20040722 Ver 1_Monitoring Report_20090212

ELK SHOALS STREAM RESTORATION SITE
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT FOR 2008 (YEAR 4)
CONTRACT NUMBER AW.03003-B
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 203
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604

RECEIVtu
NC ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
Prepared By:
,laker
ohm mhaa ? r
EB 12 zoos
YIERA4 AWSUAUj-r
November 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................1
2.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 3
2.1 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Purpose .............................................................................................................................3
2.3 Project History .................................................................................................................. 4
3.0 STREAM MONITORING ..............................................................................................10
3.1 Description of Stream Monitoring ................................................................................. 10
3.2 Stream Restoration Success Criteria .............................................................................. 11
3.3 Results of Stream Monitoring ........................................................................................ 11
4.0 VEGETATION MONITORING .................................................................................... 13
4.1 Description of Vegetation Monitoring ........................................................................... 13
4.2 Vegetation Success Criteria ........................................................................................... 14
4.3 Results of Vegetative Monitoring .................................................................................. 14
4.4 Vegetation Observations ................................................................................................ 14
4.5 Vegetative Conclusions .................................................................................................. 15
4.5.1 Climatic Data .......................................................................................................... 15
5.0 PROJECT MAINTENANCE ......................................................................................... 17
5.1 Kudzu Control ................................................................................................................ 17
5.2 Beaver Dam Removal .................................................................................................... 17
6.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................18

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site ........................................................ 5
Figure 2. As-built Figures for the Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site .................................. 6-9
Figure 3. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2008 Observed Rainfall ..................... 16
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Background Information .............................................................................................. 2
Table 2. Summary of As-built Lengths and Restoration Approaches ........................................ 3
Table 3. Tree Species Planted in the Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site ............................... 13
Table 4. 2008 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Species Composition ............................................ 14
Table 5. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2008 Observed Rainfall (Inches)........ 16
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. Photo Log
APPENDIX B. Stream Monitoring Data
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008 (YEAR 4)
Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site
1.0 SUMMARY
This Year 4 Annual Report describes the monitoring activities during the 2008 growing season on
the Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site (Site). Construction of the Site, including planting of
trees, was completed in April 2005. The 2008 data represent results from the fourth year of
stream and vegetation monitoring.
The design for the Elk Shoals project involved the restoration of channel dimension, pattern, and
profile on Elk Shoals Creek and two of its unnamed tributaries (UTs). After construction was
complete, 5,376 linear feet (LF) of stream had been restored on the Site.
This Annual Report presents the data from 3 vegetation monitoring stations, 21 photo point
stations, 1 crest gauge and 10 cross-sections. The cross-sections are of Elk Shoals Creek and two
UTs, as described in the approved Restoration Plan for the Site. Photos were taken of cross-
sections and at in-stream structures. The longitudinal stream profile was not required during Year
4 of monitoring.
Survival success of woody vegetation is being monitored at 3 vegetation monitoring plots, each
0.057 acre in size, placed randomly at the Site. Survivability of trees in each vegetation plot is
used to estimate the average survivability of all trees planted across the Site. The vegetation
monitoring for Year 4 indicated a range of average survivability between 596 to 403 stems per
acre. This Annual Report details the tree survival data obtained from all onsite vegetation
monitoring plots and provides the average stems per acre of woody vegetation established
throughout the Site during the 2008 growing season.
Part of the monitoring effort for this project includes observation of the project's response to local
climatic conditions. Weather data from the Statesville Weather Station (UCAN: 14362, COOP:
318292) were used to document precipitation. Historical average rainfall totals were compared to
the 2008 observed rainfall totals. For 2008, rainfall between the months of April and September
was 28.19 inches recorded at the weather station compared to the long-term average of 23.80
inches for the same period of time, indicating that the conditions during the 2008 growing season
were substantially wetter than the long-term average.
The on-site crest gauge documented the occurrence of at least one bankfull flow event during the
Year 4 monitoring period. Year 4 cross-section monitoring data for stream stability were
collected during August 2008. The riffle and pool cross-sections show that there has been very
little adjustment to stream dimension since construction. Cross-sections 2, 3, 9 and 10 have
remained very stable since as-built conditions. These cross-sections have continued to exhibit
stability through Year 4. Cross-sections 1, 7 and 8 have exhibited moderate stability since as-
built conditions. Cross-sections 5 and 6 have been deepening slightly every year since as-built
conditions. The pool in cross-section 4 has also deepened since as-built conditions.
Visual observations of all structures for the Year 4 monitoring season revealed that the cross vane
at station 49+50 exhibited minor piping occurring on the left bank. A visual observation of the
ephemeral pool sequence located just upstream of Old Concord Church Road has experienced
erosion on the left bank. An area of scour upstream of the ephemeral pool sequence was also
observed during Year 4 of monitoring.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4
Approximately one acre of kudzu (Pueraria montana) was treated at the Site during Year 4 of
monitoring. This was a follow-up to treatment of these areas in 2007, plus an expansion of the
upstream area. Four beaver dams on Elk Shoals Creek were also observed and removed during
the Year 4 monitoring period.
Table 1. Background Information.
Project Name Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site
Primary Contractor Restoration Systems, LLC
1001 Haynes Street, Suite 203, Raleigh, NC 27604
[phone]
Designer Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200, Cary, NC, 27518
[phone]
Construction Contractor River Works, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200, Cary, NC, 27518
[phone]
Project County Alexander County
Directions to Project Site From Raleigh, follow 1-40 west to exit 144 (Old
Mountain Rd.). Head north on Old Mountain Rd to Old
Concord Church Rd. Turn left on Old Concord Church
Rd., Site entrance is on the right after crossing Elk
Shoals Creek.
Drainage Area Elk Shoals Creek = 4.6 square miles
UT1 = 0.38 square miles
UT2 = 0.5 square miles
USGS Cataloging Unit 03050101
NCDWQ Sub-basin 03-08-32
Project Length 5,376 LF (Restoration)
Restoration Approach Restore and enhance channel dimension, pattern and
profile to three separate stream reaches (As-built
restoration length = 5,376 LF)
Date of Completion April 2005
Monitoring Dates Yearly through 5 growing seasons
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Project Description
The Site is located near the town of Stony Point in Alexander County within the Piedmont
physiographic province of North Carolina (Figure 1). The Site lies in US Geological Survey
(USGS) Cataloging Unit 03050101 and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)
sub-basin 03-08-32 of the Catawba River Basin. Environmental components monitored in this
project are those that allow an evaluation of channel stability and survivability of riparian
vegetation. The design for the restored streams involved the construction of stable meandering
channels for the purpose of improving water quality and wildlife habitat.
The stream systems that historically flowed through the Site were degraded by past land
management practices including land clearing, straightening and ditching of streams, row crop
production (corn and soybeans), and livestock production. The streams on the Site were
channelized, and riparian vegetation was cleared in most locations to increase arable acreage and
improve drainage for agricultural purposes. Stream and riparian functions on the Site had been
severely impacted as a result of agricultural conversion.
The project involved the restoration of 5,376 LF of channelized stream on Elk Shoals Creek and 2
UTs. Table 2 shows the as-built lengths and restoration type per reach. The as-built plans
presented in Figure 2 illustrate the construction and planting that were completed for this project
in April 2005.
Table 2. Summary of As-built Lengths and Restoration Approaches.
Reach Name As-built Length (LF) Restoration Approach
Elk Shoals Creek 563 Enhancement Level I
Elk Shoals Creek 3,531 Restoration
UT I 613 Restoration
UT2 669 Restoration
Total
F 5,376
2.2 Purpose
Monitoring of the Elk Shoals Site is required to demonstrate successful stream restoration based
on the criteria described in the approved Restoration Plan for this Site. Vegetation and stream
stability monitoring are conducted on an annual basis. Success criteria for this site must be met
for five consecutive years. This Annual Report details the results of the monitoring efforts
performed during 2008 (Year 4) at the Elk Shoals Site.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4
2.3 Project History
October 2004
April 2005
April 2005
December 2005
March 2006
June 2006
December 2006
November 2007
November 2008
Approved Mitigation Plan
Construction Completed
Planting Completed
1 st Annual Monitoring Report
Supplemental Planting
Channel Repair Work
2nd Annual Monitoring Report
3rd Annual Monitoring Report
4th Annual Monitoring Report
December 2009 (scheduled) 5th Annual Monitoring Report
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 4
Figure 1. Location of Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site.
y N
?Ay
- __"_
.?- i s ism ? ? r•-;^,?a. k?C-{`a tfll(i d _ _? V
}?.
?.
Project Area
}d al_ y
., '
R
L
x Rd rns teR? _ _ ?',? IT
r
L } _
Ray F7
d
62
ore `? fm $ ` 'tr ?4 C° G e 1 vil
-'-
??fJ '--
t• r ? G
.? $ ? ? Nva rd ?'
?'?? t ? .ads o Rd
Figure 1.1. Project Vicinity Map
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
0 0.5 1 2
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiMiles
I r

e?
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 5
@I ? ? y
0

0

II
??
O

?

g S s LL
(D_ 1\ N p
i o ? 6
Gg H
Jill
go
y zy0
W W O fC
6+ 4?
W

F g
i 2
U
m

W
h
p
8
i
W
H A.
U ?
? ? S
i w
N
W
?
N N

® lad
x w o?
R N X p

w Rw?i
U

?'
/ g$
O >? O o R
CCU y $ OM

W ® W "? ?

?w
•• 3

O N
'
n
i
CL i
? W
O , ei
®
qq/ ?
?yy
LL
/r^^
?
? Qif
9 ----- ------------- -_ ----_N -IW
S
y

W W
W v
[y
'.
LL [? 3 8
Q Q
? O
N LL W
?
y
b

a ^
z n a
O u?
w? F
o Q9N
o
to N
m ?S
NV I ?
? ? G m O

w0
?z O
oww
I', yyS
h wl? a
F
8 ?Vy u • n n
_ o
o O
a
Rz V U
_ - a
¢ =o
N

?
7
3

? a
N 0
W m
4z J
2 F
H
W
i? W
? _
o o I?i
_- ?

? I
v ? o
b
/ h
N
N
T ?IELIO ??L49,y Oald
W
r
c?
Soo
G

W 0

2W
M m _ -• ti,'

o e ? _ QQ Pf
a ? _ §
y p Y
R

N
W
w
D
LL
G
z
z
z .
oc
U
NLL
W
W 02
z5L
I
of
Cyry
WOQ
?QII?
+ Z
Q ~
U
N?
J ~
6z
O
yU
J Z
W W
m
L? -
T ? 4
.1 L
m
I
N
LLI
LL
1

?s
s
i
?N\1N?LdW
NHS
oo°p`e£d?s
r
r
2
LL y
i 1i 4y{
. , 11 1I1I
1. `H
k S
00-00.E?e1s?'??tr ,
NHS ?Nl Na
bryy

0
z
i .
00
W
NW
K
2 I!?
pF
gig
a_

J F c
3d W LL

M W
Z '±
m

U
I
j Cl) ? ?d
rvv
s

Q
co r

p vol

.
I
\
`
E6
? } N
+z
t 4 ?QV •
f
my7
` ' a? t uj
Q fig
? ,yn
t i? ? W
O

cl y
4 ZJZ'
,

x

z ,ems
,.

++ 05
LL

} z .

U a?
>>
CV m

o z xr'
2
Z

V m
LL
?a•se-ee-wa-sa'cue?•? taws=•?ag?/?i??n
3.0 STREAM MONITORING
3.1 Description of Stream Monitoring
To document the stated success criteria, the following monitoring program was instituted
following construction completion on the Elk Shoals Creek Restoration Site:
Bank full Events: A crest gauge was installed on the Site to document bankfull events. The
gauge is checked during yearly site visits, and records the highest out-of-bank flow event that
occurs during the year. The gauge is located at stream station 47+00, near permanent cross-
section 10 (see Figure 2-C).
Cross-Sections: As per the design criteria, 2 permanent cross-sections were installed per 2,000
LF of stream restoration work, with 1 of the locations being a riffle cross-section and 1 location
being a pool cross-section. A total of 10 permanent cross-sections were established on the Site, 6
on Elk Shoals Creek, 2 on UT I, and 2 on UT2. Each cross-section was marked on both banks
with permanent pins to establish the exact transect used. Permanent cross-section pins were
surveyed and located relative to a common benchmark to facilitate easy comparison of year-to-
year data. The annual cross-section surveys include points measured at all breaks in slope,
including top of bank, bankfull, inner berm, edge of water, and thalweg. Riffle cross-sections are
classified using the Rosgen stream classification system.
Longitudinal Profiles: A complete longitudinal profile was surveyed following construction
completion to record as-built conditions. For monitoring years 1, 3, and 5 the longitudinal
profile will be surveyed for at least 1,000 LF of the restored channel on Elk Shoals Creek, which
shall include a 500-foot reach of the restored channel near the upstream section of the project and
another 500-foot reach measured downstream. Measurements will include thalweg, water
surface, bankfull, and top of low bank. Each of these measurements will be taken at the head of
each feature (e.g., riffle, pool, and glide). In addition, maximum pool depth will be recorded.
All surveys will be tied to a single permanent benchmark.
Photo Reference Stations: Photographs are used to visually document restoration success. A
total of 21 photo reference stations were established to document conditions at the constructed
grade control structures across the Elk Shoals Creek Site, and additional photo stations were
established at each of the 10 permanent cross-sections. The GPS coordinates of each photo
station have been noted as additional references to ensure the same photo location is used
throughout the monitoring period. Reference photos are taken at least once per year.
Each stream bank is photographed at each permanent cross-section photo station. For each
stream bank photo, the photograph is framed so that the survey tape is centered in the photo
(appears as a vertical line at the center of the photograph), keeping the channel water surface line
horizontal and near the lower edge of the frame, to include as much of the photographed bank as
possible in the photo. A photo log of structures and photographs taken at the permanent cross-
sections at the Elk Shoals Creek Site is included in Appendix A of this report.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 10
3.2 Stream Restoration Success Criteria
The approved Restoration Plan requires the following criteria be met to achieve stream
restoration success:
• Bankfull Events: Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the five-year
monitoring period. The two bankfull events must occur in separate years.
• Cross-Sections: There should be little change in the as-built cross-sections. If cross-section
changes are observed, they should be minor changes representing an increase in stability
(e.g., settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth
ratio). Cross-sections shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method and
all monitored cross-sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for
"C4/E4" type channels.
• Longitudinal Profiles: The longitudinal profiles should show that the bedform features are
remaining stable (not aggrading or degrading). The pools should remain deep with flat water
surface slopes and the riffles should remain steeper and shallower than the pools. Bedforms
observed should be consistent with those observed in "C" or "E" type channels.
Photo Reference Stations: Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel
aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation and effectiveness of
erosion control measures. Photos should indicate the absence of developing bars within the
channel, no excessive bank erosion or increase in channel depth over time, and maturation of
riparian vegetation.
3.3 Results of Stream Monitoring
The on-site crest gauge documented the occurrence of at least one bankfull flow event during the
Year 4 monitoring period. An inspection of site conditions during the October site visit revealed
visual evidence of out-of-bank flow, such as debris and wrack lines, confirming the crest gauge
reading. The largest onsite stream flow documented by the crest gauge during Year 4 of
monitoring was in October, and was greater than 3.0 feet above the bankfull stage. Photos of the
October bankfull evidence are located in Appendix A.
Year 4 cross-section monitoring data for stream stability were collected during August 2008 and
compared to baseline stream data collected in May 2005 (as-built conditions), Year 1 data
collected in November 2005, Year 2 data collected in September 2006 and Year 3 data collected
in August 2007. The ten, permanent cross-sections along the restored channels (five located
across riffles and five located across pools) were re-surveyed to document stream dimension at
the end of monitoring Year 4. Data from each permanent cross-section are included in Appendix
B of this report. The longitudinal profile survey was not required during Year 4 of monitoring.
The riffle and pool cross-sections show that there has been very little adjustment to stream
dimension since construction. Cross-sections 1, 4, 6, 7, and 9 are located in pools found at the
apex of meander bends. Cross-sections 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 are located in riffles before and after
pools.
Cross-sections 2, 3, 9 and 10 have remained very stable since as-built conditions. These cross-
sections have continued to exhibit stability through Year 4. Cross-sections 1, 7 and 8 have
exhibited moderate stability since as-built conditions.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 11
Cross-sections 5 and 6 have been deepening slightly every year since as-built conditions. The
pool in cross-section 4 has also been deepening since as-built conditions, with the exception of
Year 4. During Year 4 of monitoring, the cross-section 4 thalweg was found to be at
approximately the same elevation as as-built conditions.
Survey data from all pool cross-sections indicate the continued development of point bar features
on the inside bank of the meander bends. All monitored cross-sections fell within the
quantitative parameters defined for "C" or "E" type channels.
Four beaver dams were noted in the restored channel during this monitoring year and have since
been removed. The beaver dams did not affect the overall monitoring results for Year 4.
Flow through a meander bend possesses higher conveyance velocity along the outer bank of the
bend, and lower flow velocity along the bend's inner bank. As flow velocity decreases, sediment
transport capacity also declines, causing transported sediment to fall out and settle on the bottom
as it slows down. Point bar formation along the inside of a meander bend indicates flow velocity
vectors occurring as designed, and is therefore expected.
In-stream structures installed within the restored stream included constructed riffles, rock cross
vanes, rock j-hooks and vanes, log bank toe protection, and root wads. A constructed riffle and
three rock cross vanes were installed on the lower end of the project to step down the elevation
of the restored stream bed to match the existing channel invert at the outlet of the project. Two
cross vanes were repaired in June 2006 after minor piping or head cuts were noted upstream.
Visual observations of all structures during Year 4 of monitoring revealed that the cross vane at
station 49+50 exhibited minor piping occurring on the left bank. A visual observation of the
ephemeral step pool sequence located just upstream of Old Concord Church Road along the N.C.
Department of Transportation (DOT) right-of-way has experienced erosion on the left bank.
Scour upstream of the step pool sequence was also observed during Year 4 of monitoring. These
two areas will be closely monitored during Year 5 of monitoring. If necessary, repairs may be
performed using hand and/or power equipment. All other structures on the Site are performing as
designed.
Rock vanes and J-hooks placed in meander pool areas have provided scour to keep pools deep
and provide cover for fish. Cross vanes placed in riffle areas have maintained riffle elevations
and provided a downstream scour hole that provides habitat. Root wads and brush layers placed
on the outside of meander bends have provided bank stability and in-stream cover for fish and
other aquatic organisms.
Photographs of the channel were taken during the Year 4 monitoring season to document the
evolution of the restored stream geometry (see Appendix A and B).
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 12
4.0 VEGETATION MONITORING
4.1 Description of Vegetation Monitoring
At the completion of construction activities, stream margins and riparian areas of the Site were
planted with bare root trees, live stakes, and a permanent herbaceous seed mixture. The woody
vegetation was planted randomly six to eight feet apart from the top of the stream banks to the
outer edge of the project's re-vegetation limits at a density of 680 stems per acre. The tree
species planted at the Site are shown in Table 3. The seed mix of herbaceous species applied to
the project's riparian area included Soft rush (Juncus effusus), Joe-pie-weed (Eupatorium
maculatum), Wool grass (Scirupus cyperinus), Fringe sedge (Carex crinata), River Oats (Uniola
latifolia), and Cardinal flower (Lobelia cardinalis). This seed mixture was broadcast on the Site
at a rate of 21 pounds per acre. All planting was completed in April 2005.
Table 3. Tree Species Planted in the Elk Shoals Restoration Area.
ID Scientific Name Common Name FAC Status
1 Platanus occidentalis Sycamore FACW-
2 uercus hellos Willow Oak FACW-
3 uercus rubra Northern Red Oak FACU
4 uercus alba White Oak FACU
5 Betula ni ra River Birch FACW
6 Dios ros vir iniana Persimmon FAC
7 Hamamelis vir iniana Witch Hazel FACU
8 Fraxinus enns lvanica Green Ash FACW
9 Liriodendron tuli i era Tulip Poplar FAC
10 uercus alcata Southern Red Oak FACU-
*11 uercus michauxii Swam Chestnut FACW
*12 uercus vir iniana Live Oak FACU
*13 uercus shumardii Shumard Oak FAC
*September 2006 after supplemental planting conducted by River Works, Inc T
At the time of planting, three vegetation plots, labeled Ml, M2, and M3, were delineated on-site
to monitor survival of the planted woody vegetation. Each vegetation plot is 0.057 acre in size
or 25 feet x 100 feet dimensionally. Plot delineation involved using metal fence posts at each of
the four corners to clearly and permanently establish the area that was to be sampled. Then ropes
were hung connecting all four corners to help in determining if trees close to the plot boundary
were inside or outside of the plot. Trees on the boundary and trees just outside of the boundary
that appear to have greater than 50 percent of their canopy inside the boundary were counted
inside the plot. All of the planted stems inside the plot were flagged to distinguish them from
any colonizing individuals and to facilitate locating them in the future.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 13
4.2 Vegetation Success Criteria
To determine vegetation success criteria objectively, specific goals for woody vegetation density
have been defined. Data from vegetation monitoring plots should display a surviving tree
density of at least 320, 3-year-old trees per acre at the end of Year 3 monitoring, and a surviving
tree density of at least 260, 5-year-old trees per acre at the end of the 5-year monitoring period.
Although the selected native canopy species planted throughout the Site are the target woody
vegetation cover, up to 20 percent of the Site's established woody vegetation at the end of the
monitoring period may be comprised of volunteer species.
4.3 Results of Vegetative Monitoring
Table 4 presents stem counts of surviving individuals found at each of the monitoring stations at
the end of Year 4. Each planted tree species is identified across the top row, and each plot is
identified down the left column. The numbers on the top row correlate to the ID column of
Table 3. Trees within each monitoring plot are flagged regularly to prevent the occurrence of
unmarked trees due to flag degradation. It is important for trees within the monitoring plots to
remain marked to ensure they are all accounted for during the annual stem counts and calculation
of tree survivability. Volunteer individuals found within the plots are also flagged during this
process. Flags are used to tag trees because they do not interfere with the growth of the tree.
Table 4. 2008 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Species Composition.
Tree Species ID Number
Plot 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 *11 *12 *13 Total Stems/acre
M1 8 3 18 1 30 526
M2 3 2 19 2 4 34 596
M3 5 1 4 9 2 1 1 23 403
September 2006 after supplemental planting conducted by River Works, Inc *
4.4 Vegetation Observations
All of the herbaceous species seeded throughout the Site after construction (see Section 4.1 of
this report) were found on-site at the end of the Year 4 monitoring period. In addition, Switch
grass (Panicum virgatum) and Deer tongue (Panicum clandestinum) were observed throughout
the Site. Microstegium (Microstegium vimineum), a non-native plant, was also noted within the
riparian area. A few small privet plants and blackberry (rubus spp.) were noted on vegetation
plot 1 M1. These species were not planted on the Site and are considered to be volunteer
species.
During Year 4 of monitoring, Kudzu (Pueraria montana.) was noted on the Site within the
conservation easement at Old Concord Church Road and between stations 42+00 and 44+00.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 14
4.5 Vegetative Conclusions
The survival success of woody vegetation at each vegetation monitoring plot was notably low at
the end of 2005. This low survival rate of planted trees was attributed to late planting (April
2005) combined with drier than average conditions throughout the growing season.
That initial low survival success of woody vegetation suggested the Site may not meet the
minimum success criteria established as goal for the end of Year 3 of the monitoring period. To
increase the density of successfully established trees at the Site, supplemental planting of woody
vegetation took place during March 2006. The entire Site was planted with 50 percent of the
original plantings, or 2,200 additional trees. At the end of Year 4 monitoring, the density of the
3 vegetation plots ranged from 596 to 403 stems\acre, as shown in Table 4 and the site is
considered to be on trajectory for success. Photographs of the vegetation plots are presented in
Appendix B.
4.5.1 Climatic Data
Table 5 and Figure 3 show a comparison of the 2008 monthly rainfall to historical precipitation
(WETS table for Iredell County, collected between 1971 and 2000) for the project area. Historic
climate information for Alexander County was not readily available; therefore, data from Iredell
County were used due to its proximity to the Site. Weather data from the Statesville Weather
Station (UCAN: 14362, COOP: 318292) were used to document precipitation for the monitoring
year. Historical average rainfall totals were compared to the 2008 observed rainfall totals. For
2008, total rainfall observed at the weather station between the months of April and September
was 28.19 inches, compared to the long-term average of 23.80 inches for the same period.
Monthly precipitation values for 2008 were mostly average to below average, with the
exceptions of July and August that experienced higher than normal rainfall due to tropical
systems. This demonstrates that the climatic conditions observed during the 2008 growing
season were substantially wetter than the long-term average.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 15
Table 5. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2008 Observed Rainfall (Inches).
Observed Precipi tation, P (in)
Month Average 30% 70% Month P
January 3.83 2.65 4.74 January 2008 0.82
February 3.48 2.53 4.22 February 2008 3.06
March 4.4 3.13 5.19 March 2008 3.3
April 3.42 2.13 4.53 April 2008 3.65
May 4.15 2.67 5.00 May 2008 1.05
June 4.49 2.99 5.39 June 2008 4.55
July 3.95 2.57 4.95 July 2008 5.37
August 3.72 2.59 4.65 August 2008 10.12
September 4.07 2.41 5.88 September 2008 3.45
October 3.45 1.99 4.13 October 2008 1.90
November 3.3 2.45 3.84 November 2008
December 3.64 2.51 4.41 December 2008
Notes:
Data not available for Statesville Weather Station before submittal date of this report
Figure 3. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2008 Observed Rainfall
r - -
Elk Shoals Site
12 Historic Average vs. Observed Rainfall
a?
w c 10
8
t 0
6
f+
•? 4
a` 2
??
Historic 30 percentile
-? Historic Average -r-- Historic 70 percentile
- - -•- - - Observed 2008

.i

Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 16
5.0 PROJECT MAINTENANCE
5.1 Kudzu Control
On September 19, 2008, approximately one acre of kudzu (Pueraria montana.) was treated at the
Site. This was a follow-up to treatment of the areas made in 2007, plus an expansion of the
upstream area. One area treated was near Station 50+25 and the other was between Stations
42+00 and 44+00. Treatment was made with Milestone VM herbicide at a rate of 7 oz. per acre.
Follow-up surveys will be conducted during Year 5 and re-treatment carried out if necessary.
5.2 Beaver Dam Removal
Four beaver dams on Elk Shoals Creek were observed during the 2008 monitoring activities.
The dams were located at the following locations: one upstream of station 20+00, two upstream
of station 42+00 and one upstream of station 47+00. All dams were removed by using hand
equipment. During monitoring Year 4, eight beavers were removed from the Site by trapping.
Follow-up surveys during monitoring Year 5 will be conducted to determine if additional control
activities are necessary.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 17
6.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Stream Monitoring. The total length of stream channel restored on the Site was 5,376
LF. This entire length was inspected during Year 4 of the monitoring period to assess
stream performance.
Visual observations of all structures for the Year 4 monitoring season revealed that the
cross vane at station 49+50 exhibited minor piping occurring on the left and right bank.
A visual observation of the ephemeral step pool sequence located along the Old Concord
Church Road DOT right-of-way has experienced erosion on the left bank. Scour
upstream of the step pool sequence was also observed during Year 4 of monitoring.
These two areas will be closely monitored during Year 5 of monitoring. If future
monitoring proves that a move toward unstable conditions is developing in these areas,
repairs may be performed using hand equipment. All other structures along the restored
channel are stable and functioning as designed.
Vegetation Monitoring. During Year 4, vegetation monitoring indicated a range of
average survivability between 403 and 596 stems per acre. The above average rainfall
during the Year 4 growing season has increased the survivability of the vegetation plots.
Seeded herbaceous vegetation has thrived onsite, providing adequate ground cover during
the 2008 growing season. Kudzu on the Site will be monitored throughout Year 5
growing season.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 4 18
APPENDIX A
PHOTO LOG
Constructed Riffle 1
Constructed Riffle 2
Constructed Riffle 3
Constructed Riffle 4
Constructed Riffle 5
Constructed Riffle 6
Constructed Riffle 9
s
Constructed Riffle 10
Constructed Riffle 7
Constructed Riffle 8
Constructed Riffle 11
Cross Vane 1

a ?

vL ? t
M tb
7!
I

?

r
rk , 11-
P ;off # ?'7?,..1

i 'r
pp

Cross Vane 2
Cross Vane 3
Cross Vane 4
Cross Vane 5
Cross Vane 6
Cross Vane 7
Cross Vane 9
h

Cross Vane 10
1
Vegetation Plot Ml
Cross Vane 8
Vegetation Plot M2
Vegetation Plot M3

a

k
"
rt
'
71

? +
??M
1-6'4 ?
`F. ,? ? ?? +, +????y
?
T '

r;.«w?,, -M;+i?' '•.a..?,„..aria°. .,e' "
Bankfull evidence - Vegetation wrack line with
direction of flow
Bankfull evidence - small debris in area of
Crest gauge - reading of more than 4.0 feet
APPENDIX B
STREAM MONITORING DATA
UT1 Permanent Cross-section #1
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)
Stream BKF BKF Max BKF
Feature Type BKF Area Width Depth Depth W/D BH Ratio ER BKF Elev TOB Elev W-f a
Pool 4.7 12.58 0.37 0.76 33.76 0.9 5.9 928.5 928.45 73.95
933
932
931
$ 930
0
929
w 928
927
926
925
UT1 Cross-section #1
.......-.. o
-- Year 1 -o Bankfull
O Floodprone As-Built
Year 2 Year 3
-r - Year 4
100 110 120 130 140
Station (ft)
150 160 170 180
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
UT1 Permanent Cross-section #2
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)

Feature Stream
Type
BKF Area BKF
Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle Cc 10.8 12.64 0.85 1.92 14.85 1 4.5 928.58 928.57
UT1 Cross-section #2
933
932
931
930
c
0 R 929
w 928
927
926
925
4) ---------- ---------------------------------------------o
Year 2 - - O - -Bankfull
- - 6 - •Floodprone Year 1
As Built year 3
Year4
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
Station (ft)

Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Permanent Cross-section #3
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)
932
930
928
0 926
m 924
w
922
920
918
Cross-section #3
------------------------------------0
Year 2 O - - Bankfull
8 - - Floodprone Year 1
L;?:As-Built t-Year3
-+- Year 4
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Permanent Cross-section #4
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)
Cross-section #4
931
929
927
c 925
.2
> 923
m
w 921
919
917
Year 2 0 - - Bankfull
o - - Floodprone Year 1
As-Built -} Year 3
-+- Year 4
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)
Looking at the Right Bank
Looking at the Left Bank
Permanent Cross-section #5
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)

Feature Stream
Type
BKF Area BKF
Width BKF
Depth
--
-
-
-- Max BKF
De th
-
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOR IF
Riffle E 11.3 25.48 2
4
1 F
4.47 10.58 1 3.8 921.3 921.33
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross-section #5
928
926 ------ ----------------•-------•----••---------•-----••----...----...--o
$ 924
c 922
w
920
w
918 _
Year 2 7- - Banvull
916 0 - -Floodprone Year 1
As-Built Year 3
+-- Year 4
914 _
L 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Permanent Cross-section #6
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)
'p- , 1 1. - W _r 49Y.-
Elk Shoals Creek
927 -- ---- Cross-section #6
925 ------------------------------------•--------------------------------o
923
c 921
---------------------
919
W Year 2 O - • Bankfull
917 a - -Floodprone ---Year 1
915 As-Built Year 3
- i Year4
913
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
UT2 Permanent Cross-section #7
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)
UT2 Cross-section #7
924
923
922
c 921
> 920
m
w 919
918
917
y----------------- ------ ••--••--------------------------------------------
-Year 2 O - -Bankfull
O - - Floodprone Year 1
As-Built Year 3
-f - Year 4
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Station (ft)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
UT2 Permanent Cross-section #8
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)

UT2 Cross-section #8
924
923
922
c 921
> 920
m
w 919
918
917
-----------------------------------------------------------o
Year 2 O - - Bankfull
O - - Floodprone Year 1
As-Built Year 3
-? Year4
100 110 120 130
140 150
Station (ft)
160 170
Looking at the Right Bank
Looking at the Left Bank
Permanent Cross-section #9
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)

Feature Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool 79 42.9 1.84 4.98 23.3 0.8 2.6 919.4 918.52
926
924
922
c 920
> 918
a>'
w
916
914
912
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross-section #9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------•
Year2 d - -Bankfull
O - -Floodprone Year 1
As-Bui@ Year 3
t Year 4
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Permanent Cross-section #10
(Year 4 Data - collected August 2008)

Feature Stream
Type
BKF Area BKF
Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle Cc 40 29.72 1.34 2.9 22.09 0.8 2.5 919.11 918.61
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross-section #10
927 - -- ---------- -----------
925
923
$ ------------ ......................................................... o
c 921
m 919
w 917 - -
Year 2 - - O - - Bankfull
8 - - Floodprone Year 1
915 As-Built Year 3
--Year4
913 - ---
L 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank