20110955 Ver 1_IRT Site Visit Comments_20180208

Strickland, Bev
From: Will Jeffers <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 10:55 AM
To: [e-mail]; Kichefski, Steven L SAW; Haupt, Mac; Price, Zan
(George); Leslie, Andrea J; Grant Lewis; Cord Faquin
Subject: [External] Sluder Branch IRT Site Visit Comments
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Good morning,
It was great to meet and see everyone again last Tuesday. Below are the comments from the site visit.
On January 31, the IRT conducted a Site review of the proposed Sluder Branch Mitigation Bank. The proposed Bank
encompasses 12.6 acres of agricultural land utilized for livestock grazing, crops, and hay production situated along cool waters of
Newfound Creek, Sluder Branch, and an unnamed tributary to Newfound Creek. As proposed, the Bank is expected to offer 3285
Stream Mitigation Units and 0.52 Riparian Riverine Wetland Mitigation Units. Mitigation is proposed to include stream restoration,
enhancement level I, and enhancement level II, as well as, wetland restoration and enhancement.
Comments discussed during the IRT site visit include the following.
1) The IRT has concerns that the Newfound Creek portion of the project may be expensive and risky. All agreed
the reach would be suitable for functional uplift due to mitigation; however, the size of the watershed and alluvial
nature of floodplain soils/substrate could make the project difficult and costly to implement.
2) The IRT indicated that pattern within Newfound Creek should be targeted during restoration activities. This
maybe accomplished through increasing sinuosity, or the installation of step -pool structures. Increasing sinuosity
was the preferred method of providing pattern in Newfound Creek.
3) The draft prospectus proposed a variety of stream mitigation options, including restoration and enhancement
(levels I and II); however, it was agreed that restoration may be the appropriate approach for Sluder Branch and
Newfound Creek. The functional uplift of proposed channel work should warrant a 1:1 credit ratio.
4) UT 1, located northeast of Sluder Branch Road, is isolated from the main reach of the project and is divided
by a pond. Therefore, at this time the IRT believes UT 1 is not suitable for inclusion into the Bank.
5) Although Sluder Branch is an approved mitigation bank, it was agreed that changes to the site are significant
enough to restart the banking process.
Please let me know if you have any additions, or alterations to the above comments. We sincerely appreciate you scheduling
the IRT meeting as quickly as possible.
Thank you.
Grant and Will
Will Jeffers
phone [phone]
fax [phone]