20180198 Ver 1_Email from Andrea H-field notes_20180228

Strickland, Bev
From: Hughes, Andrea W CIV USARMY CESAW (US)<[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 5:01 PM
To: Haupt, Mac; Merritt, Katie; Wilson, Travis W.; Sullivan, Roscoe L III CIV (US)
Subject: [External] Sassarixa Swamp
Attachments: Field Notes Feb 23 2018.pdf, 86 topo S Swamp.JPG; 1909 S Swamp.JPG; S Swamp
1908 topo.JPG
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:[e-mail]>
Attached are my field notes from last Friday as well as a couple of historic maps and an 86 topo. The 1909 soils map and
1908 topo are the most interesting. After reviewing the maps, my notes, photographs, and the materials provided by
Wildlands, I have serious concerns with this site. T1A turned out to be a wetland, T1 originates from a pond outfall and
a road crossing and doesn't show up on historic maps, T2 is a swale right now and not depicted on historic maps with a
watershed of 13 acres, T3 doesn't show stream features until about halfway down and it is not depicted on historic
maps OR the 86 topo, T4 is the preservation reach that does not have consistent channel features and it's not depicted
on historic maps OR the 86 topo, T5 originates below the lake (and the impairments noted could be related to the
impoundment) and includes enhancement at 2.5:1 within a forested buffer, and T6 flows into a lake (but it is the only
channel that shows up on historic maps). One of the reaches above the lake originates from a pond outlet and another
does not exhibit stream characteristics for about half the reach. When you look at the maps, the site is chopped up
between restoration and enhancement II but it is mostly enhancement II AND they are installing 6 stream crossings - 1
on Sassarixa, 2 on T4, 2 on T5, and 1 at the end of T6 (who needs two crossings on the same stream?). I know it is
difficult to find good sites in the Neuse 01 but there is not a single tributary on this project site without concerns/issues.
There has to be something out there that is better than this proposal.

NI
NI
NI

..r -�
_ �-;��� Orr
�; �.��'