sp. -
Philopotamidae FC
Chimarra cf obscura 2.76 FC 30 1 1 2
Polycentropodidae FC
Polycentropus sp. 3.5 FC 1
Coleoptera
Carabidae
Chrysomelidae
Dryopidae
Helichus fastigiatus
Dytiscidae P
Hydroporus sp. 8.6 PI
Neoporus sp. (Hydroporus) 8.62 PI
Elmidae CG
Ancyronyx variegata 6.49 SC 1
Dubiraphia vittata 4.1 SC 1 1 1
Macronychus glabratus 4.58 SH 3 2 4 3
Microcylloepus pusillus 2.1 SC
Stenelmis sp. 5.1 SC 13 2 2 2
Gyrinidae p
2
2
2
1
2
3 1
3 3
1
1
2 2
6 14
1
1
29
2
1
1
22 1
3
2 2 6
1
3 29 1
Dineutus sp. 5.54 p
Gyrinus sp. 6.17 p
Haliplidae
Peltodytes sp. 8.73 SH
Peltodytes duodecimpunctatus
Peltodytes sexmaculatus
Heteroceridae
Hydrophilidae
Berosus sp. 8.43 CG
Enochrus sp. 8.8 CG
Helochares sp. P
Hydrochus sp. 6.55 SH
Sperchopsis tessellatus 6.13 CG
Tropisternus sp. 9.7 P
Psephenidae SC
Psephenus herricki 2.35 SC
Scirtidae SC
Scirtes sp.
Staphylinidae p
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae *5 p
Bezzia/Palpomyia gp. 6.9 P
Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia mallochi 7.2 P
Ablabesmyia rhamphe gp. 7.2 P
Cardiocladius obscurus 5.9 P
Chironomus sp. 9.63 CG
Cladotanytarsus sp. 4.09 FC
Clinotanypus sp. *6 P
Conchapelopia sp. 8.4 P
Corynoneura sp. 6.01 CG
Cricotopus sp. *7 CG
Cricotopus bistnctus 8.5 CG
Cricotopus trifascia 2.8 CG
Dicrotendipes neomodestus 8.1 CG
Dicrotendipes simpsoni 10
Diplocladius cultriger 7.4 CG
Eukiefferiella claripennis gp. 5.6 CG
Glyptotendipes sp. 9.5 FC
Hydrobaenus pilipes 9.5 SC
Nanocladius distinctus 7.07 CG
Nilotanypus sp. 3.9 P
Orthocladius sp. CG
Paracladopelma sp. 5.51 CG
Parakiefferiella sp. 5.4 CG
Paralauterborniella nigrohalteralis 4.8 CG
Parametriocnemus sp. 3.65 CG
Pentaneura inconspicia
Polypedilum flavum (convictum) 4.9 SH
Polypedilum halterale gp. 9 SH
Polypedilum illinoense 7.3 SH
Potthastia longimana 9 CG
1
3 1
2
4 1
1 2
1 2
1 1
2 1 1
2 4 4 2 8
1 3
2
1
1 3
12
4 8 13 3 2
3 1 1 1 1 2 1
10 7 5 16 90 11 5
7 29 50 16 11 67 49 32
3 3
1 3 1 7
1
2
9 8 8 1 9 64 4
4
5
1 1
1 1
1 7 1 11 22 61 19 1
1 1 5 1 1 3
1
2
1 2 5
1 3 3 4 18 5
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Procladius sp.
Psectrocladius sp.
Pseudochironomus sp.
Rheotanytartsus exiguus gp.
Tanytarsus sp.
Thienemanniella xena
Tribelos jucundum
Tvetenia paucunca
Tvetenia vitracies
Unniella multivirga
Zavrelimyia sp.
Culicidae
Anopheles sp.
Dixidae
Dolichopodidae
Sarcophagidae
Sciaridae
Simuliidae
Prosimulium sp.
Simulium sp.
Stratiomyidae
Odontomyia sp.
Tabanidae
Chrysops sp.
Tabanus sp.
Tipulidae
Antocha sp.
Hexatoma sp.
Limnophila sp.
Pseudolimnophila sp.
Ormosia sp.
Tipula sp.
TOTAL NO. OF ORGANIMS
TOTAL NO. OF TAXA
EPTINDEX
BIOTIC INDEX
Assigned BIOTIC INDEX VALUE
EPT ABUNDANCE
9.1 P
3.6 SH
5.4 CG
5.9
6.76 FC
5.86 CG
6.3
3.7 CG
3.6 CG
0 CG
9.11 P
FC
8.6 FC
CG
P
-6 FC
6 FC
6 FC
CG
PI
6.73 PI
9.2 PI
-3 SH
4.3 CG
4.3 P
*4 P
7.22 P
6.3 CG
7.33 SH
1 1
2 7
1 1
12 56 52 4
1
5
1
3 1
1
1 31 46 39
5 11
1
1
1 6 1 15 10 13 3
1 1
1
1
1
1 1 1
249 246 403 300 271 539 687 379
59 51 62 58 42 41 62 66
22 15 23 19 13 10 27 25
4.66 5.68 5.87 5.44 6.36 5.51 5.21 5.72
4.92 5.39 5.55 5.66 6.62 5.70 5.06 5.53
125 81 194 168 75 202 373 182
APPENDIX C: CARBONTON DAM REMOVAL YEAR-3 FISH MONITORING REPORT
PROVIDED BY THE CATENA GROUP
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
Appendix C
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
The
Catena
Group
410-B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
[phone]
CARBONTON DAM REMOVAL YEAR-3 MONITORING
REPORT
Deep River Watershed Restoration Site Cape Fear River Basin Cataloging Unit
030300003
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems LLC
November 12, 2008
Prepared By:
The Catena Group, Inc.
Timothy W. Savidge
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Carbonton dam removal project performed by Restoration Systems, LLC (RS) is
projected to result in the restoration of -10 river miles of the mainstem Deep River, as well
as portions of three major tributaries (McLendons Creek, Big Governors Creek and Little
Governors Creeks) and fifteen smaller tributaries. One of the goals of the restoration effort is
to restore habitat for the federally Endangered Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas),
several species of rare mussels, and other riverine aquatic species, including fish and
mollusks. Restoring this stretch of river will also re-connect the upstream and downstream
populations of the Cape Fear shiner, which have been essentially isolated' since the dam was
constructed in the early 1900's.
The restoration success criteria established by the interagency Dam Removal Task Force
(DRTF) and the goals of RS require documenting the diversity of aquatic fauna and
characterizing habitat within the reservoir pool created by the dam, and then monitoring
changes in faunal composition and habitat following the dam's removal. The Catena Group
Inc. (TCG) was retained by RS in 2005 to conduct the pre-dam removal aquatic species
surveys. Eighteen sites were surveyed for freshwater mussels and clams, aquatic snails, and
freshwater fish, the results of which were provided in the August 07, 2006 Pre-removal
Survey Report (TCG 2006). The success criteria for the Cape Fear Shiner were met during
the 2-year post removal studies, and documented in the October 01, 2007 Carbonton Dam
Removal Year-2 Monitoring Report (TCG 2007). The thrust of the Year 3 monitoring effort
is to document whether freshwater mussels, in particular the targeted rare species identified
in the pre-removal report (TCG 2006) are recolonizing habitats previously impoundment by
the dam, and to document the evolving habitats at each of the monitoring stations.
Surveys targeting freshwater mussels were conducted at each of the 13 established Deep
River impoundment monitoring stations. General observations of in-stream habitat
conditions and bank stability were recorded throughout the former reservoir pool and at each
of the monitoring stations. At least 12 substantial riffle habitats have developed.
Morphological features at many of these sites have created various hydraulic conditions and
in turn, multiple microhabitats which correspond to potentially high quality habitat for
aquatic species, including the Cape Fear shiner and various rare mussel species.
Based on field observations and mussel surveys during the Year-3 monitoring studies, it
appears that the habitats within the former reservoir pool are continuing to transition to
habitats more typical of lotic conditions. The surveys documented several mussel species of
conservation interest associated with lotic environments, including five state-listed species:
yellow lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa), creeper (Strophitus undulatus), triangle floater
(Alasmidonta undulata), eastern creekshell (Villosa delumbis), and the notched rainbow
(Villosa constricta). Survey results indicate that mussel recruitment has occurred in the
riffle habitats in the upper limits of the former reservoir pool; however, recruitment is not
evident in the lower sections.
' In the strictest sense, the isolation has been substantial, but not total, since fish from upstream '
groups can transit over the dam during full flows. This would theoretically enable some genetic
exchange between upstream and downstream groups.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................1
1.1 Monitoring Plan ....................................................................................................... 1
2.0 SURVEY EFFORTS ................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Survey Methodology ................................................................................................. 2
2. L I Habitat Reconnaissance ..................................................................................... 2
2.1.2 Mollusk Sampling ............................................................................................... 2
3.0 RESULTS .................................................................................................................... 3
3.2 Freshwater Mollusk Surveys ................................................................................... 5
3.2.1 Site 1 (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 5
3.2.2 Site ]a (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................. 6
3.2.3 Site 2 (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 6
3.2.4 Site 3 (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 7
3.2.5 Site 4 (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 8
3.2.6 Site S (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 8
3.2.7 Site 6 (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 9
3.2.8 Site 7 (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 9
3.2.9 Site 8 (Deep River-Impoundment): .................................................................... 9
3.2. 10 Site 9 (Deep River-Impoundment): ................................................................ 10
3.2. 11 Site 10 (Deep River-Impoundment): .............................................................. 10
3.2.12 Site 11 (Deep River-Impoundment): .............................................................. 11
3.2.13 Site 12 (Deep River-Impoundment): .............................................................. 11
3.2.14 Site 13 (Deep River-Impoundment): .............................................................. 12
4.0 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................12
4.1 Habitat Reconnaissance .......................... .............................................................. 12
4.2 Freshwater Mollusk Surveys ................... .............................................................. 12
4.2.1 Freshwater mussel fauna ................... .............................................................. 12
4.3 Aquatic snail fauna .................................. .............................................................. 16
5.0 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................16
6.0 WORKS CITED .....................................................................................................177
FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Map ....................................................................................4
TABLES
Table 1. Permanent Monitoring Survey Locations-Carbonton Dam Reservoir Pool ......... 2
Table 2. Mollusk Species Collected .................................................................................... 5
Table 3. Mollusk Species Collected Site 1 ......................................................................... 6
Table 4. Mollusk Species Collected Site 1 a ........................................................................ 6
Table 5. Mollusk Species Collected Site 2 ......................................................................... 7
Table 6. Mollusk Species Collected Site 3 ......................................................................... 7
Table 7. Mollusk Species Collected Site 4 ......................................................................... 8
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report
TCG Job # 3202
Table 8. Mollusk Species Collected Site 5 ......................................................................... 8
Table 9. Mollusk Species Collected Site 6 ......................................................................... 9
Table 10. Mollusk Species Collected Site 7 ....................................................................... 9
Table 11. Mollusk Species Collected Site 8 ..................................................................... 10
Table 12. Mollusk Species Collected Site 9 ..................................................................... 10
Table 13. Mollusk Species Collected Site 10 ................................................................... 11
Table 14. Mollusk Species Collected Site 11 ................................................................... 11
Table 15. Mollusk Species Collected Site 12 ................................................................... 11
Table 16. Mollusk Species Collected Site 13 ................................................................... 12
Table 17. CPUE of Mussel Species Pre-Removal and Year-3 ......................................... 13
Table 18. Estimated Age Groups of Live Mussels Collected Year-3 ............................... 15
11
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report
TCG Job # 3202
1

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The removal of the Carbonton dam on the Deep River by Restoration Systems LLC (RS)
is projected to result in the restoration of -10 river miles (RM) of the mainstem Deep
' River, as well as portions of three major tributaries (McLendons Creek, Big Governors
Creek and Little Governors Creeks), and fifteen smaller tributaries, all within the Cape
Fear River Basin. Specific goals of the project are to restore habitat for the federally
' Endangered Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas), several species of rare mussels,
and other riverine aquatic species. Restoring this stretch of river will also re-connect the
upstream and downstream populations of Cape Fear shiner, which have been essentially
isolated' since the dam was constructed in the early 1900's.
The restoration success criteria established by the interagency Dam Removal Task Force
' (DRTF) and the goals of RS require documenting the diversity of aquatic fauna and
characterizing habitat within the reservoir pool created by the dam, and then monitoring
changes in faunal composition and habitat following the dam's removal. The Catena
Group Inc. (TCG) was retained by RS in 2005 to conduct the pre-dam removal aquatic
species surveys. Eighteen sites were surveyed for freshwater mussels and clams, aquatic
snails, and freshwater fish, the results of which were provided in the August 07, 2006
' Pre-removal Survey Report (TCG 2006).
1.1 Monitoring Plan
' A five-year monitoring plan has been initiated to evaluate the success of the dam
removal. Success criteria identified include the documentation of Cape Fear shiner
' recruitment into the formerly impounded reach of the river and establishment of lotic
fish, freshwater mussel and aquatic snail communities. This five-year monitoring plan
involves conducting aquatic species (fish, freshwater mussels and aquatic snails) surveys
at 16 permanent monitoring stations within the former reservoir pool, that were
' established in the pre-removal surveys. Fourteen stations are in the Deep River and one
each in McClendons Creek and Big Governors Creek.
The success criteria (re-establishment within former reservoir pool) for the Cape Fear
Shiner, and establishment of lotic fish communities were met during the 2-year post
removal studies, and documented in the October 01, 2007 Carbonton Dam Removal
Year-2 Monitoring Report (TCG 2007). The thrust of the Year 3 monitoring effort is to
document whether freshwater mussels, in particular the targeted rare species identified in
the pre-removal report (TCG 2006), are re-colonizing habitats previously impounded by
the dam, and to document the evolving habitats at each of the monitoring stations. Based
on field observations in the Year-1 and Year-2 studies, the decision was made not to
sample McClendons Creek and Big Governors Creek, as these did not appear to be as far
' along in habitat transitioning as the sites on the Deep River.
In the strictest sense, the isolation has been substantial, but not total, since fish from upstream
groups can transit over the dam during full flows. This would theoretically enable some genetic
exchange between upstream and downstream groups.
' Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report
TCG Job # 3202
1
2.0 SURVEY EFFORTS
Freshwater mollusk surveys were conducted for the Year-3 monitoring effort at the
fourteen Deep River monitoring locations (Table 1), by the following TCG personnel
Tim Savidge, Tom Dickinson and Chris Sheats on August 07, and October 01, 2008. The
locations of the sampled sites are depicted in Figure 1.
Table 1. Permanent Monitoring Survey Locations-Carbonton Dam Reservoir Pool
Site # Site Location GPS Location
1 Deep River (impoundment) 35.49298°N, -79.41518°W
la Deep River (impoundment) 35.49315 ON, -79.40278°W
2 Deep River (impoundment) 35.48996°N, -79.38668°W
3 Deep River (impoundment) 35.48269°N, -79.38307°W
4 Deep River (impoundment) 35.46404°N, -79.39042°W
5 Deep River (impoundment) 35.46126°N, -79.38965°W
6 Deep River (impoundment) 35.45722°N, -79.38024°W
7 Deep River (impoundment) 35.47221°N, -79.36856°W
8 Deep River (impoundment) 35.47767°N, -79.36000°W
9 Deep River (impoundment) 35.47855°N, -79.35072°W
10 Deep River (impoundment) 35.49891°N, -79.33601°W
11 Deep River (impoundment) 35.50792°N, -79.34282°W
12 Deep River (impoundment) 35.51258°N, -79.34925°W
13 Deep River (impoundment) 35.51962°N, -79.34761°W
2.1 Survey Methodology
The surveys had two components, habitat reconnaissance and fresh water mollusk
sampling.
2. 1.1 Habitat Reconnaissance
Habitat reconnaissance was conducted in the entire restored reach of the Deep River by
canoeing from the upper limits of the former reservoir pool downstream to the former
dam. Observations of in-stream habitat conditions and bank stability were recorded.
Mollusk surveys were conducted at the monitoring stations, as navigated to with GPS.
2.1.2 Mollusk Sampling
Specific visual searches were conducted for freshwater bivalves and freshwater snails at
each of the monitoring stations shown in Figure 1. The survey team spread out across the
stream into survey lanes to provide total width coverage as they ascended the site. All
appropriate habitat types within a given survey reach were searched for bivalves
thoroughly via visual surveys using primarily mask/snorkel and/or bathyscopes (glass-
bottom view buckets). Tactile methods were also employed when appropriate. All species
of freshwater mussel were recorded and returned to the substrate. Searches were also
conducted for relict shells. The presence of a shell was equated with presence of that
species, but not factored into the Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE), which is defined as the
number of individuals found per person hour of search time. All species that are
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 2
TCG Job # 3202

monitored by the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) were measured (total length).
Snails were hand picked from rocks and woody debris. Dip nets were used, where
appropriate, to sift through leaf packs. Collected snails were identified to the species level
and each species was assigned a relative abundance rating to correspond to the survey
site.
The CPUE (# per survey hour) was calculated for freshwater mussels, while relative
abundance used for other mollusk species was estimated using the following criteria:
Freshwater Snails and Clams (per approximate square meter):
• Very abundant: > 50 estimated
• Abundant: 31-50 estimated
• Common: 11-30 estimated
• Uncommon: 3-10 estimated
• Rare: 1-2 estimated
The length of the survey reach, and amount of survey time varied between sites, and was
dependent on amount of suitable habitat.
3.0 RESULTS
Based on field observations, it appears that much of the habitat within the former
reservoir pool has reverted to lotic conditions. Riffle/run/pool habitats have formed at
varying intervals throughout the restored reaches. Recruitment of freshwater mussels is
evident in the newly established riffle habitats in the upper (upstream) sections of the
former reservoir pool, while lotic-adapted aquatic snails have colonized riffle habitats
throughout.
3.1 Habitat Reconnaissance
The Year-1 monitoring report questioned whether riffle habitat would form at Sites 9 and
10, as predicted during the pre-removal studies. In Year-1 these sites were characterized
by moderate to deep rocky run/pool habitats; however, Year 2 sampling indicated that
cobble/gravel bars were beginning to form near Site 9 (TCG 2007). As a result a small
amount of riffle habitat has formed at this site. Little change has been noted at Site 10.
Numerous other areas with similar characteristics (deep rocky runs) were also observed
throughout the Deep River, but were not marked or recorded, as the intent of the habitat
reconnaissance was to mark the riffle areas. All other riffle habitats that were noted as
having formed in the Year-1 and Year-2 studies appear to be more developed and stable.
In general, vegetation has colonized the river banks throughout the former impounded,
and the banks appear to be stable with very little scour and erosion noted. As was noted
in the Year-2 studies (TCG 2007), there were a few areas where patches of moderate
streambank erosion and scour was observed, most notably below site 10 and in the
general vicinity of the WRC boat landing. While these areas still exist, although not
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 3
TCG Job # 3202
r? u A'

arbonton Dam
Cc
?'t \ 13

.,k
#
Legend
Y
is ior

??' - ;G" .. • Survey Site
Survey Site with Cape
Fear Shiner Present

Streams
l? Primary Road
d Secondary Road

?.. Former Impoundment

F
Date Figure
The Site Map November 2008
Catena Year Three: Mollusk Surveys scale
Group (Carbonton Dam Removal Project) shown
Moore and Lee Counties. North Carolna Job No
3202
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 4
TCG Job # 3202

I
measured they appear to be smaller in size, with less severity of erosion. Also, as noted
in the Year-2 studies (TCG 2007) the invasive Japanese hops (Humulus japonica) has
become established along most of the river bank in the lower reaches of the former
impoundment. The plant is considered to be an invasive species and can be spread by
' wind, water, and soil movement to an area where it quickly forms dense thickets that
excludes native vegetation and greatly alters the natural ecosystem. The species has a
shallow root system so, in the absence of other native vegetation, sites overgrown by
Japanese hops could become susceptible to erosion following winter dieback of leaf
material. Measures to control this species include manually pulling up the plants, or use
of herbicides (http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fhp/invasive plants/weeds/Japanese-hop.pdf).
3.2 Freshwater Mollusk Surveys
A total of eleven freshwater mussel species, two aquatic snail species and 1 freshwater
clam species were found within newly formed riffle habitats in the former impounded
reach (Table 2). Mussels were very rare to absent in the lower sites (Sites 11-13). The

' lentic-adapted gravel elimia (Elimia catenaria) was common to abundant throughout,
while the pointed campeloma, a species more common in slow flowing habitats was rare
to absent.
Table 2. Mollusk Species Collected
Scientific Name Common Name Sites
' Freshwater Mussels -
Alasmidonta undulata triangle floater 1,1a, 7, 8,9
Elliptio angustata Carolina lance l,la,3,8
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio All except 12 and 13
Elliptio icterina variable spike l,la,3,4,57„8,9
Elliptio lazarus Atlantic delicate spike 1,3,5,8
Elliptio producta Atlantic spike 2,3
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel l,la,2,3,4,5,8,9*,10*
Pyganodon cataracta Eastern floater 10*
Strophitus undulatus creeper 4,7,8,9
Villosa constricta notched rainbow 2
Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell 1a,4,8,9
Uniomerus carolinianus Florida pondhom 8*, 10
' Freshwater Snails and Clams -
Campeloma decisum pointed campeloma 2,5,8,10
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia All
Helisoma anceps two-ridge rams-horn 2,5
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam All
* relict shell only
' 3.2.1 Site I (Deep River-Impoundment):
This sampling station occurs near an old mill site. Some of the dam material (rock and
timbers) remain in the river, and a riffle run sequence has continued to develop below the
former mill site. The substrate is dominated by rock (from the old dam) and cobble.
Coarse sand and gravel have accumulated in the shallow areas at the head and base of the
' Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 5
TCG Job # 3202
1
riffle. Cobble-gravel bars have formed below the old mill site and have been colonized
by various species of herbaceous species and woody shrubs. Five freshwater mussel
species, including the targeted yellow lampmussel were collected.
Table 3. Mollusk Species Collected Site 1

Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator '
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Elliptio angustata Carolina lance 1 (0.5/hr)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 44 (22/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 1 (0.5/hr)
Elliptio lazarus Atlantic delicate spike 1(0.5/hr)
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel 1 (0.5/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Common
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
3.2.2 Site I a (Deep River-Impoundment):
h
i
f
or target
A large gravel/cobble riffle has formed at this site, providing excellent
ab
tat
species and was thus sampled as an additional survey station in Year-2 (TCG 2007). The
substrate is dominated by cobble/gravel and coarse sand, which extends across most of
the river's width as a shallow riffle. Cobble-gravel bars have formed along each of the
river banks. Six freshwater mussel species, including the targeted triangle floater, yellow
lampmussel and eastern creekshell were collected. While conducting mussel surveys, '
several Cape Fear shiner were observed. One seine net haul was performed to confirm
the underwater identifications, and 3 individual Cape Fear shiner were captured.
Table 4. Mollusk Species Collected Site la ,
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Alasmidonta undulata triangle floater 2 (1.3/hr)
Elliptio angustata Carolina lance 1 (0.7/hr)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 160 (106.7/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 2 (1.3/hr)
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel 1 (0.7/hr)
Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell 1 (0.7/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Abundant
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
3.2.3 Site 2 (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site is situated within a long riffle/pool/riffle run sequence, with a rocky/cobble
island bar that has formed from the center of the river to the left descending bank,
creating a long run along the right descending bank. The substrate is dominated by
cobble and gravel overlain with coarse sand. A variety of habitat conditions occur at this
site providing habitats for lotic and lentic adapted species. Five mussel species were
collected including the targeted yellow lampmussel and the notched rainbow, which
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report
TCG Job # 3202
1
1

had been collected only one other
time in the Deep River within the
last 100 years. The gravel elimia
was very abundant in the riffle
habitats, and the majority of
individuals appeared to be newly
recruited (small in size). Two seine
net hauls were also performed and 5
individual Cape Fear shiner were
captured.

Notched rainbow individual found at Site 2.
Table 5. Mollusk Species Collected Site 2
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 30 (30.0/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 2 (2.0/hr)
Elliptio producta Atlantic spike 1 (1.0/hr)
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel 1 (1.0/hr)
Villosa constricta notched rainbow l(1.0/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Campeloma decisum pointed campeloma Uncommon
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Very Abundant
Helisoma anceps Two-ridge rams-horn Rare
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
3.2.4 Site 3 (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site was selected prior to dam removal due to the presence of large rock
outcroppings in an area of constricted channel. Since dam removal, much more of the
rock outcropping is exposed and small (< 20 feet in length) riffles with accumulated
gravel and cobble over bedrock have formed. A cobble/gravel bar has formed at the
upstream extent of this site. Six freshwater mussel species were collected, including the
targeted yellow lampmussel.
Table 6. Mollusk Species Collected Site 3
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Elliptio angustata Carolina lance 1 (1.0/hr)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 48 (48.0/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 3 (3.0/hr)
Elliptio lazarus Atlantic delicate spike I(1.0/hr)
Elliptio producta Atlantic spike 1 (1.0/hr)
1
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel 1 (1.0/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitorin g Report 7
TCG Job # 3202
J
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Common
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
3.2.5 Site 4 (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site is situated within a long, riffle/run/pool sequence that is essentially contiguous '
with Site 5. The substrate is dominated by cobble and gravel overlain with coarse sand.
A large bar of this material is present at the site with flow in a run along the left ,
descending side of the river. Six freshwater mussel species were collected including the
targeted yellow lampmussel, creeper and eastern creekshell.
Table 7. Mollusk Species Collected Site 4
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 77 (77/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 51 (51/hr)
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel 7 (7.0/hr)
Strophitus undulatus creeper 3 (3.0/hr)
Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell 1 (1.0/hr)
Uniomerus carolinianus Florida pondhom
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam
* relict shell only
3.2.6 Site S (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site was selected prior to dam removal due to the presence of large boulder and
bedrock rock outcroppings. Since dam removal, much more of the rock outcropping is
exposed and the channel has braided flow around several of the large boulders creating
hydraulic breaks where sediments have accumulated that have been colonized by
herbaceous vegetation in some areas. This site is essentially contiguous with Site 4. This
station is situated adjacent to a boulder/gravel/sand bar. Four mussel species including
the targeted yellow lampmussel were collected.
Table 8. Mollusk Species Collected Site 5
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 48 (48.0/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 1 (1.0/hr)
Elliptio lazarus Atlantic delicate spike 2 (2.0/hr)
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel 2 (2.0/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Campeloma decisum pointed campeloma Uncommon
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Common
Helisoma anceps Two-ridge rams-horn Uncommon
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report
TCG Job # 3202
1

3.2.7 Site 6 (Deep River-Impoundment):
'
This sampling station occurs in a small riffle/run sequence on the left descending side of
the river just below the SR 1621 (Carbonton Road) bridge. This habitat was created by
large accumulations of woody debris trapped by the bridge. Only three individual eastern
elliptio were found; however they were all young (newly recruited) individuals (21, 34
and 40 mm TL).
' Table 9. Mollusk Species Collected Site 6
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 3 (4.0/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Common
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
3.2.8 Site 7 (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site is characterized by a large gravel/sand bar island in the center of the channel that
has created a shallow riffle along the right descending bank and a riffle/run of moderate
depth along the left descending bank. The island is colonized by herbaceous and woody
vegetation and appears to flood on a fairly regular basis, as is evident by numerous pools
within the island that retain water. This station exhibits some of the most complex
' habitat selected for monitoring, as a variety of substrate and hydraulic conditions are
present. Four mussel species, including the targeted triangle floater and creeper were
collected. The highest number of Cape Fear shiner found during the Year-2 studies were
found at this site (TCG 2007). Numerous individuals were observed while conducting
the mussel surveys, but no seine net hauls were performed.
Table 10. Mollusk Species Collected Site 7
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels # (CPUE)
Alasmidonta undulata triangle floater 1 (0.3/hr)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 25 (8.3/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 3 (1.0/hr)
Strophitus undulatus creeper 2 (0.7/hr)
' Freshwater Snails and Clams Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Abundant
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
3.2.9 Site 8 (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site occurs at the mouth of Big Governors Creek and is dominated by a shallow
sand/gravel riffle in a long riffle/run/pool sequence. A cobble/gravel point bar has
formed at the confluence. Eight mussel species, including the targeted triangle floater,
' yellow lampmussel, creeper and eastern creekshell were collected.
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report
TCG Job # 3202

Table 11. Mollusk Species Collected Site 8
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator

Freshwater Mussels
CPUE '
Alasmidonta undulata triangle floater 3 (1.0/hr)
Elliptio angustata Carolina lance 1 (0.3/hr)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 30 (10.0/hr)
Elliptio icterina variable spike 2 (0.7/hr)
Elliptio lazarus Atlantic delicate spike
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel 1 (0.3/hr)
1 (0.3/hr)
Strophitus undulatus creeper 1 (0.3/hr)
Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell 7 (2.3/hr)
Uniomerus carolinianus Florida pondhorn
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Campeloma decisum pointed campeloma Uncommon
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Common
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
* relict shell only
3.2. 10 Site 9 (Deep River-Impoundment): ,
This site was selected during the pre-removal surveys due to the presence of large
boulder and bedrock rock outcroppings. Since dam removal much more of the rock
outcropping is exposed, and during Year-2 gravel/sand bars that had begun to form
adjacent to river banks were noted (TCG 2007). These bars have created small riffle

areas. Six mussel species, including the targeted triangle floater, yellow lampmussel, ,
creeper and eastern creekshell were collected.
Table 12. Mollusk Species Collected Site 9
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels CPUE
Alasmidonta undulata triangle floater 1 (1.0/hr)
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 11 (11.0/hr)
Elliptio icterina Variable spike 2 (2.0/hr)
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel
Strophitus undulatus creeper 1 (1.0/hr)
Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell 2 (2.0/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Abundant
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
* relict shell only
3.2. 11 Site 10 (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site was selected during the pre-removal studies due to the presence of large boulder
and bedrock rock outcroppings. Prior to dam removal, flow was virtually nonexistent and
the rocky substrate was covered with large accumulations of fine sediments. Since dam
removal, much more of the rock outcropping is exposed, however riffle habitat has not
formed. It appears that most of the fine sediments have been flushed from this site, and
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 10
TCG Job # 3202
1

accumulations of gravel and sand are evident in some areas, but it is unclear whether
riffle habitat will form. Three mussel species were found at this site, all of which were
found along the right descending bank at the waters edge.
Table 13. Mollusk Species Collected Site 10
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels CPUE
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 6 (4.6/hr)
Pyganodon cataracta Eastern floater
Uniomerus carolinianus Florida pondhorn 5 (3.8/hr)
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Campeloma decisum pointed campeloma Patchy Common
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Patchy Uncommon
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Common
* relict shell only
3.2.12 Site 11 (Deep River-Impoundment):

This site occurs in a long straight reach of the Deep River and is characterized by a
gravel/cobble riffle/run area with a bar developing along the right descending side of the
1 river. Only one eastern elliptio was found; however it was a young individual (29 mm
TL). The gravel elimia was very abundant, primarily young individuals.
Table 14. Mollusk Species Collected Site 11
' Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels CPUE
Elliptio complanata Eastern elliptio 1 (1.0/hr)
1 Freshwater Snails and Clams Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Very Abundant
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
3.2.13 Site 12 (Deep River-Impoundment):
' This site occurs in a long straight reach of the Deep River and is characterized by a
gravel/cobble riffle/run transitioning into a boulder fall. No mussels were found. The
' gravel elimia was abundant.
Table 15. Mollusk Species Collected Site 12
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
' Freshwater Mussels CPUE
None
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Abundant
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
' Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 11
TCG Job # 3202
3.2.14 Site 13 (Deep River-Impoundment):
This site occurs in a shifting shallow riffle/run consisting of shifting sand and gravel
beginning just below the location of the former Carbonton dam and extending upstream.
No mussels were found. The gravel elimia was abundant.
Table 16. Mollusk Species Collected Site 13
Scientific Name Common Name Abundance Indicator
Freshwater Mussels CPUE
None
Freshwater Snails and Clams - Relative Abundance
Elimia catenaria gravel elimia Patchy Common
Corbicula fluminea Asian clam Abundant
4.0 DISCUSSION
Semi-quantitative surveys for various freshwater fish were conducted at 15 specific
locations in areas formerly impounded by Carbonton Dam to document establishment of
lotic habitats and associated freshwater mollusk communities.
4.1 Habitat Reconnaissance
At least 12 substantial riffle habitats have developed within the Deep River.
Morphological features at many of these sites have created various hydraulic conditions
and, in turn, multiple microhabitats which correspond to potentially high quality habitat
for aquatic species, including the targeted Cape Fear shiner and various rare mussel
species. It is anticipated that mussel recruitment will continue in these areas as the
substrates become more stable. Moderate to deep run habitats, as those observed at site
10, are also expected to provide quality habitats for various lotic-adapted fish and
freshwater mussel species.
4.2 Freshwater Mollusk Surveys
While both freshwater mussels and aquatic snails were found within the former reservoir
pool prior to dam removal, the Year-3 surveys demonstrate a transition from lentic to
lotic adapted species as well as an increase in species diversity.
4.2.1 Freshwater mussel fauna
Prior to dam removal, the freshwater mussel fauna within the former reservoir pool was
dominated by habitat generalist, or lentic-adapted species generally confined to bank
habitats. Establishment of more lotic-adapted species was expected to occur in the newly
formed riffle habitats following removal. This aspect of the monitoring plan was not
implemented until Year-3, to allow for re-colonization of the newly restored habitats, and
allow for the newly recruited individuals to attain a size that are easily detectable with the
least habitat-invasive survey methodology.
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 12
TCG Job # 3202
t
t
4.2.1.1 Species Composition
When comparing the mussel fauna observed during the pre-removal surveys (TCG 2006)
with the 3-Year surveys, it is evident that the fauna has transitioned from one comprised
of habitat generalists and lentic-adapted species, to one comprised of habitat generalists
and lotic-adapted species. For this analysis, each mussel species found was assigned a
habitat guild based on habitat preferences reported in the literature as well as personal
observations made by TCG staff with over 26 years collectively studying mussel
distribution. It should be noted that these guilds represent habitats "typically" occupied
by each species, and species can often be found "outside" of these habitats. The
combined CPUE for each species (grouped by habitat guild) found in the former
impounded reach are shown in Table 17.
Table 17. CPUE of Mussel Species Pre-Removal and Year-3
Mussel Species CPUE Pre-removal CPUE 3-Year
Lentic-adapted
Pyganodon cataracta 0.95/hr 0.0/hr*
Utterbackia imbecillis 0.23/hr
Habitat Generalists
Elliptio complanata 37.9/hr 25.0/hr
Elliptio producta 1.19/hr 0.1/hr
Uniomerus carolinianus 11.0/hr 0.3/hr
Lotic-adapted
Alasmidonta undulata 0.23/hr 0.3/hr
Elliptio angustata 0.2/hr
Elliptio icterina -- 3.5/hr
Elliptio lazarus@ 1.19/hr 0.3/hr
'
Elliptio roanokensis 0.23/hr
Lampsilis cariosa 0.0/hr* 0.7/hr
Strophitus undulates 0.3/hr
N
Villosa constricta 0.05/hr
Villosa delumbis 0.6/hr
@ identified as Elliptio sp. during the pre-removal surveys
* relict shell only
The freshwater mussel fauna prior to dam removal was represented by two lentic-
adapted, three habitat generalist, and four lotic-adapted species. Of the four lotic-adapted
species, the triangle floater and Roanoke slabshell were ea ch represented by only one
individual, and the yellow lampmussel was represented by only a relict shell (TCG 2006).
' Based on size and appearance, it was speculated that the Roanoke slabshell may have
been alive prior to the dam being constructed (TCG 2006).
Sites 10 and 11 are the only sites that contained live mussels that did not exhibit a trend
of increasing number of lotic-adapted species. Four additional lotic-adapted species were
found during the Year-3 surveys, the variable spike, creeper, notched rainbow, and
eastern creekshell.
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 13
TCG Job # 3202
The presence of the notched rainbow is especially significant, as this species is
extremely rare in the entire length of the Deep River, with a single relict shell
collected at the SR 14456 crossing in Moore County in 1997 (personal observation),
being the only other recent collection.
While the overall CPUE appears to be lower during the Year-3 monitoring than pre-
removal, this is more a reflection of habitat than relative abundance. As stated earlier,
prior to dam removal, mussels were concentrated into small pockets of suitable habitat on
the banks, thus the majority of search time was spent in these areas, and very little time
was spent in other areas. The results of the Year-3 surveys indicate that mussels are more
distributed across the river; thus sample time is not concentrated in small areas. In
addition, no mussels were found at Sites 11, 12 and 13, lowering the overall CPUE.
1
r a
t ° P '
1 1

d ' ? I
i. aka
Young creeper (top left), eastern creekshell (top right), eastern elliptio (bottom left) and triangle
floater (bottom right) found in Deep River within formerly impounded reach during Year-3
monitoring.
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 14
TCG Job # 3202
4.2.1.2 Post-removal Mussel Recruitment
While field-determination of the exact age of an individual mussel can be difficult, size
measurements, coupled with observations of growth rests and an understanding of typical
growth rates by species and latitude allow for estimations to be made. With the exception
of eastern elliptio, each individual mussel collected was measured. To save time and limit
stress to individuals, a subset of the eastern elliptio were measured at sites where
numbers were high. Based on size measurements, it appears that the majority of mussels
found were individuals recruited into the former reservoir since dam removal (Table 18).
Young eastern creekshells and a triangle floater (bottom right)
found in Deep River within the formerly impounded reach-3 year
monitoring
Table 18. Estimated Age Groups of Live Mussels Collected Year-3
' Scientific Name (%) of post-removal age (%) of pre-removal age
Alasmidonta undulata 100% 0%
Elliptio angustata 50% 50%
Elliptio complanata 79% 21%
Elliptio icterina 81% 19%
Elliptio lazarus 80% 20%
Elliptio producta 50% 50%
1 Lampsilis cariosa 64% 36%
Strophitus undulatus 100% 0%
Villosa constricta
Villosa delumbis 100%
100% 0%
0%
Uniomerus carolinianus 0% 100%
' As discussed above (Sec. 4.2.1.1), Site 10 appears to retain many of the lentic
characteristics that were present prior to dam removal. As a result, the species
composition has changed little, and the live mussels that were found were dominated by
1 older individuals (73%). This was the only site where older-aged individuals
outnumbered younger ones.
' Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 15
TCG Job # 3202
6.0 WORKS CITED
2006, TCG. Carbonton Dam Removal: Pre-Removal Survey Report, August 07, 2006.
2007, TCG. Carbonton Dam Removal: Year Two Monitoring Report, October 01, 2007.
Carbonton Dam Removal Year-3 Monitoring Report 17
TCG Job # 3202

APPENDIX D: NCDWQ HABITAT ASSESSMENT FIELD DATA SHEET
EEP Project No. D-04012A Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
Appendix D

t
t
t
t
1
1
3/06 Revision 6
t
t
1
1
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Mountain/ Piedmont Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ ?rOTAL SCORE
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream Location/road: (Road Name )County
Date
CC#
Basin
Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ? Fish ?Benthos ? Basinwide ?Special Study (Describe)
Latitude Longitude Ecoregion: ? MT ? P ? Slate Belt ? Triassic Basin
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO mg/l Conductivity (corr.) µ&cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what
you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: -%Forest %Residential ___%Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use : ?Forest ?Agriculture ?Urban ? Animal operations upstream
j Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank) Stream Depth: (m) Avg _ Max
? Width variable ? Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank-first flat surface you stand on): (m)
t Bank Angle: ° or ? NA (Vertical is 90°, horizontal is 0°. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards mid-channel, < 90°
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
? Channelized Ditch
?Deeply incised-steep, straight banks ?Both banks undercut at bend ?Channel filled in with sediment
? Recent overbank deposits ?Bar development ?Buried structures ?Exposed bedrock
? Excessive periphyton growth ? Heavy filamentous algae growth ?Green tinge ? Sewage smell
Manmade Stabilization: ?N ?Y: ?Rip-rap, cement, gabions ? Sediment/grade-control structure ?Berm/levee
Flow conditions : ?High ?Normal ?Low
Turbidity: ?Clear ? Slightly Turbid ?Turbid ?Tannic ?Milky ?Colored (from dyes)
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? ? YFS ?NO Details
1 Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................ ?
B. Water fills >750/. of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ?
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed ............................................. ?
D. Root mats out of water ................................................................................................................... ?
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ?
Weather Conditions: Photos: ?N ?Y ? Digital ?35mm
Remarks:
39
I. Channel Modification Score
A. channel natural, frequent bends ........................................................................................................ 5
B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old) ...................................................... 4
C. some channelization present .............................................................................................................. 3
D. more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted ............................................................... 2
E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0
? Evidence of dredging ?Evidence of desnagging=no large woody debris in stream ?Banks of uniform shape/height
Remarks Subtotal
11. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >70% of the
reach is rocks, 1 type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have
begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare, Common, or Abundant.
-Rocks Macrophytes Sticks and leafpacks Snags and logs Undercut banks or root mats
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
>70% 40-70% 20-40% <20%
Score Score Score Score
4 or 5 types present ................. 20 16 12 8
3 types present ......................... 19 15 11 7
2 types present ......................... 18 14 10 6
1 type present ........................... 17 13 9 5
No types present ....................... 0
? No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks Subtotal

III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle
for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle-look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks.
A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders Score
1. embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders) ......................... 15
2. embeddedness 20-40% .......................................................................................................... 12
3. embeddedness 40-80% .......................................................................................................... 8
4. embeddedness >80% ............................................................................................................. 3
B. substrate gravel and cobble
1. embeddedness <20% ............................................................................................................ 14
2. embeddedness 20-40% ......................................................................................................... 11
3. embeddedness 40-80% ........................................................................................................ 6
4. embeddedness >80% ............................................................................................................ 2
C. substrate mostly gravel
1. embeddedness <50% ............................................................................................................ 8
2. embeddedness >50% ............................................................................................................ 4
D. substrate homogeneous
1. substrate nearly all bedrock ................................................................................................... 3
2. substrate nearly all sand ........................................................................................................ 3
3. substrate nearly all detritus .................................................................................................... 2
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay ................................................................................................... 1
Remarks Subtotal
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in
large high gradient streams, or side eddies.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ............................................................................................................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................................................ 8
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ............................................................................................................... 6
b. pools about the same size ...................................................................................................... 4
B. Pools absent ............................................................................................................................................ 0
? Pool bottom boulder-cobble=hard ? Bottom sandy-sink as you walk ? Silt bottom
Remarks
40
Subtotal_
? Some pools over wader depth
Page Total

V. Riffle Habitats
Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration-can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent Riffles Infrequent
Score Score
A. well defined riffle and rim, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream.... 16 12
B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width .................................... 14
C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10 7
3
D. riffles absent ................................................................................................................... 0
Channel Slope: ?Typical for area ?Steep=fast flow ?Low=like a coastal stream Subtotal
' VI. Bank Stability and Vegetation
FACE UPSTREAM Left Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Banks stable
1. little evidence of erosion or bank failure(except outside of bends), little potential for erosion.. 7 7
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems ..................................... 6 6
' 2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ........................... 5 5
3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding ................. 3 3
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2 2

' 5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident. ......... * ...... *,*,**,** ............ *,*,* 0 0
Total

Remarks _

VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric.
Score
Remarks
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration ............................................. 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ..................................................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal .................................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ....................................................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading ............................................................................................................. 0
Subtotal
VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). D efinition: A break
in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths
down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc.
FACE UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Dominant vegetation: ? Trees ? Shrubs ? Grasses ? Weeds/old field ?Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. width > 18 meters ..................................................................................... 5 5
2. width 12-18 meters ................................................................................... 4 4
3. width 6-12 meters ..................................................................................... 3 3
4. width < 6 meters ...................................................................................... 2 2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
' 1. breaks rare
a. width > 18 meters ......................................................................... 4 4
b. width 12-18 meters ....................................................................... 3 3
c. width 6-12 meters ....................................................................... 2 2
d. width < 6 meters ......................................................................... 1 1
2. breaks common
a. width > 18 meters ......................................................................... 3 3
b. width 12-18 meters ...................................................................... 2 2
c. width 6-12 meters ....................................................................... 1 1
d. width < 6 meters ......................................................................... 0 0
Remarks Total
' Page Total
? Disclaimer-form filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion-atypical stream. TOT AL SCORE
41
Supplement for Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Diagram to determine bank angle:
LA*.4.
90° 45°
Typical Stream Cross-section
This side is 45° bank angle.
Site Sketch:
Other comments:
42
1
1
1
1
i
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX E: MONITORING PICTURES AND VIDEOS (DATA DVD)
EEP Project No. D-04012A
Carbonton Dam Removal 2008 Monitoring Report
Appendix E