20120748 Ver 1_Year 4 Monitoring Report 2017_20180102

Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5
FINAL
Project Name: Junes Branch Stream Restoration
NCDMS Contract No.: 003979
NCDMS Project No.: 95027
USACE Permit Action ID: 2012-01101
DWR Project No.: 20120748
Jackson County, NC
Data Collected: January 2017 - December 2017
Date Submitted: January 2018
Submitted to:
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
NCDEQ-DMS, 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1652

fires
January 31, 2018
Paul Wiesner
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Drive, Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd. Suite 650
Houston, TX 77006
Main: 713.520.5400
RE: Junes Branch Stream Restoration Site: MY4 Monitoring Report (NCDMS ID
95027)
Listed below are comments provided by DMS on January 11, 2018 regarding the Junes Branch
Stream Restoration Site: Year 4 Monitoring Report and RES' responses.
General: The MY4 cross section and longitudinal profile data shows significant aggradation on
Higdon Branch and Doris Branch. This aggradation has increased on both reaches since MY3.
Junes Branch also shows areas of increased aggradation in MY4. In the report text, please add
additional discussion regarding the aggradation on these reaches.
Additional discussion has been added to the report text in Section 1.5.
Based on review of the MY4 data and past experience with the IRT, DMS believes that both
Higdon Branch (422 SMUs) and Doris Branch (282 SMUs) are "at risk" and may receive no
mitigation credit at project closeout with the IRT.
DMS will be withholding payment for these 704 "at risk" stream credits until the April 24-25,
2018 IRT Credit Release meeting.
Cover: Please include the USACE Permit Action ID and the DWR Project Number on the report
cover page.
Done.
General: As noted in the report text, Junes Branch is one of the projects that the IRT has
requested be reverted to the Mitigation Plan asset totals prior to the 2018 credit release. Total
stream assets will be reduced to 3,093 SMUs per the approved mitigation plan.
Section 1.1 - Goals and Objectives: Please include the full goals and objectives from the
approved mitigation plan. Currently, the "objectives" section and associated bullets are missing.
Done.
General: One the project objectives from the approved mitigation plan is; "Provide riparian
buffer restoration by establishing a native forested and herbaceous riparian buffer plant
community with a minimum width of 30 feet from the edge of the restored channels. This new
community will be established in conjunction with the eradication of any existing exotic or
undesirable plant species." Please be sure to closely monitor and treat invasive species along
res.us

0
the entire conservation easement through project closeout. At project closeout, the regulatory
agencies may expect no living exotic invasive species within the project conservation easement
based on the approved mitigation plan objective.
Section 1.5. Project Performance: Monitoring Year 3 (MY4) should be updated to Monitoring
Year 4 (MY4).
Done.
Section 1.5.1 - Vegetation: Invasive species were prevalent on this site prior to construction.
No invasive species are reported in the text, CCPV sheets or Table 6. Please confirm and add
report verbiage to this section noting that no invasive species were observed on the site in MY4
(2017).
This statement is correct and verbiage has been added to the report.
Table 1: Please revert Table 1 back to the totals found in the Mitigation Plan. Add a note at
bottom of table to acknowledge communications with IRT regarding the change. Suggested
table note: "* Stream credit calculations were originally calculated along the as -built thalweg.
Based on the April 3, 2017 IRT Credit Release Meeting, these stream credits have been
reverted back to the amounts in the IRT approved mitigation plan."
Done.
Table 2: Please list all invasive -exotic treatments in Table 2. If none have been completed,
please disregard the comment.
Invasive treatments were done in October 2014. This has been added to Table 2.
Table 2: The data collection complete column for MY3 is incorrect. Based on the final MY3
report, MY3 data was collected in Dec. 2016. Additionally, The MY1 data collection date is
entered as Jan. 2015. Please QA/QC the table update accordingly. This was an IRT concern at
the 2017 credit release meeting.
The MY3 data collection dates have been corrected. According to the MY1 report, data
collection was done in January 2015.
Table 2: For MY4 please report the data collection complete dates for vegetation and
geomorphology as they appear to have been collected at different times. This update should be
made in MY5 as well.
Done.
Table 3: Please add a row for the MY4 monitoring performers. It is currently missing.
Done.
Cross Sections / Cross Section Tables — A couple of methods are currently being utilized to
calculate the BHR from year to year. To compare subsequent monitoring years to the As -built
condition one can hold the bankfull depth static (denominator) while allowing the Low TOB max
depth (numerator) to vary. Another method that has been proposed and is being evaluated is to
hold the As -built cross sectional area static within each year's new cross section and allow that
to determine the max bankfull depth for each year. However; if there are large changes in the
W/D ratio either method can make for somewhat distorted BHR values depending upon the
direction and magnitude of the change in the W/D ratio. Please update the calculations to reflect
changes observed in the overlays and explain in detail as a table footnote how the calculations
were made. Be prepared to defend the method used for the 2018 credit release and justify
through context whether or not any changes observed in a cross section represent an issue.

0
Starting in MY4, BHR was calculated on riffles using the baseline bankfull elevation. This method
was used because the dimension of the channels has not changed enough to alter the bankfull
elevation. None of the riffle cross sections exceeded a 1.2 BHR. This has been added to the text
and as a footnote to Table 11 a.
Longitudinal Profiles — Per the approved mitigation plan, longitudinal profiles are required
annually as part of the project monitoring. The project longitudinal profiles were not included in
the draft report; however, they were included in the digital support files. Please include the MY4
longitudinal profiles in the FINAL MY4 report and QA/QC the associated data and tables.
Done.

Prepared by:
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605

Contents
1.0 Project Summary.........................................................................................................................
1.1. Goals and Objectives..............................................................................................................
1.2. Success Criteria.......................................................................................................................
1.3. Project Setting and Background..............................................................................................
1.4. Project Approach....................................................................................................................
1.5. Project Performance................................................................................................................
2.0 Methods.......................................................................................................................................
3.0 References...................................................................................................................................
.5
.5
.5
.7
.7
.7
.9
10
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 3 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

Appendices
Appendix A. General Tables and Figures
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Information
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Figures 2a -c. Current Conditions Plan View Maps
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Figure 7. 2017 Photo Station Photos
Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Metadata
Table 9. Total Planted Stem Counts
Figure 8. Vegetation Plot Photos
Appendix D. Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 11 a. Dimensional Morphology Summary
Table l lb. Stream Reach Data Summary
Figure 9. Cross Section Plots
Figure 10. Pebble Count Data
Table 12. Pebble Count Data Summary
Charts 1-11. MY4 Stream Reach Substrate Composition Charts
Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 13. Verification of Bankfull Events
Figure 11. Photo Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 14.2017 Rainfall Summary
Chart 10. 2017 Junes Branch Site Precipitation Data
Appendix F. Memorandum
Junes Branch IRT Site Visit on 4/18/2017 Meeting Summary
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 4 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
1.1. Goals and Objectives
The project goals address stressors identified in the Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) and include the
following:
• Improve water quality within the restored channel reaches and downstream watercourses through:
o reducing turbidity by stabilizing existing stream banks and altering stream channel
dimension, pattern and profile
o reducing nutrient loads and fecal coliform bacteria from adjacent agricultural fields by
fencing the riparian area to keep livestock out of the stream and restoring a wooded
riparian buffer
• Improve local aquatic and terrestrial habitat and diversity within the restored channels and their
vicinity through:
o reducing water temperatures by planting native vegetation in the riparian zone and
creating shade
o improving habitat complexity by restoring the stream profile to stable riffle/pool and
step/pool complexes
o improving terrestrial habitat by excluding livestock and creating a riparian buffer
comprised of native plant species
o improving aquatic habitat by establishing tree canopy to provide organic material such as
woody debris and leaf packs to stream
o removing invasive exotic species and planting native vegetation in the riparian buffer
• Improve flood flow attenuation on-site and downstream through:
o raising the bed or creating bankfull benches to allow for overbank flows every 1-2 years
and improve the connection to the active floodplain.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Restore stable channel morphology and proper sediment transport capacity.
• Create and improve stream bed form and improve aquatic and benthic macroinvertebrate habitat.
• Reconnect the stream to the historic floodplain or construct a floodplain bench that is accessible
at the proposed bankfull channel elevation.
• Improve channel and stream bank stabilization by integrating in -stream structures and native bank
vegetation.
• Provide riparian buffer restoration by establishing a native forested and herbaceous riparian
buffer plant community with a minimum width of 30 feet from the edge of the restored channels.
This new community will be established in conjunction with the eradication of any existing exotic
or undesirable plant species.
1.2. Success Criteria
The success criteria for the Junes Branch Stream Restoration Site follows accepted and approved success
criteria presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent NCDMS and agency
guidance. Specific success criteria components are presented below.
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 5 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

1.2.1. Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability
Restored and enhanced streams shall be in compliance with the standards set forth in the USACE 2003
Stream Mitigation Guidelines and should demonstrate morphologic stability to be considered successful.
Stability does not equate to an absence of change, but rather to sustainable rates of change or stable
patterns of variation. Restored streams often demonstrate some level of initial adjustment in the several
months that follow construction and some change/variation subsequent to that is also to be expected.
However, the observed change should not be unidirectional such that it represents a robust trend. If some
trend is evident, it should be very modest or indicate migration to a stable form.
Dimension - Cross-section measurements should indicate little change from the as -built cross-sections.
If changes do occur, they will be evaluated to determine whether the adjustments are associated with
increased stability or whether they indicate movement towards an unstable condition.
Pattern and Profile - Measurements and calculated values should indicate stability with little deviation
from as -built conditions and established morphological ranges for the restored stream type. Pool
depths may vary from year to year, but the majority should maintain depths sufficient to be observed
as distinct features in the profile. The pools should maintain their depth with flatter water surface
slopes, while the riffles should remain shallower and steeper. Pattern measurements will not be
collected unless conditions seem to indicate that a detectable change appears to have occurred based
on channel profile and/or cross-section dimension measurements.
Substrate - Calculated D5o and D84 values should indicate coarser size class distribution of bed
materials in riffles and finer size class distribution in pools. The majority of riffle pebble counts
should indicate maintenance or coarsening of substrate distributions. Generally, it is anticipated that
the bed material will coarsen over time.
Sediment Transport - Depositional features should be consistent with a stable stream that is effectively
managing its sediment load. Point bar and inner berm features, if present, should develop without
excessive encroachment of the channel. Isolated development of robust (i.e. comprised of coarse
material and/or vegetation actively diverting flow) mid -channel or lateral bars will be acceptable.
Likewise, development of a higher number of mid -channel or lateral bars that are minor in terms of
their permanency such that profile measurements do not indicate systemic aggradation will be
acceptable, but trends in the development of robust mid -channel or alternating bar features will be
considered a destabilizing condition and may require intervention or have success implications.
Surface Water Hydrology - Monitoring of stream surface water stages should indicate recurrence of a
bankfull flow on average every 1 to 2 years. At a minimum, throughout the monitoring period, the
surface water stage should achieve bankfull or greater elevations at least twice. The bankfull events
must occur during separate monitoring years.
1.2.2.Vegetation
Riparian vegetation monitoring shall be conducted for a minimum of five years to ensure that success
criteria are met per USACE (2003) guidelines. Accordingly, success criteria will consist of a minimum
survival of 320 stems per acre by the end of the Year 3 monitoring period and a minimum of 260 stems per
acre at the end of Year 5. If monitoring indicates either that the specified survival rate is not being met or
the development of detrimental conditions (i.e., invasive species, diseased vegetation), appropriate
corrective actions will be developed and implemented.
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 6 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

1.3. Project Setting and Background
The Junes Branch Restoration Site (Site) is located in central Jackson County approximately 2 miles east
of Sylva, NC (Figure 1). The site encompasses 5.8 acres of formerly agricultural land and includes
portions of Bumgarner Branch and three unnamed tributaries that, for purposes of the project, are referred
to as Junes Branch, Higdon Branch, and Doris Branch. The Site is located within the Little Tennessee
River Basin, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit 06010203020010, and
the North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) sub basin 04-04-02. The site watershed
is characteristic of the Blue Ridge region with moderate rainfall with annual precipitation averaging 52.9
inches. Elevation within the site ranges from 2,200 feet at the northwestern extent, to 2,150 feet along
Junes Branch. The drainage area of Bumgarner Branch at the downstream end of the Site is 1.03 square
miles (668 acres). Land use within the watershed is predominately forested (68%) with the remaining
land use composed of low-density residential (21%) and agricultural (11%). Additional information
regarding project setting and background is found in the Final Mitigation Plan (EBX 2013).
Following 2016 monitoring the NCIRT requested a review of the differential between the Approved
Mitigation Plan and Baseline Monitoring Report. The table below details the discrepancies by reach. The
cause of increased baseline SMUs is construction field adjustments and survey methodology (thalweg vs.
centerline). The Mitigation Plan lengths were based on centerline.
Proposed Length M igation
Reach 1Vfitigation Type* (LIF) Ratio ProposedSMCTs Baseline SM[Js
Bumgarner Branch 1 P1 Restoration 594 1:1 594 631
Bumgarner Branch 2
P1 Restoration
476
l:l 476
501
June's Branch
PI Restoration
1,319
1:1 1,319
1,374
11gdon Branch
P1 Restoration
422
1:1 422
376
Doris Branch
P1 Restoration
282
1:1 282
280
Total
3,093
3,093
3,162
*P1=Priority 1
**The contracted amount of credits for this Site is 3,000 SMUs
1.4. Project Approach
Channel restoration involving improved pattern, dimension, and longitudinal profile was completed on all
four stream reaches. A Priority I approach was applied to all four reaches of the project (Rosgen 1996;
NCSRI 2004).
1.5. Project Performance
Monitoring Year 4 (MY4) data was collected from January 2017 to December 2017. Monitoring included
the following activities: visual assessment of all reaches and the surrounding easement, collection of
photos at 14 permanent photo stations, documentation of eight permanent vegetation monitoring plots,
surveying of 3,050 feet of longitudinal profile and 15 cross-sections, and conducting pebble counts at
eight riffles.
Generally, visual assessment of the project as a whole indicates that the streams are performing as desired
and, with the exception of one small bare area, vegetation is well established throughout the easement.
Summary tables and photos taken at the permanent photo stations associated with the visual assessment
are presented in Appendix B. Visual assessment of the stream was performed to document signs of
instability, such as eroding banks, in -stream structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. One small
area of degradation was observed on Bumgarner I (Table 5 and Figure 2). Structures are intact and
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 7 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

performing as designed. Herbaceous vegetation has become well established in both the wetland fringes
along the stream as well as upland areas. Planted stems are becoming well established; however, one bare
areas totaling 0.03 acres was noted along Junes Branch (Table 6, Figure 2). This area is improving and
will be monitored in future site visits for woody recruitment and the establishment of herbaceous
vegetation.
In April of 2017, RES and the IRT met to discuss the sediment aggradation noted on Doris Branch and
Higdon Branch. On Higdon Branch, the IRT agreed there was sediment aggradation but a defined channel
was present. No maintenance, remedial actions or credit deductions were requested. On Doris Branch,
however, the sedimentation had diminished the distinct channel features. The IRT requested no specific
maintenance and recommended a final decision on crediting be made after additional monitoring. The
IRT also noticed that overall Junes Branch has a high sediment load but concluded that it appeared to be
maintaining appropriate geomorphology. The meeting summary is documented in Appendix F.
Summary information and data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver activity or easement
encroachment and statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be
found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting information
formerly found in these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report (formerly the Mitigation
Plan) and in the Mitigation Plan (formerly the Restoration Plan) documents available on NCDMS'
website (http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services). All raw data supporting the tables and
figures in the appendices is available from NCDMS upon request.
1.5.1.Vegetation
Monitoring of eight permanent vegetation plots was completed during October 2017. Summary tables
and photographs associated with MY4 monitoring can be found in Appendix C. With the exception of
Plot 2, MY4 monitoring data indicates that all vegetation monitoring plots met the MY4 interim success
criteria of 260 planted stems per acre. Low planted stem densities at Plot 2 can be attributed to thick
herbaceous vegetation and a large density of recruited black willows (Salix nigra) outcompeting the
planted stems. While vegetation Plot 2 is not meeting success criteria for planted stems, with recruits, the
stem density 8,498 stems/ acre, far exceeding the MY4 interim success criteria of 260 stems per acre.
Eleven species were documented in the plots as volunteers: red maple (Acer rubrum), hazel alder (Alnus
serrulata), river birch (Betula nigra), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum),
flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tulip poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera), sycamore Platanus occidentalis), black cherry (Prunus serotina), and black willow (Salix
nigra). Planted stem densities among the plots ranged from 162 to 1,012 planted stems per acre with a
mean of 622 stems per acre across all plots. When volunteer stems are included, densities ranged
between 688 and 8,498 total stems per acre with a mean of 2,327 stems per acre across all plots. The
estimated average plot tree height was 223 cm (7.3 ft). No invasive species were observed in the easement
in MY4. RES will continue to monitor for invasive species and will treat them as needed in the upcoming
monitoring year.
1.5.2. Stream Geomorphology
Geomorphic data for MY4 was collected in December 2017. Cross-section plots, longitudinal profiles,
and summary tables related to stream morphology are located in Appendix D. The MY4 stream
morphology data indicate that, in general, streams are stable. Cross-section and longitudinal profile data
suggests that Higdon Branch and Doris Branch continue to display aggradation; however, Higdon Branch
still has an obvious, defined channel with regular baseflow. As for Bumgarner Branch and Junes Branch,
several small changes were noted in the cross-section dimensions and longitudinal profile; however, these
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 8 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

are minor and do not exceed expected adjustments in channel form. Starting in MY4, BHR was calculated
on riffles using the baseline bankfull elevation. This method was used because the dimension of the
channels has not changed enough to alter the bankfull elevation. None of the riffle cross sections
exceeded a 1.2 BHR.
MY4 substrate monitoring was performed in December 2017 (Table 12 & Charts 1-6). The pebble
counts fell into the coarse gravel range for Bumgarner I and II, and Junes Branch and remained in the
silt/clay range for both the Higdon and Doris Branches. The channel substrate will be monitored in future
years for shifts in particle size distributions.
Overall, documented shifts in stream morphology do not exceed expectations between MY3 and MY4 as
the newly reconstructed streams adjust to conditions at the site. The project is meeting success criteria
regarding stable dimension and profile as well as substrate and sediment transport with the exception of
Doris Branch. As for Doris Branch, the IRT requested no specific maintenance and recommended a final
decision on crediting be made after additional monitoring.
1.5.3.Stream Hydrology
Stream hydrology is documented utilizing manual crest gauges to record bankfull events (Table 13).
Manual crest gauge readings were collected in April, October, and December of MY4. There were two
bankfull events recorded in MY4 on Junes Branch, documented in December 2017. Based on the
precipitation data, the highest bankfull event most likely occurred in October. Junes Branch has had three
bankfull events since construction was completed in June 2014. There were no bankfull events recorded
on the Bumgarner II Branch in MY4 but this reach has had three total events since construction. Both
crest gauges had to be maintained in October of MY4, to clear the bottom of the gauge of sediment.
Additionally, the Bumgarner II Branch crest gauge had to be elevated, since the bottom of the gauge had
been buried in the bank, likely from high flow events.
2.0 METHODS
Visual assessment of the Junes Branch restoration site was performed at the beginning of the monitoring
period. Permanent photo station photos were collected during the initial visual assessment. Vegetation or
stream problem areas occurring outside of the monitoring stations were documented with additional
photographs.
Geomorphic measurements were taken during low flow conditions using a Topcon GTS -312 Total
Station. Three-dimensional coordinates associated with cross-sections and longitudinal profiles were
collected in the field and geo-referenced (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200). Morphological data was
limited to 15 cross-sections, and 3,050 feet of longitudinal profile. Survey data were imported into CAD,
ArcGIS®, and Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis. Channel substrate was characterized
using a Wolman Pebble Count outlined in the Harrelson et al (1994) and processed using Microsoft
Excel.
Vegetation success is being monitored at eight permanent monitoring plots. Vegetation monitoring
follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) and
includes analysis of composition and density of planted species. Data are processed using the CVS data
entry tool. In the field, the four corners of each plot were permanently marked with rebar and photos of
each plot are taken from the origin each monitoring year.
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 9 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

Precipitation data were collected using an Onset® HOBO® Data Logging Rain Gauge. Bankfull events
were documented with crest gauges. During quarterly visits to the site, the height of the corkline was
recorded and cross-referenced with known bankfull elevations at each crest gauge.
3.0 REFERENCES
EBX (Environmental Banc and Exchange). 2013. Junes Branch Stream Restoration, Final Mitigation
Plan, Jackson County, North Carolina. NCEEP Project No. 95027.
Harrelson, Cheryl, C. Rawlins and J. Potyondy. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated
Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM -245. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. USDA Forest Service. Fort Collins, Colorado
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.2. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm.
NCSRI (North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute). 2004. Stream Restoration: A Natural Channel
Design Handbook. North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute and North Carolina Sea Grant.
Raleigh. http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/wgfz/srp/guidebook.html
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, Colorado.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources -Division of Water Quality.
Wilmington District.
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Project 10 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95027 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 4 of 5 January 2018

Appendix A
General Tables and Figures
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Information
Figure 1. Vicinity Map

1BR = Bioretention Cell; SF = Sand Filter; SW = Stormwater Wetland; WDP = Wet Detention Pond; DDP = Dry Detention Pond; FS = Filter Strip; S = Grassed Swale; LS = Level Spreader; NI =
Natural Infiltration Area; FB = Forested Buffer
Note: Stream credit calculations were originally calculated along the as -built thalweg. Based on the April 3, 2017 IRT Credit Release Meeting, these stream credits have been
reverted back to the amounts in the IRT approved mitigation plan
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Junes Branch / Project Number 95027
Mitigation Credits
Stream Riparian Wetland Non -riparian Wetland Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient Offset
Phosphorous Nutrient
Offset
Type R
RE R
RE R RE
Totals 3,093
_ _
_ _ _
Project Components
Project Component -or- Reach ID Stationing/Location
Approach Restoration -or- Restoration Footage or
Existing Footage/Acreage Restoration Equivalent Acreage
(PI, PII etc.) 9 g
Mitigation Ratio
Bumgamer Branch I
100+37 - 107+27
610 PI R
594
1:1
Bumgamer Branch 11
107+27 - 112+50
550 PI R
476
1:1
June's Branch
200+97 - 215+15
1,311 PI R
1,319
1:1
Higdon Branch
300+46 - 304+08
530 PI R
422
1:1
Doris Branch
400+00 - 402+37
260 PI R
282
1:1
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream Riparian Wetland Non -riparian Wetland Buffer
(linear feet) (acres) (acres) (square feet)
Upland
(acres)
Riverine
Non-Riverine
Restoration
3,093 -
- - -
-
Enhancement
- -
- - -
-
Enhancement I
- -
- - -
-
Enhancement 11
- -
- - -
-
Creation
- -
- - -
-
Preservation
- -
- - -
-
HighQualityPreservation
- -
- - -
-
BMP Elements
Element
Location
Purpose/Function
Notes
FB
Entire Site
Protect Stream
1BR = Bioretention Cell; SF = Sand Filter; SW = Stormwater Wetland; WDP = Wet Detention Pond; DDP = Dry Detention Pond; FS = Filter Strip; S = Grassed Swale; LS = Level Spreader; NI =
Natural Infiltration Area; FB = Forested Buffer
Note: Stream credit calculations were originally calculated along the as -built thalweg. Based on the April 3, 2017 IRT Credit Release Meeting, these stream credits have been
reverted back to the amounts in the IRT approved mitigation plan

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Junes Branch / Project Number 95027
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Mitigation Plan
Aug -12
Apr -13
Final Design - Construction Plans
-
Apr -13
Construction
-
Jun -14
Temporary S&E Mix Applied to Entire Project Area
May -14
Permanent Seed Mix Applied
May -14
Containerized and B&B Plantings
May -14
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0 Monitoring - Baseline)
Jul -14
Jul -14
Year 1 Invasive Species Treatment
-
Oct -14
Year 1 Monitoring
Jan -15
Feb -15
Year 2 Monitoring
Nov -15
Nov -15
Year 3 Monitoring
Dec -16
Dec -16
Year 4 Monitoring
Vegetation: Oct -17
Stream: Nov -17
Jan -18
Year 5 Monitoring

Table 3. Project Contacts
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Site — Project # 95027
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson St., Suite 110
Prime Contractor
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
Brian Hockett [phone]
Wolf Creek Engineering
12-1/2 Wall St., Suite C
Designer
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Gant Gann [phone] ext 102
Northstate Environmental
2889 Lowery Street
Construction Contractor
Winston Salem North Carolina 27101
Darrell Westmoreland [phone]
Northstate Environmental
2889 Lowery Street
Planting Contractor
Winston Salem North Carolina 27101
Darrell Westmoreland [phone]
Kee Mapping and Surveying
PO Box2566
As-built Surveys
Asheville, North Carolina 28802
Phillip B. Key [phone]
Green Resource
5204 Highgreen Court
Seeding Mix Source
Colfax, North Carolina 27235
[phone]
Dykes & Son Nursery
825 Maude Etter Road
Bare Root Seedlings
McMinnville, Tennessee
[phone]
Foggy Mountain Nursery
797 Helton Creek Road
Live Stakes
Lansing, North Carolina 28643
[phone]
Equinox
Monitoring Performers (YO-MY3)
37 Haywood St.
2014-2016
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Drew Alderman [phone]
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
Monitoring Performers (Y4-MY5)
302 Jefferson St., Suite 110
2017-2018
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
Ryan Medric [phone]

Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Site — Project # 95027
Project Information
Project Name
Jones Branch
County
Jackson County
Project Area (acres)
5.8 ac.
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
35.357378'N; 83.191391° W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Blue Ridge
River Basin
Little Tennessee
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
06010203 USGSHydrologic Unit l4 -digit
6010203020010
DWQ Sub -basin
4/4/2002
Project Drainage Area (acres)
668
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<5%
CQA Land Use Classification
2.01.03 Hay and Pasture Land
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Bumgarner Br. I Bumgarner Br. 11 Junes Br.
Higdon Br.
Doris Br.
Length of reach (linear feet)
610 550 1,311
530
260
Valley classification (Rosgen)
11 II II
II
II
Drainage area
0.93 1.03 0.23
0.08
0.01
NCDWQ stream identification score
40 40 38
38
29.5
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
C C -
-
-
Morphological Description (stream type) (Rosgen)
E G G
E
G
Evolutionary trend (Rosgen)
C F F
E
G
Underlying mapped soils
CwA, WtB CwA, WtB WtB
CwA
CwA
Drainage class
Somewhat Poorly Somewhat Poorly Somewhat
Drained- Mod. Well Drained- Mod. Well Mod. Well Drained Poorly
Drained Drained Drained
Somewhat
Poorly
Drained
Soil Hydric status
Non -Hydric Non -Hydric Non -Hydric
Non -Hydric
Non -Hydric
Slope
2,20% 2.20% 2.30%
FEMA classification
N/A N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
Native vegetation community
Agricultural Agricultural Agricultural
Agricultural
Agricultural
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
30% 30% 30%
40%
40%
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetland 1 Wetland 2
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.03 0.13
Riparian Riparian
Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian riverine or riparian non-riverine) Non-Riverine Non-Riverine
Mapped Soil Series
CwA CwA
Drainage class
Somewhat Poorly Drained Somewhat Poorly Drained
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric Hydric
Source of Hydrology
Seep Seep
Hydrologic Impairment
None Dredging/Ditching
Native vegetation community
Scrub -Shrub Forested
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
2% 42%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable? Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section 404
Yes Resolved
Action ID #2012-01101
Waters of the United States — Section 401
Yes Resolved
NCDWR Project # 20120748
Endangered Species Act
No Yes
ERTR
Historic Preservation Act
No Yes
ERTR
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
No N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
N/A N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
N/A N/A

■
Nantahall
National
Forest
-lop
.
Appendix A: General Table and Figures
23
Scott C
� f
./+ June's Branch _
/L /
V'.
Webster
Nantahala
National
Forest
�Jfr
116 Tu4asegee VU`
c' i —
Uf
s F`
-P .0 1
1
r i Directions: From Asheville, take I-40 West for approximately 18 miles.
Take exit 27 onto US -74 toward US-19/Clyde/US-23/Waynesville.
r 107 Take exit 107 toward Jones Cove Road and merge onto
r US -23 South/US-74 West. After approximately 20 miles, take exit
J 85 toward NC-107/Cullowhee. Keep right at the fork in the ramp
t and continue onto US-23/Asheville Highway. Make a slight left
onto NC-107/East Main Street for approximately 2 miles before
turning left onto Fairview Road (SR 1724).
The subject project site is an environmental restoration site of the
NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and is
X' encompassed by a recorded conservation easement, but is
r bordered by land under private ownership. Accessing the site may
* require traversing areas near or along the easement boundary and
therefore access by the general public is not permitted. Access by
antahala authorized personnel of state and federal agencies or their
ational designees/contractors involved in the development, oversight and
stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within the terms and
j Forest I timeframes of their defined roles. Any intended site visitation or
activity by any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles
and activities requires prior coordination with DMS.
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
June's Branch
Project No. 95027
Jackson County, North Carolina
r�t�iY.y►%i�itl��I►�Jy���'Y
Notes: Conservation Easement from Key
Mapping & Survey, P.A.
0 0.5 1 2 3
Miles

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Figures 2a -c. Current Conditions Plan View Maps
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Figure 7. 2017 Photo Station Photos

w;.
•.��,r -
Gb .fir �`� '� .►. ` ,� N
res
_1T
.lop
-r . rs"igr
0 100 � 200
' ! Feet
1 inch = 200 feet
Figure 2a.
�, ;• Junes Branch Stream
4P► -Restoration Project
MY4 2017
Bumgarner II
Current Conditions
Overview Map
Junes Branch `
,r �` ,r _ - ^ ® r •� - Date: 12/20/2017 Drawn by: MDE
LEGEND
Branch �,. .� "�,� Conservation Easement
,. Gam*;"• `° Junes.Branch:�
7N Stream Restoration
�, _vim - _ • * � �= � 'f' �e-4:r;. q. , .may -
r •rte' ~..� ,� f ,{�' !, .:;y:,• � .t, t
Sof a --r..�"Lsry :,'�� I • Rain Gauge
Photo Station
-= Higdon Branch Y':- -. M
® Crest Gauge
Cross Section
IV
2.
Structure
ug arneI ., � � _ � � ��- � Long Pro Beg in/End
Bm r
Vegetation Plot
.�� ` + r A. .'ate ,�� • .: > 260 stems/acre
4,Kry' < 260 stems/acre
•j Y s
31
f ��'1K `rte Y,�w.r • � �_ � 7 r � � � -
.�'e
7, Riparian Buffer Conditions
Target Community
f. �� 5r, F.- =, "'.'" '•yy� �: : � �' a Present Mar Qinal Absent
f =.� _'..♦ 4. . �; �.?< :► i`. �s�>'rti b/}yy' Absent No Fill
►a 1. ..+' 1�iA...•.► Present

fires
N
F
0 50 100
Feet
1 inch = 101 feet
r _ Y Photo Station
„ • 'mss-
® Crest Gauge
04 PIP 6
aCross Section
r Structure
x -
PP 10 - Junes Branch Long Pro Begin/End
k ..,� ' •, 7�. Vegetation Plot
WW7U> 260 stems/acre
® PP 9V. a' :1 _ < 260 stems/acre
Ar -ior
rL
a - 1• }�. < 8 - .,. ' - x.' ,*�: _. _�: ��•: � '�_ � t Riparian Buffer Conditions
IJA
Target Community
Present Marcfinal Absent
9 - ' J 6. •;•.. _�. -Y." �- r k. ' ` ' , �•1y '`��- �L T'^ YY 1.~' .y .'.f A+ Z Absent WFill
PP 8 ' ] ' *c Present
4 y ----
r m
_ f , -:° _ •r r � Common —_—_—_—_
Source: 2013 NC OneMap Aer al ii
x �' VP 3: L k Ar
Bare Area
Figure 2b.
Junes Branch Stream
Restoration Project
pp 1
MY4 2017
R�
3
5
Current Conditions
PP 2
VP
Plan View
_
Date: 12/20/2017
Drawn by: MDE
N�
+�. �'
-'�-`
t
LEGEND
.I'
Conservation Easement
VP 1 PP 4 VP 4
_
.
•�
Stream Restoration
Rain Gauge
PP 5 '
J
r _ Y Photo Station
„ • 'mss-
® Crest Gauge
04 PIP 6
aCross Section
r Structure
x -
PP 10 - Junes Branch Long Pro Begin/End
k ..,� ' •, 7�. Vegetation Plot
WW7U> 260 stems/acre
® PP 9V. a' :1 _ < 260 stems/acre
Ar -ior
rL
a - 1• }�. < 8 - .,. ' - x.' ,*�: _. _�: ��•: � '�_ � t Riparian Buffer Conditions
IJA
Target Community
Present Marcfinal Absent
9 - ' J 6. •;•.. _�. -Y." �- r k. ' ` ' , �•1y '`��- �L T'^ YY 1.~' .y .'.f A+ Z Absent WFill
PP 8 ' ] ' *c Present
4 y ----
r m
_ f , -:° _ •r r � Common —_—_—_—_
Source: 2013 NC OneMap Aer al ii
x �' VP 3: L k Ar

Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Bumgarner Branch I
Assessed Len th 631 feet
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub -Category
Metric
Number
Stable'
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Number
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %
for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
1. Aeeradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly
deflect flow lateral] not to include point bars).
0
0
100%
2. Deeradation - Evidence of downcutting
1
20
97
(Riffle and Run Units)
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate.
13
13
100%
3. Meander Pool
1. Deoth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth >: 1.6).
13
13
100%
Condition
2. Lena appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
up stream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
N/A
N/A
N/A
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run).
13
13
100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide).
12
12
100%
2.Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth
and/or scour and erosion.
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhangmgto the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
sustainable and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping calving, or collapse.
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
0
1 0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
14
14
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
14
14
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
14
14
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT
exceed 15%.
14
14
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining- Max Pool Depth: Mean
4. Habitat
Bankfull Depth Ratio > 1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
14
14
100%
base -flow.

Table 5 con'td. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Bumgarner Branch II
Assessed Len th 543 feet
Number
Footage
Adjusted %
Number
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable,
with
with
for
Major Channel
Channel
Stable,
Metric
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Category
Sub -Category
Performing
As -built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
Woody
Woody
Woody
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Ageradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
1. Vertical Stability
flow laterally (not to include point bars).
0
0
100%
2 Degradation -Evidence of downcutting.
0
0
100%
(Riffle and Run Units)
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate.
7
7
100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6).
8
8
100%
3. !Meander Pool
Condition
2. Lengd] appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
2
2
100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run).
8
8
100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide).
8
8
100%
2. Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
1. Scoured / Eroding
scour and erosion.
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse.
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
3. Engineered
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
7
7
100%
Structures
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
7
7
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
7
7
100%
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT exceed
3. Bank Protection
15%.
7
7
00%
forming structures maintaining - Max Pool Depth: Mean BankfullF
1. 71abit,1Pool
4. Habitat
Depth Ratio > 1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
7
7
100
F777- Item does not apply.

Table 5 con'td. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Junes Branch
Assessed Len th 1,375 feet
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub -Category
Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Number
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %
for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
1. Aeeradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars).
0
0
100%
2 Deeradation -Evidence of downcutting.
0
0
100%
(Riffle and Run Units)
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate.
45
45
100%
3. Meander Pool
1. Denth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6).
45
45
100%
Condition
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
N/A
N/A
N/A
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run).
45
45
100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide).
45
45
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured /Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion.
U
U
100 %
0
0
100
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse.
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
00
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
45
45
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
45
45
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
45
45
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT exceed
15%
45
45
100%
F11,bital
Pool forming structures maintaining _ Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull
Depth Ratio >_ 1.6. Rootwads/Logs providing some cover at base -flow.
45
45
00 11.
N/A -Item does not apply.

Table 5 con'td. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Higdon Branch
Assessed Len th 376 feet
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Number
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %
for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
1. AgKradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars).
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
(Riffle and Run Units)
2 Deeradation - Evidence of downcutting.
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 18
18
Ll
100%
3. Meander Pool
1. Death Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6). 18
18
100%
Condition
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
3
100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run). 18
18
100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide). 18
18
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured /Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion.
U
0
100 %
0
0
100
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
11
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse.
Totals
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
15
15
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
15
15
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
15
15
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT exceed
15%.
15
15
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining _ Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull
Depth Ratio > 1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
15
15
100%
N/A - Item does not apply.

Table 5 con'td. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 5 cont'd. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Doris Branch
Assessed Len th 288 feet
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub -Category
Metric
Number
Stable'
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Number
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage
with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %
for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
1. Aeeradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly
deflect flow lateral] not to include point bars).
1
288
0%
2. Deeradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100
(Riffle and Run Units)
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate.
23
23
100%
3. Meander Pool
1. Deoth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth >- 1.6).
23
23
100%
Condition
2. Lena appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
up stream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
N/A
N/A
N/A
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run).
23
23
100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide).
23
23
100%
2.Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth
and/or scour and erosion.
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhangmgto the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
sustainable and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping calving, or collapse.
0
0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
0
1 0
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
23
23
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
23
23
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
23
23
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT
exceed 15%.
23
23
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining- Max Pool Depth: Mean
4. Habitat
Bankfull Depth Ratio > 1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
23
23
100%
base -flow.

Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027
Planted Acreage: 5.81
Vegetation Category
Definitions
CCPV Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
1. Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.
Vertical Red Lines
1
0.03
<1%
2. Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on
MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria.
N/A
0
0.00
0'%o
Totals
1
0.03
<1%
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or
Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously
small given the monitorm ear.
N/A
0
0.00
0%
Cumulative Totals
1
0.03
<1%
Easement Acreage: 5.81
Vegetation Category
Definitions
CCPV Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Easement
Acreage
4. invasive Areas of Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map
scale).
N/A
0
0.00
01yo
5. Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map
scale).
N/A
0
0.00
01yo
N/A - Item does not apply.

Appendix B - Visual Assessment Data
Figure 7. 2017 Photo Station Photos
Junes Branch — Permanent Photo Station 1
Station 202+60 — Downstream
October 4, 2017
Junes Branch — Permanent Photo Station 1
Station 202+60 — Upstream
October 4, 2017

J�?`"�
pod -`

Junes Branch — Permanent Photo Station 3
Looking South/Downstream Junes Branch
October 4, 2017
Junes Branch — Permanent Photo Station 3
Looking North/Upstream — Upstream
October 4, 2017
sment Data

Junes Branch — Permanent Photo Station 4
Station 210+60 — Downstream
October 4, 2017
Junes Branch — Permanent Photo Station 4
Station 210+60 — Upstream
October 4, 2017
sment Data

I ilfL
flp l � I
_ r
i i L
ii `
i M
r - r�lrl "`y `

Bumgarner Branch I — Permanent Photo Station 8
Station 102+70 — Downstream
October 5, 2017
Bumgarner Branch I — Permanent Photo Station 8
Station 102+70- Upstream
October 5, 2017
sment Data
Appendix 13 - visual Asses
1 �
Bumgarner Branch I — Permanent Photo Station 8
Station 102+70 — Downstream
October 5, 2017
Bumgarner Branch I — Permanent Photo Station 8
Station 102+70- Upstream
October 5, 2017
sment Data

Bumgamer Branch I — Permanent Photo Station 9
Station 105+25 — Downstream
October 5, 2017
Bumgarner Branch I — Permanent Photo Station 9
Station 105+25 Upstream
October 5, 2017
sment Data

G it �I
{•fi �ti •_ d�4tf 1{4 a � l� ' a,,�• ` iP, " Y �.k�qti
r r I. s
y,. '' #`� � `fig "'# IIS ��'r✓��,,�I � I }� vda r. * ,I
Y NI, dr�
I
C #r`
f A.I.Pip Y,
fid. - "r` �; � . i'� � ,{� +++�� ✓ � p= :... - �
I i• y
l �

Appendix B - Visual Asses
Bumgarner Branch II Permanent Photo Station 11
Looking Upstream from Confluence with Higdon Branch
October 5, 2017
Higdon Branch — Permanent Photo Station 11
Looking Upstream from Confluence with Bumgarner Branch II
October 5, 2017
sment Data
pp
�r R
AW
i
R
Bumgarner Branch II Permanent Photo Station 11
Looking Upstream from Confluence with Higdon Branch
October 5, 2017
Higdon Branch — Permanent Photo Station 11
Looking Upstream from Confluence with Bumgarner Branch II
October 5, 2017
sment Data

•- :�� � '� �'�� � �wrA� ..yam. -gyp ��`
fto �-lltl
IA
ri
i.

y
�' � '�^,g ���
pp��
� � '� ,
r -� Y. �
_ � Yd — ;���"'� �K
� �� ' i
� �! r � _ - � , � _ .. i� � � - -
�� i ' >,
1,�• '�. �
f � �� a� � '1 _ � , r 1i'
7 � A`t ' - � �
'!/ / V�
1�
�� '. �p � ., '�
� -... � 1 .�' 1

Doris Branch — Permanent Photo Station 14
Station 400+00 — Downstream
October 5, 2017
sment Data

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Metadata
Table 9. Total Planted Stem Counts
Figure 8. Vegetation Plot Photos

Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Plot #
Planted
Stems/Acre
Volunteer Total
Stems/Acre Stems/Acre
Success
Criteria Met?
Average Tree
Height (cm)*
01
688
688 1376
Yes
186
02
162
8337 8498
No
166
03
364
2995 3359
Yes
309
04
607
364 971
Yes
150
05
486
202 688
Yes
144
6
1012
445 1457
Yes
216
7
850
526 1376
Yes
316
8
809
81 890
Yes
296
Project Avg
622
1705 2327
Yes
223
*The tallest seven trees were averaged, as this represents 260 stems/acre.

Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8: CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Junes Branch Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Report Prepared By
Eric Teitsworth
Date Prepared
10/23/20179:48
database name
Junes Branch_MY4_2017.mdb
database location
C:\Users\eteitsworth\Dropbox (RES)\@RES Projects\North
Carolina\Junes Branch\Monitoring\Monitoring
Data\MY4 2017\Vegetation Data
computer name
D4VOKGH2
file s ize
61837312
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a
summary of project(s) and project data.
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each
year. This excludes live stakes.
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year.
This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural/volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems,
dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences
and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for
each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted
and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing
stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code
95027
project Name
Junes Branch
Description
River Basin
Little Tennessee
le ngth(ft)
stream -to -edge width (ft)
area (sq m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
8

Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9. Planted Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot)
PnoLS: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment.
Color Key
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Recruit Stems
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Site
Current Plot Data (MY4 2017)
Scientific Name Common Name
Species Type
95027-01-0001
PnoLS P -all T
95027-01-0002
PnoLS P -all T
95027-01-0003
PnoLS P -all T
95027-01-0004
PnoLS P -all T
95027-01-0005
PnoLS P -all T
1 95027-01-0006
PnoLS P -all T
95027-01-0007
PnoLS P -all T
95027-01-0008
PnoLS P -all T
Acerrubrum Red Maple
Tree
5
Alnus serrulate Hazel Alder
Shrub
1
1
8
8
8
5
5
5
1
1
1
Betula nigra River Birch
Tree
4
4
4
4
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
1
3
3
3
3
Corpinus corohniona var. coi Coastal American Hornbeam
Tree
3
3
3
Carya ovate Shagbark Hickory
Tree
1
Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood
Shrub
11
1
1
8
1
11
Cornus florida Flowering Dogwood
Tree
1
2
2
2
Diospyros virginiana Common Persimmon
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash
Tree
9
9
9
2 2
2
5
5
8
4
4
5
1
1
1
2
2
2
Hamamelis virginiana var. v American Witchhazel
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
luglans nigra Black Walnut
Tree
Liriodendron tulipifera Tuliptree
Tree
Liriodendron tulipifera var. t Tulip -tree, Yellow Poplar, Whitewood
Tree
1
6
1
1
4
2
2
2
7
7
8
5
5
6
Platonus occidentalis American Sycamore
Tree
Platanus occidentalis var. oc Sycamore, Plane -tree
Tree
1
1
1
4 4
4
7 7
17
2
2
2
2
6
6
6
71
7
8
15
15
15
Prunus cerasus Sour Cherry
Exotic
Prunus serotina Black Cherry
Tree
1
Prunus serotina var. serotin Black Cherry
Tree
1
1
2
21
2
Quercus Oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii Swamp Chestnut Oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus phellos Willow Oak
Tree
2
2
2
Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus rubra var. rubra Northern Red Oak
Tree
Salix nigra Black Willow
Tree
101
202
541
11
11
2
Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry
Shrub
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Vitis aestivolis Summer Grape
Vine
Vitis rotundifolia IMuscadine
IVine
Stem count
17
17
34
4 41
210
9 91
83
15
151
24
12
12
17
25
25
36
21
21
34
20
201
22
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1
0.02
Species count
61
61
10
11 11
6
2 2
5
7
7
9
61
61
8
61
61
7
5
5
61
41
41
5
Stems per ACRE
6881
6881
1376
1621 1621
8498
364 3641 3359
6071
6071
971
4861
4861
688
10121
10121
1457
8501
8501
1376
8091
8091
890
PnoLS: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment.
Color Key
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Recruit Stems

Table 9 con't. Planted Total Stem Count (Annual Means)
�Pnol.S: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment.
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Color Key
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Recruit Stems
Junes Branch Stream Restoration Site
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
MY4 (2017)
Species Type PnoL P -all T
MY3 (2016)
PnoL P -all T
MY2 (20 5)
PnoL P -all T
MYl (2015)
PnoL P -all T
MYO (2014)
PnoL P -all T
Acer rubrum
Red Maple
Tree
5
Alnus serrulata
Hazel Alder
Shrub
14
14
16
13
13
15
5
Betula nigra
River Birch
Tree
11
11
19
9
9
13
5
5
20
6
6
6
11
11
11
Carpinus caroliniana var. co Coastal American Hornbeam
Tree
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
Carya ovata
Shagbark Hickory
Tree
1
Cornus amomum
Silky Dogwood
Shrub
20
50
3
Cornus florida
Flowering Dogwood
Tree
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Diospyros virginiana
Common Persimmon
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
6
4
Fraxinuspennsylvanica
Green Ash
Tree
23
23
27
25
25
28
20
20
28
20
20
20
21
211
21
Hamamelis virginiana var.
i American Witchhazel
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
31
3
3
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
Juglans nigra
Black Walnut
Tree
1 1
1
6
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tuliptree
Tree
5
Liriodendron tulipifera var. Tulip -tree, Yellow Poplar, Whitewood
Tree
15
15
27
17
17
17
4
41
4
61
6
61
7
7
7
Platanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
Tree
24
Platanus occidentalis var. o Sycamore, Plane -tree
Tree
42
42
55
43
431
53
16
16
16
17
17
17
17
17
17
Prunus cerasus
Sour Cherry
Exotic
3
Prunus serotina
Black Cherry
Tree
1
Prunus serotina var. serotin Black Cherry
Tree
2
21
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
Quercus
Oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
41
4
41
6
6
61
6
6
6
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
Tree
2
2
2
21
21
2
2
Quercus rubra
Northern Red Oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus rubra var. rubra
Northern Red Oak
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
6
6
6
5
5
Salix nigra
Black Willow
Tree
270
77
53
81
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1
3
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
4
4
4
Vitis aestivalis
Summer Grape
Vine
2
Vitis rotundifolia
IMuscadine
IVine
2
Stem count
123
123
460
128
128
285
66
66
196
761
761
157
871
871
87
size (ares)
8
8
5
5
5
size (ACRES)
0.20
0.20
0.12
0.12
0.12
Species count
141
141
191
151
151
18
111
111
21
111
111
12
1?1
12
12
Stems per ACRE
6221
6221 23271
6471
6471 1,142
534
-5341 1586
61-51
6151 12711
7041
7041
704
�Pnol.S: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment.
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Color Key
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Recruit Stems

Fm1 ,
Itt;
�1
�y
`
,.f
X11-
i45
i
Fm1 ,
Itt;
�1

t
ow 1,
�yy^

T•f � 1� J ` �1.i ♦i

�r� i ,� �` tib. � € --'?G� 3.i�_,t,1► ). �° �
;" 'SPY 1s'"�,mks
i
+ lv r sem,
I � '•i ` ';' �-r �'}"� �;: 1.
.• J ` - !

Appendix D
Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 11 a. Dimensional Morphology Summary
Table l lb. Stream Reach Data Summary
Figure 9. Cross Section Plots
Longitudinal Profile with Annual Overlay
Figure 10. Pebble Count Data
Table 12. Pebble Count Data Summary
Charts 1-11. MY4 Stream Reach Substrate Composition Charts

N/A - Item does not apply.
Table 11a cont'd. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Sections)
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Bumgarner II (543 feet)
Table 11a. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Sections)
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Bumgarner I (631 feet)
Cross -Section 4 Pool
Cross -Section 1 Riffle
Dimension
Base
Cross -Section 2 Pool
MY2
MY3
MY4
Cross -Section 3 Riffle
W1
Dimension
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
MYl
MY2 MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used
2,153.11
2,153.11
2,153.11
2,153.11
2,153.11
2,152.68
2,152.68
2,152.68 2,152.68
2,152.68
2,145.60
2,145.60
2,145.60
2,145.60
2,145.60
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.3
13.4
12.7
12.9
13.2
13.4
13.1
13.2 12.7
13.4
15.8
16.8
16.3
18.0
18.3
Floodprone Width (ft)
>79
>79
>79
>79
>33
>124
>124
>124 124
>39
>42
>42
>42
>42
>42
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
1.5
1.1
0.9 0.9
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
2.9
1.9
2.1 2.0
2.3
1.2
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft')
11.7
11.3
10.2
9.6
8.6
20.6
14.0
12.2 11.3
12.2
12.2
14.5
14.8
15.8
17.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
15.2
15.8
15.8
17.2
20.2
8.7
12.3
14.3 14.4
14.6
20.4
19.4
18.0
20.5
19.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.9
>5.9
>6.2
6.1
>2.5
>9.3
>9.5
>9.4 >9.7
N/A
>2.7
>2.5
>2.6
>2.3
>2.3
Bankfixll Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
N/A
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
d50 (mm)
N/A
27
0.67
1.5
15
N/A
I N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
16
0.68
0.24
14
N/A - Item does not apply.
Table 11a cont'd. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Sections)
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Bumgarner II (543 feet)
Cross -Section 4 Pool
Cross -Section 5 Riffle
Dimension
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
W1
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used
2,140.17
2,140.17
2,140.17
2,140.17
2,140.17
2,139.81
2,139.81
2,139.81
2,139.81
2,139.81
Bankfull Width (ft)
16.5
16.1
16.5
15.2
13.8
16.3
15.7
16.2
16.0
15.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
>50
>50
>50
>49
>48
>48
>48
>48
>47
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
0.7
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.3
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
Bankfixll Cross Sectional Area (f12)
23.0
18.9
18.5
17.9
16.6
11.9
13.4
12.6
13.7
9.4
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.9
13.7
14.8
12.8
11.5
22.2
18.4
20.8
18.6
24.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.0
>3.1
>3.0
>3.3
N/A
>3.0
>3.1
>3
>3.0
>3.1
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
d50 (mm)
I N/A
N/A
N/A
I N/A I
N/A
N/A
1 25
1 4.9
4.3
57
N/A - Item does not apply.
Note: Starting in MY4, Bankfull Bank Height Ratio was calculated on riffles using the baseline bankfull elevation. This method was used because the dimension of the channels has not changed enough to alter the bankfull elevation.

Table 11a cont'd. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Sections)
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Junes (1,375 feet)
Cross -Section 6 Riffle
Cross -Section 10 Pool
Cross -Section 7 Pool
Cross -Section 11 Riffle
Cross -Section 8 Riffle
Base
Dimension
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
WI
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used
2,172.66
2,172.66
2,172.66
2,172.66
2,172.66
2,171.35
2,171.35
2,171.35
2,171.35
2,171.35
2,163.28
2,163.28
2,163.28
2,163.28
2,163.28
Bankfull Width (ft)
8.6
8.8
8.0
6.3
3.9
8.2
8.8
7.8
8.3
6.8
9.6
10.8
10.6
10.6
10.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>94
>94
>94
>94
>23
>111
>111
>111
>111
>32
>53
>53
>53
>53
>36
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.0
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.5
2.1
1.6
1.3
1.0
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ff)
3.7
4.1
3.0
1.7
0.8
8.6
6.1
4.8
3.7
2.7
6.4
6.4
5.7
5.6
3.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
19.7
18.9
21.7
23.0
19.4
7.9
12.7
12.7
18.8
17.0
14.3
18.2
19.8
20.0
28.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>11.0
>10.7
>11.7
>14.8
>5.8
>13.5
>12.6
>14.2
>13.4
N/A
>5.5
>4.9
>5.0
>5.0
>3.6
Bankf ill Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
1.0
1.0
1.0
1 1.0
1.0
d50 (mm)
N/A
1.4
0.13
0.062
2.8
N/A
I N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.7
0.65
1 0.062
1.9
N/A - Item does not apply.
Table 11a cont'd. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Sections)
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Junes (1,375 feet)
Cross -Section 9 Pool
Cross -Section 10 Pool
Cross -Section 11 Riffle
Dimension
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
MY1 MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used
2,162.64
2,162.64
2,162.64
2,162.64
2,162.64
2,144.35
2,144.35 2,144.35
2,144.35
2,144.35
2,143.99
2,143.99
2,143.99
2,143.99
2,143.99
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.5
11.1
10.1
9.8
7.3
11.0
10.9 11.0
10.3
10.7
9.8
9.0
8.6
9.2
10
Floodprone Width (ft)
>56
>56
>56
>56
>36
>39
>39 >39
>39
>39
>38
>38
>38
>38
>38
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
0.8
0.7
0.9
0.4
0.8
0.7 0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.0
1.8
1.6
2.0
0.9
1.7
1.5 1.5
1.5
1.6
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ff)
10.5
8.4
7.5
8.4
3.3
9.0
7.9 7.6
7.6
7.9
5.8
5.2
5.2
5.7
5.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.4
14.7
13.7
11.5
16.3
13.4
15.0 16.1
14.1
14.3
16.5
15.9
14.1
14.7
17.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.3
>5
>5.5
>5.7
N/A
>3.5
>3.5 >3.5
>3.8
N/A
>3.9
>4.2
>4.4
>4.1
>3.8
Bankfixll Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
1.0
1.0 1.0
1.0
N/A
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
d50 (mm)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
12
0.21
4.3
27
N/A - Item does not apply.
Note: Starting in MY4, Bankfull Bank Height Ratio was calculated on riffles using the baseline bankfull elevation. This method was used because the dimension of the channels has not changed enough to alter the bankfull elevation.

Table 11a. cont'd. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Sections)
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 -Higdon Branch (376 feet)
Cross -Section 12 Riffle
Cross -Section 13 Pool
Dimension
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used
2,140.85
2,140.85
2,140.85
2,140.85
2,140.85
2,140.14
2,140.14
2,140.14
2,140.14
2,140.14
Bankfull Width (ft)
6.6
8.1
7.0
7.7
5.4
8.0
7.2
7.0
7.0
5.6
Floodprone Width (ft)
>40
>40
>40
>40
>21
>30
>30
>30
>30
>8
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.7
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.1
Bankfill Max Depth (ft)
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.6
1.7
1.1
0.5
0.4
0.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
2.5
2.6
2.4
2.1
1.2
5.9
4.0
2.1
1.9
0.5
Bankf ill Width/Depth Ratio
17.6
24.7
20.6
28.8
23.3
10.8
13.0
23.9
25.5
62.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>6.0
>4.9
>5.6
>5.2
>3.9
>3.7
>4.1
>4.2
>4.3
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1.0 1
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
N/A
d50 (mm)
N/A
1 15
0.13
0.062 1
0.062
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
I N/A
N/A - Item does not apply.
Note: Starting in MY4, Bankfull Bank Height Ratio was calculated on riffles using the baseline bankfull elevation. This method was used because the dimension of the channels has not changed enough to alter the bankfull elevation.

Table 11a. cont'd Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Sections)
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 -Doris Branch (288 feet)
Cross -Section 14 Riffle
Cross -Section 15 Pool
Dimension
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record Elevation (datum) Used
2,138.93
2,138.93
2,138.93
2,138.93
2,138.93
2,138.74
2,138.74
2,138.74
2,138.74
2,138.74
Bankfull Width (ft)
6.2
6.6
6.9
7.3
3.5
11.6
11.7
11.9
12.4
9.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
>23
>23
>23
>23
>20
>21
>21
>21
>21
>21
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.3
Bankf ill Max Depth (ft)
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
2.3
1.7
1.4
1.2
0.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
2.3
2.4
1.9
2.1
0.9
9.4
8.3
7.4
6.5
2.8
Bankf ill Width/Depth Ratio
16.7
18.2
25.7
25.9
13.3
14.3
16.5
19.1
23.6
32.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
>3.5
>3.4
>3.2
>5.6
>1.8
>1.8
>1.8
>1.7
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
d50 (mm)
N/A
0.062
0.062
0.062
0.062
N/A
N/A
N/A
I N/A
N/A
N/A - Item does not apply.
Note: Starting in MY4, Bankfull Bank Height Ratio was calculated on riffles using the baseline bankfull elevation. This method was used because the dimension of the channels has not changed enough to alter the bankfull elevation.

N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock
Table llb. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Bumgarner I (631 feet)
Parameter
Baseline
MY -1
MY -2
MY -3
MY -4
MY -5
Dimension & Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
Min
13.3
Mean
14.6
Med Max
14.6 15.8
SD JIL
N/A 2
Min Mean
13.4 15.5
Med Max
15.5 17.6
SD
3.0
n
2
12.7
14.5
Med Max
14.5 16.3
SD
2.5
n
2
In
12.9
Mean
15.4
Med Max
15.4 18.0
SD n
3.6 2
13.2
can
15.8
Med
15.8
Max
18.3
SD
3.6
in can Med Max SD n
2
Floodprone Width(ft)
>42
>61
>61 >79
N/A 2
>42 >61
>61 >79
26.2
2
>42
>61
>61 >79
26.2
2
>42
>60
>60 >79
26.2 2
>33
>37.5
>37.5
>42
6.4
2
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.8
0.9
0.9 0.9
N/A 2
0.8 0.8
0.8 0.8
0
2
0.8
0.9
0.9 0.9
0.1
2
0.7
0.8
0.8 0.9
0.1 2
0.7
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.2
2
Bankfull Max De th fr
1.2
1.4
1.4 1.5
N/A 2
1.3 1.5
1.5 1.7
0.3
2
1.3
1.6
1.6 1.9
0.4
2
1.4
1.7
1.7 2.1
0.5 2
1.5
1.9
1.9
2.2
0.5
2
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft )
11.7
12.0
12.0 12.2
N/A 2
1 11.3 16.4
16.4 21.4
7.1
2
10.2
12.5
12.5 14.8
3.3
2
9.6
12.7
12.7 15.8
4.3 2
8.6
13.1
13.1
17.5
6.3
2
Width/Depth Ratio
15.2
17.8
17.8 20.4
N/A 2
15.8 18.6
18.6 21.4
4.0
2
15.8
16.9
16.9 18.0
1.6
2
17.2
18.9
18.9 20.5
2.3 2
19.1
19.7
19.7
20.2
0.8
2
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.1
>4.3
>4.3 >5.9
N/A 2
>2.4 >4.15
>4.15 >5.9
2.5
2
>2.6
>4.4
>4.4 >6.2
2.5
2
>2.3
>4.2
>4.2 >6.1
2.7 2
>2.3
>2.4
>2.4
>2.5
0.1
2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
N/A 2
1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0
1 0.0 1
2
1.0 1
1.0
1.0 1.0 1
0.0
2
1.0
1.1
1.0 1.1
0.1 2
0.9
1.0 1
1.0 1
1.1
0.1
2
Profile
Riffle Length ft
0.5
13.7
14.4 23.0
7.4 14
10.5 17.0
14.5 25.6
5.7
11
11.4
17.5
14.9 26.6
6.1
11
9.4
15.5
12.4 27.3
6.3 11
3.3
15.2
14.2
37.2
8.1
13
Riffle Slope ft/ft
0.016
0.061
0.039 0.251
0.063 14
0.019 0.030
0.027 0.055
0.010
11
0.017
0.028
0.025 0.040
0.009
11
0.007
0.022
0.021 0.042
0.012 11
0.001
0.023
0.015
0.061
0.020
13
Pool Length ft
5.2
10.2
9.2 22.5
4.3 12
5.0 7.6
7.3 13.4
2.2
12
5.4
7.7
7.0 12.9
2.1
12
4.9
9.2
8.1 19.1
3.7 12
6.1
12.1
9.6
24.8
5.9
14
Pool Max Depth ft
2.1
2.8
2.8 3.6
0.5 14
1.9 2.5
2.4 3.7
0.5
14
1.9
2.3
2.2 2.7
0.3
14
1.5
1.9
1.9 2.6
0.3 14
2.1
2.6
2.6
3.4
0.3
14
Pool Spacing ft
24.2
45.2
44.1 60.3
10.3 1 11
25.3 41.8
41.1 59.9
11.9
11
28.8
41.4
37.6 57.5
10.3
11
23.6
41.3
36.3 56.6
10.9 11
25.9
51.7
45.6
106.3
24.1
13
Pattern
Channel Belt Width ft
24.5
25.3
25.3 26.2
N/A 2
Radius of Curvature ft
41.6
48.3
41.6 60.1
10.3 3
Re: Bankfull Width(ft/ft)
2.8
3.3
2.9 4.1
0.7 3
Meander Wavelength ft
69.8
81.7
75.9 105.4
16.6 4
i
L
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
1.9
2.0
E
2.0 2.1
Be
N/A 2
B
B
B
134c
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
728
713
704
703
693
Sinuosity (ft)
1.09
1.09
1.07
1.06
1.06
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0233
0.0243
0.0247
0.0247
0.0253
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0235
0.0245
0.0250
0.0254
0.0248
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
37%
32%
24% 7%
0%
38% 34%
19% 9%
0%
40%
35%
19% 7%
0%
35%
36%
23% 6%
0%
29%
33°/
24%
14%
0%
SC% / SA% / G% / C% / B% / Be%*
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (nun)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock

N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock
Table llb. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Bumgarner II (543 feet)
Parameter
Baseline
MY - 1
MY-2
MY-3
MY-4
MY-5
Dimension&Substrate -Riffle
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
Min Mean
Med Max
SD
n Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width (ft)
16.3
N/A
1
15.7
N/A
1
16.2
N/A
1
16.0
N/A
1
15.1
N/A
1
Floodprone Width(ft)
>47
N/A
1
>48
N/A
I
>48
N/A
I
>48
N/A
1
>47
N/A
I
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.7
N/A
1
0.9
N/A
1
0.8
N/A
1
0.9
N/A
1
0.6
N/A
1
Bankfull Max De th fr
1.2
N/A
1
1.3
N/A
1
1.3
N/A
1
1.4
N/A
1
1.4
N/A
I
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft)
11.9
N/A
1
13.4
N/A
1
12.6
N/A
1
13.7
N/A
1
9.4
N/A
1
Width/Depth Ratio
22.2
N/A
1
18.4
N/A
1
20.8
N/A
1
18.6
N/A
1
24.3
N/A
I
Entrenchment Ratio
>3
N/A
1
>3.1
N/A
1
>3.0
N/A
1
>3.0
N/A
1
>3.1
N/A
1
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
N/A
1
1.0
N/A
I
1.0
N/A
1
1.0
N/A
1
1.1
N/A
1
Profile 0
3-
Riffle Lenth ft
3.1
29
32.3 38.6
12
7 27.2 34.5
34.5 42.0
5.5
6 26.5
32.9
32.3 42.0
5.9
6
27.9
33.1
30.6 43.2
5.7
6
20.6
27.9
27.7 34.6
4.9
7
Riffle Slo a(ft/ft)
0.016
0.026
0.020 0.064
0.017
7 0.015 0.017
0.016 0.021
0.002
6 0.013
0.017
0.015 0.024
0.005
6
0.008
0.015
0.016 0.017
0.004
6
-0.001
0.015
0.011 0.037
0.013
7
Pool Length ft
12.1
17.8
19.2 22.4
4
7 9.1 13.9
12.7 25.2
5.6
7 7.9
14.6
14.0 20.1
4.1
7
10.1
17.2
15.9 24.7
5.1
7
9.0
17.3
15.8 27.1
5.9
7
Pool Max De th ft
2.3
2.9
3.1 3.4
0.4
7 2.2 2.7
2.7 3.2
0.4
7 2.1
2.6
2.7 3.0
0.3
7
1.9
2.3
2.2 2.6
0.3
7
1.6
2.0
2.0 2.5
0.3
7
Pool SPE ft
61.5
70.2
69.9 80.2
6
6 60.7 66.7
66.4 74.5
5.1
6 59.0
67.6
67.7 75.8
5.7
6
60.3
67.8
68.4 76.6
6.1
6
14.6
68.0
63.4 129.9
38.8
6
Pattern
Channel Belt Width ft
25.4
28.0
26.2 26.2
3.8
3
Radius of Curvature ft
39.5
54.4
54.4 69.3
N/A
2
Re: Bankfull Width(ft/ft)
3.1
4.3
4.3 5.5
N/A
2
Meander Wavelength ft
109.3
123.2
65.2 134.6
12.8
3
LAL■
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
2.0
2.2
2.1 2.6
0.3
3
Am
Rosgen Classification
Be
Be
Be
Be
B4c
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
543
522
526
536
501
Sinuosity (ft)
1.07
1.06
1.07
1.08
1.05
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0140
0.0151
0.0166
0.0164
0.0158
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0152
0.0154
0.0145
0.0154
0.0152
Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%
45%
18%
28% 8%
0%
50 % 16%
24% 10%
0%
48%
18°/
25% 10%
0 %
47%
18%
28% 7%
0%
39°/
17°/
27% 17%
0%
SC% / SA% / G% / C% / B% / Be%*
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 mm)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock

N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock
Table llb. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Junes Branch (1,375 feet)
Parameter
Baseline
MY -1
MY -2
MY -3
MY -4
MY -5
Dimension & Substrate - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
d
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width (ft)
8.6
9.3
9.6 9.8
0.6
3
8.8
9.6
9.0 10.8
1.1
3
8.0
9.1
8.6 10.6
1.4
3
6.3
8.7
9.2 10.6
2.17 3
3.9
8.0
10.0 10.1
3.6
3
Floodprone Width(ft)
>38
>62
>53 >94
29.204
3
>38
>62
>53 >94
29.0
3
>38
>62
>53 >94
29.0
3
>38
>62
>53 >94
29 3
>23
>32.3
>36 >38
8.1
3
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.4
0.6
0.6 0.7
0.2
3
0.5
0.5
0.6 0.6
0.1
3
0.4
0.5
0.5 0.6
0.1
3
0.3
0.5
0.5 0.6
0.2 3
0.2
0.4
0.4 0.6
0.2
3
Bankfull Max De th ft
0.7
1.0
1.2 1.2
0.3
3
0.9
1.0
1.0 1.1
0.1
3
0.7
1.0
1.0 1.2
0.3
3
0.5
1.0
1.2 1.3
0.4 3
0.5
1.0
1.1 1.4
0.5
3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft )
3.7
5.3
5.8 6.4
1.4
3
1 4.1
5.2
5.2 6.4
1.2
3
3.0
4.6
5.2 5.7
1.4
3
1 1.7
4.4
5.6 5.7
2.3 3
0.8
3.4
3.6 5.7
2.5
3
Width/Depth Ratio
14.3
16.8
16.5 19.7
2.7
3
15.9
17.7
18.2 18.9
1.6
3
14.1
18.5
19.8 21.7
4.0
3
14.7
19.2
20.0 23.0
4.2 3
17.6
21.8
19.4 28.3
5.7
3
Entrenchment Ratio
>3.9
>6.8
>5.5 >1l
3.7
3
>4.2
>6.6
>4.9 >10.7
3.6
3
>4.4
>7.0
>5.0 >11.7
4.1
3
>4.1
>8.0
>5.0 >14.8
5.9 3
>3.6
>4.4
>3.8 >5.8
1.2
3
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
0
3
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
0.0
3
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
0.0
3
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.1
0.1 3
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.1
0.1 1
3
Riffle Length ft
7.8
14.9
14.4 33.7
4.1
44
4.9
13.8
14.1 20.5
3.5
43
5.6
13.6
13.8 20.9
3.4
43
6.2
16.2
16.2 26.9
5.0 43
3.2
16.0
11.6 39.5
8.8
39
Riffle Slope ft/ft
0.007
0.029
0.030 0.052
0.010
44
0.007
0.030
0.032 0.049
0.010
43
0.014
0.034
0.031 0.093
0.014
43
0.004
0.031
0.028 0.081
0.016 43
0.000
0.021
0.021 0.075
0.019
39
Pool Length ft
4.7
10.7
10.4 19.5
3.0
42
1.6
7.8
7.6 14.8
2.9
43
3.7
9.7
9.7 14.5
2.7
43
3.1
8.8
9.0 13.8
2.3 43
4.1
14.0
11.0 27.9
6.4
43
Pool Max Depth ft
1.3
1.9
1.9 3.2
0.4
44
1.0
2.1
2.0 3.8
0.6
43
0.8
2.0
2.0 3.6
0.6
44
0.9
2.0
1.9 3.5
0.6 45
0.6
1.6
1.6 2.8
0.6
43
Pool Spacing ft
12.3
30.0
30.5 42.1
6.2
41
19.7
29.8
31.5 38.2
5.4
40
11.9
29.0
30.0 38.6
6.4
4%ilk
4.1
32.4
26.4 94.8
13.5
42
Pattern
Channel Belt Width ft
18.5
19.7
20.1 21.0
1.5
3
Radius of Curvature ft
31.9
35.8
36.7 38.9
3.6
3
Re: Bankfull Width (ft/ft)3.3
Meander Wavelength ft
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
53.7
1.9
IN
3.7
67.1
2.1
3.8 4.0
61.4 88.3
2.1 2.2
Be
0.4
12.5
0.2
3
6
3
B
B
B4c
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
1,480
1,427
1,414
1,424
1,405
Sinuosity (ft)
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0231
0.0245
0.0271
0.0261
0.0259
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0246
0.0248
0.0272
0.0263
0.0256
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
50%
0%
34% 9%
7%
47%
0%
26% 18°/
9%
46%
0%
33% 13%
8%
55%
O%
30% 8%
7%
44%
0%
43% 10%
3%
SC% / SA% / G% / C% / B% / Be%*
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 mm)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
IL
N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock

N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock
Table llb. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Higdon Branch (376 feet)
Parameter
Baseline
MY - 1
MY -2
MY -3
MY -4
MY -5
Dimension&Substrate - Riffle
Min
Mean'
Med Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med MU
SD I
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width (ft)
8.0
N/A
1
8.1
N/A
1
7.0
N/A
1
7.7
N/A
1
5.4
N/A
1
Floodprone Width(ft)
>40
N/A
1
>40
N/A
I
>39
N/A
1
40.0
N/A
1
>21
N/A
I
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.4
N/A
1
0.3
N/A
1
0.3
N/A
1
0.3
N/A
1
0.2
N/A
1
Bankfull Max De th fr
0.7
N/A
1
0.7
N/A
1
0.9
N/A
1
0.7
N/A
1
0.6
N/A
I
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft)
2.5
N/A
1
2.6
N/A
1
2.4
N/A
1
2.1
N/A
1
1.2
N/A
1
Width/Depth Ratio
17.6
N/A
1
24.7
N/A
1
20.6
N/A
1
28.8
N/A
1
23.3
N/A
I
Entrenchment Ratio
>6
N/A
1
>4.9
N/A
I 1
>5.6
N/A
1
5.2
N/A
1
>3.9
N/A
1
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
N/A
I
1.0
N/A
1
1.0
N/A
1
1.1
N/A
1
1.1
N/A
I
Profile
Riffle Length ft
2.5
7.7
7.6 15
2.9 13
6.5
9.8
9.1 15.6
2.9
13
4.9
8.9
8.4 14.8
2.8
13
3.4
11.2
10.8 17.6
4.0
13
4.9
12.6
11.5 24.1
6.5
12
Riffle Slope ft/ft
0.002
0.021
0.017 0.047
0.012 13
0.007
0.021
0.019 0.040
0.011
13
0.006
0.019
0.016 0.036
0.009
13
0.004
0.021
0.020 0.046
0.011
13
0.004
0.020
0.019 0.037
0.010
12
Pool Length ft
4.6
8.1
8.4 11
1.8 14
2.5
6.1
6.3 9.1
1.7
14
2.5
5.6
5.5 8.2
1.8
14
1.6
4.5
3.3 10.6
2.5
14
6.2
11.1
11.4 18.6
4.0
11
Pool Max Depth ft
1.3
1.7
1.7 2
0.2 13
1.2
1.5
1.4 2.0
0.3
12
1.2
1.4
1.4 1.7
0.2
14
0.6
1.0
1.0 1.5
0.2
14
0.4
1.3
1.1 2.1
0.5
11
Pool Spacing ft
13.1
18.6
17.5 26.6
3.8 13
14.6
20.3
19.0 31.2
4.5
12
12.7
18.8
18.3 25.8
3.5
13
13.8
18.9
18.7 24.4
3.3
13
18.7
30.1
24.6 53.7
12.3
10
Pattern
Channel Belt Width ft
9.1
10.6
10.6 12.1
2.1
2
Radius of Curvature ft
16.2
19.7
20.1 22.9
3.4
3
Re: Bankfull Width(ft/ft)
2.0
2.5
2.5 2.9
0.4
3
Meander Wavelength ft
11.8
31.1
31.5 39.5
9.3
7
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
1.1
1.3
1.3 1.5
N/A
2
Rosgen Classification
Be
Be
Be
Be
136c
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
382
370
368
369
368
Sinuosity (ft)
1.06
1.05
1.06
1.05
1.13
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.020
0.0191
0.0184
0.0162
0.0176
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.018
0.0156
0.0153
0.0164
0.0204
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
42%
1%
47% 7%
2%
51%
5%
34% 11%
0%
46%
6%
31% 15%
2%
58%
4%
25% 13%
2%
41%
8%
33% 16%
1%
SC% / SA% / G% / C% / B% / Be%*
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 mm)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock

N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock
Table llb. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Junes Branch / Project No. 95027 - Doris Branch (288 feet)
Parameter
Baseline
MY - 1
MY-2
MY-3
MY-4
MY-5
Dimension&Substrate -Riffle
Min
Mean'
Med Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max I
SD
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width (ft)
6.2
N/A
1
6.6
N/A
1
6.9
N/A
1
7.3
N/A
1
5.6
N/A
1
Floodprone Width ft
>23
N/A
1
>23
N/A
I
>23
N/A
1
23.0
N/A
1
>8
N/A
I
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.4
N/A
1
0.4
N/A
1
0.3
N/A
1
0.3
N/A
1
0.1
N/A
1
Bankfull Max De th fr
0.7
N/A
1
0.7
N/A
1
0.7
N/A
1
0.7
N/A
1
0.1
N/A
I
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft)
2.3
N/A
1
2.4
N/A
1
1.9
N/A
1
2.1
N/A
1
0.5
N/A
1
Width/Depth Ratio
16.7
N/A
1
18.2
N/A
1
25.7
N/A
1
25.9
N/A
1
62.5
N/A
I
Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
N/A
1
>3.5
N/A
1
>3.4
N/A
1
3.2
N/A
1
>1.4
N/A
1
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
N/A
I
1.0
N/A
I
1.0
N/A
1
1.0
N/A
I
1.0
N/A
1
Profile
Riffle Length ft
2.5
6.1
6.3 11.4
2.5 18
3.7
6.5
6.5 11.3
2.0
18 3.6
6.3
6.1 9.3
1.9
18
3.2
6.3
5.8 11.9
2.4
18
5.2
9.5
8.3 20.4
4.5
11
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.011
0.022
0.013 0.036
0.008 18
0.002
0.023
0.020 0.055
0.014
18 0.004
0.026
0.027 0.056
0.014
18
0.004
0.022
0.022 0.044
0.013
18
0.003
0.026
0.020 0.065
0.019
11
Pool Length ft
2.4
3.7
3.5 6.6
1 19
2.5
3.8
3.8 5.3
0.8
19 2.5
3.8
3.6 7.3
1.1
19
2.0
3.7
3.4 6.8
1.3
19
4.6
7.2
7.0 9.7
1.6
9
Pool Max Depth ft
1.2
1.6
1.6 2.3
0.3 18
0.7
1.1
1.1 1.5
0.2
19 0.6
1.2
1.2 1.8
0.3
19
0.6
0.9
0.9 1.3
0.2
19
0.4
0.8
0.8 1.2
0.3
9
Pool Spacing ft
7.2
12.4
12.6 19.9
2.9 18
7.5
12.4
13.3 18.4
3.0
18 7.6
12.4
12.9 18.5
3.0
18
8.6
12.6
12.2 18.8
2.9
18
11.5
28.6
21.7 66.8
18.4
8
Pattern
Channel Belt Width ft
9.4
9.9
10.0 10.3
0 5
3
Radius of Curvature ft
7.9
12.0
12.0 16.1
5.8
2
Re: Bankfull Width (ft/ft)3.1
4.3
4.3 5.5
N/A
2
Meander Wavelength ft
16.6
22.6
24.5 27.1
4.5
6
Meander Width Ratio
Additional Reach Parameters
2.0
2.1
2.1 2.2
mmm
0.1
3
Rosgen Classification
Be
Be
Be
Be
136c
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
288
274
274
278
268
Sinuosity (ft)
1.06
1.06
1.06
1.08
1.03
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.018
0.019
0.020
0.019
0.024
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.018
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.023
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
48%8%
31°/ 12°/
1%
51%
6%
32% 11%
0%
49%
7%
31% 11%
2%
49°/
13%
31% 7%
1%
41°/
19%
24% 15%
1%
SC% / SA% / G% / C% / B% / Be%*
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 mm)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Information does not apply.
Ri = Riffle / Ru = Run / P = Pool / G = Glide / S = Step
SC = Silt -Clay / SA = Sand / G = Gravel / C = Cobble / B = Boulder / Be = Bedrock

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Bumgarner I - Cross Section 1 - Riffle
2155
2154.5
2154
2153.5
Cross Section 1 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
� 2153
0
> 2152.5
MY2
MY3
MY4 MYS
a�
W
2152
2153.1
2153.1
2153.1
2151.5
2153.1
Bankfull Width ft
13.3
13.4
12.7
12.9
13.2
2151
2150.5
>79
>79
>79
0 10 20 30
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year Year2 Year Year4- --Approx.Bankfull
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
Cross Section 1 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MYS
Record elevation (datum) used
2153.1
2153.1
2153.1
2153.1
2153.1
Bankfull Width ft
13.3
13.4
12.7
12.9
13.2
Floodprone Width ft
>79
>79
>79
>79
>33
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
11.7
11.3
10.2
9.6
8.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
15.2
15.8
15.8
17.2
20.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.9
>5.9
>6.2
6.1
>2.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1

a � � •fie,•'" :".•
Upstream Downstream
Junes Branch - Bumgarner I - Cross Section 2 - Pool
2155
2154.5
2154
2153.5
2153
2152.5 ________ _ _____ ____
0 2152
m 2151.5
w 2151
2150.5
2150
2149.5
2149
2148.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - - • Approx. Bank -full
Cross Section 2 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2152.7
2152.7
2152.7
2152.7
2152.7
Bankfull Width ft
13.4
13.1
13.2
12.7
13.4
Floodprone Width ft
>124
>124
>124
124.0
>39
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.5
1.1
0.9
0.9
0.9
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.9
1.9
2.1
2.0
2.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2
20.6
14.0
12.2
11.3
12.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
8.7
12.3
14.3
14.4
14.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>9.3
>9.5
>9.4
>9.7
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A

Nw-
'>s==
p,'18
Upstream
Downstream
2147.5
Junes Branch - Bumgarner I - Cross Section 3 - Riffle
Cross Section 3 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
2147
2146.5
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2145.6
c
°
2146
2145.5
2145
2145.6
2145.6
Bankfull Width ft
ca
16.8
16.3
18.0
18.3
w
2144.5
2144
>42
>42
>42
>42
2143.5
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
2143
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.2
1.7
1.9
2142.5
2.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftp
12.2
14.5
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
17.5
Bankfull Width/De th Ratio
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - - - Approx. Bankfull
19.4
18.0
20.5
Cross Section 3 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2145.6
2145.6
2145.6
2145.6
2145.6
Bankfull Width ft
15.8
16.8
16.3
18.0
18.3
Floodprone Width ft
>42
>42
>42
>42
>42
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.2
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftp
12.2
14.5
14.8
15.8
17.5
Bankfull Width/De th Ratio
20.4
19.4
18.0
20.5
19.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.7
>2.5
>2.6
>2.3
>2.3
Bankfull Bank Hei t Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9

Upstream
Downstream
Cross Section 4 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2140.2
2140.2
2140.2
2140.2
2140.2
Bankfull Width ft
16.5
16.1
16.5
15.2
13.8
Floodprone Width ft
>50
>50
>50
>50
>49
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2
23.0
18.9
18.5
17.9
16.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.9
13.7
14.8
12.8
11.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.0
>3.1
>3.0
>3.3
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
III W.
Cross Section 4 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2140.2
2140.2
2140.2
2140.2
2140.2
Bankfull Width ft
16.5
16.1
16.5
15.2
13.8
Floodprone Width ft
>50
>50
>50
>50
>49
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2
23.0
18.9
18.5
17.9
16.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.9
13.7
14.8
12.8
11.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.0
>3.1
>3.0
>3.3
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Bumgarner II - Cross Section 5 - Riffle
2142
2141.5
2141
2140.5
2140
Cross Section 5 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
c
0 2139.5
MY2
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
MY4 MY5
2139
2139.8
2139.8
2139.8
w
2138.5
2139.8
Bankfull Width ft
16.3
2138
16.2
16.0
15.1
2137.5
>48
>48
>48
2137
>47
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - - -Approx. Bankfull
0.9
Cross Section 5 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2139.8
2139.8
2139.8
2139.8
2139.8
Bankfull Width ft
16.3
15.7
16.2
16.0
15.1
Floodprone Width 11
>48
>48
>48
>48
>47
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.7
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftz
11.9
13.4
12.6
13.7
9.4
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
22.2
18.4
20.8
18.6
24.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.0
>3.1
>3
>3.0
?3.1
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Junes - Cross Section 6 - Riffle
2175
Cross Section 6 (Riffle)
2174.5
Base
MYl
2174
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2172.7
2172.7
2173.5
2172.7
2172.7
2173
-00000
8.8
r
0
6.3
3.9
2172.5
>94
>94
�
a�
>94
>23
LU
0.4
0.5
2172
0.3
0.2
2171.5
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftz
3.7
4.1
2171
1.7
0.8
2170.5
19.7
18.9
21.7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - - • Approx. Bankfull
>11.0
Cross Section 6 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2172.7
2172.7
2172.7
2172.7
2172.7
Bankfull Width ft
8.6
8.8
8.0
6.3
3.9
Floodprone Width ft
>94
>94
>94
>94
>23
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
Bankfull Max Depth ft
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftz
3.7
4.1
3.0
1.7
0.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
19.7
18.9
21.7
23.0
19.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>11.0
>10.7
>11.7
>14.8
>5.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Junes - Cross Section 7 - Pool
2174
2173.5
2173
2172.5
2172
2171.5
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
° 2171
MYl
CO
2170.5
MY3
a',
LU 2170
Record elevation (datum) used
2169.5
2171.4
2169
2171.4
2168.5
Bankfull Width ft
2168
8.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (ft)
Baseline - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
6.8
Cross Section 7 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2171.4
2171.4
2171.4
2171.4
2171.4
Bankfull Width ft
8.2
8.8
7.8
8.3
6.8
Floodprone Width ft
>111
>111
>111
>111
>32
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.0
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.1
1.6
1.3
1.0
1.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2
8.6
6.1
4.8
3.7
2.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
7.9
12.7
12.7
18.8
17.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
> 13.5
> 12.6
> 14.2
-13.4
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Junes - Cross Section 8 - Riffle
2165.5
2165
2164.5
2164
Cross Section 8 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
2163.5
o
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
� 2163
LU 2162.5
2163.3
2163.3
2163.3
2162
Bankfull Width ft
9.6
10.8
2161.5
10.6
10.1
Floodprone Width ft
2161
>53
>53
>53
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
Baseline - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
0.7
Cross Section 8 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2163.3
2163.3
2163.3
2163.3
2163.3
Bankfull Width ft
9.6
10.8
10.6
10.6
10.1
Floodprone Width ft
>53
>53
>53
>53
>36
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft Z
6.4
6.4
5.7
5.6
3.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.3
18.2
19.8
20.0
28.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.5
>4.9
>5.0
>5.0
>3.6
Bankfull Bank Hei t Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
2165.5
Junes Branch - Junes - Cross Section 9 - Pool
Cross Section 9 (Pool)
2165
2164.5
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
2164
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2163.5
2162.6
2162.6
$ 2163
2162.5
2162.6
0
m 2162
10.5
11.1
2161.5
9.8
7.3
w
2161
>56
>56
>56
2160.5
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.0
0.8
2160
0.9
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2159.5
1.8
1.6
2.0
2159
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
10.5
8.4
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
3.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
14.7
13.7
11.5
Cross Section 9 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2162.6
2162.6
2162.6
2162.6
2162.6
Bankfull Width 11
10.5
11.1
10.1
9.8
7.3
Floodprone Width 11
>56
>56
>56
>56
>36
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.0
0.8
0.7
0.9
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.0
1.8
1.6
2.0
0.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
10.5
8.4
7.5
8.4
3.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.4
14.7
13.7
11.5
16.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.3
>5
>5.5
>5.7
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Junes - Cross Section 10 - Pool
2146
2145.5
2145
2144.5
2144
0
�° 2143.5
0
LU 2143
2142.5
Cross Section 10 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline banlf'ull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2144.4
2144.4
2142
2144.4
2144.4
Bankfull Width ft
11.0
10.9
11.0
2141.5
10.7
Floodprone Width ft
>39
>39
>39
>39
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
Baseline - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
0.8
Cross Section 10 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline banlf'ull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2144.4
2144.4
2144.4
2144.4
2144.4
Bankfull Width ft
11.0
10.9
11.0
10.3
10.7
Floodprone Width ft
>39
>39
>39
>39
>39
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2
9.0
7.9
7.6
7.6
7.9
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
13.4
15.0
16.1
14.1
14.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.5
>3.5
>3.5
>3.8
N/A
Bankfull Bank Hei t Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A

Upstream
y _41
ea
.y
- 1
Downstream
Junes Branch - Junes - Cross Section 11 - Riffle
2145.5
2145
2144.5
2144
Cross Section 11 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
c
O
> 2143.5
a�
w
2143
2144.0
2144.0
2144.0
2144.0
Bankfull Width ft
9.8
9.0
8.6
9.2
10.0
2142.5
>38
>38
>38
>38
>38
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.6
2142
0.6
0.6
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.2
1.0
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
Baseline - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
Cross Section 11 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2144.0
2144.0
2144.0
2144.0
2144.0
Bankfull Width ft
9.8
9.0
8.6
9.2
10.0
Floodprone Width ft
>38
>38
>38
>38
>38
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
5.8
5.2
5.2
5.7
5.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
16.5
15.9
14.1
14.7
17.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.9
>4.2
>4.4
>4.1
>3.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Higdon - Cross Section 12 - Riffle
2142.5
Cross Section 12 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
2142
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
2141.5
1
2140.9
2140.9
2140.9
2141
Bankfull Width 11
6.6
8.1
7.0
7.7
5.4
Floodprone Width ft
>40
>40
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
_
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
2140.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
Bankfull Max Depth ft
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
LU
2.6
2.4
2.1
1.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
2140
24.7
20.6
28.8
23.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>6.0
>4.9
>5.6
>5.2
>3.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
2139.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
2139
0 5 10 15 20 25
Distance (ft)
Baseline - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 12 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2140.9
2140.9
2140.9
2140.9
2140.9
Bankfull Width 11
6.6
8.1
7.0
7.7
5.4
Floodprone Width ft
>40
>40
>40
>40
>21
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
Bankfull Max Depth ft
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
2.5
2.6
2.4
2.1
1.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
17.6
24.7
20.6
28.8
23.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>6.0
>4.9
>5.6
>5.2
>3.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1

1 �.. }`r {
Upstream
Downstream
2142.5
Junes Branch - Higdon - Cross Section 13 - Pool
Cross Section 13 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
2142
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2141.5
2140.1
2140.1
2140.1
2141
Bankfull Width ft
8.0
7.2
2140.5
7.0
5.6
Floodprone Width ft
>30
Qa
>30
c
2140
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.7
0
0.3
0.3
0.1
a>
w
2139.5
2139
1.1
0.5
0.4
0.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
2138.5
4.0
2.1
1.9
0.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.8
13.0
23.9
25.5
2138
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.7
>4.1
>4.2
>4.3
N/A
Bankfull Bank Hei t Ratio
1.0
1 1.0
2137.5
1.1
N/A
2137
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (ft)
Baseline - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 13 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2140.1
2140.1
2140.1
2140.1
2140.1
Bankfull Width ft
8.0
7.2
7.0
7.0
5.6
Floodprone Width ft
>30
>30
>30
>30
>8
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.7
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.1
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.7
1.1
0.5
0.4
0.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
5.9
4.0
2.1
1.9
0.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.8
13.0
23.9
25.5
62.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.7
>4.1
>4.2
>4.3
N/A
Bankfull Bank Hei t Ratio
1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1.1
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Doris - Cross Section 14 - Riffle
2140.5
Cross Section 14 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
2140
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2138.9
2138.9
2138.9
2138.9
2139.5
Bankfull Width 11
6.2
6.6
6.9
7.3
3.5
Floodprone Width ft
>23
° 2139
>23
>23
>20
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.4
76°
0.3
0.3
0.3
Bankfull Max Depth 11
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area 112
2.3
W 2138.5
1.9
2.1
0.9
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
16.7
18.2
25.7
25.9
13.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
2138
>3.4
>3.2
>5.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2137.5
0 5 10 15 20
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 14 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation (datum) used
2138.9
2138.9
2138.9
2138.9
2138.9
Bankfull Width 11
6.2
6.6
6.9
7.3
3.5
Floodprone Width ft
>23
>23
>23
>23
>20
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
Bankfull Max Depth 11
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area 112
2.3
2.4
1.9
2.1
0.9
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
16.7
18.2
25.7
25.9
13.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
>3.5
>3.4
>3.2
>5.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
Junes Branch - Doris - Cross Section 15 - Pool
2141
Cross Section 15 Pool
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
2140.5
MY2
MY3
2140
Record elevation datum used
2138.7
2139.5
2138.7
2138.7
2139
Bankfull Width ft
11.6
2138.5
11.9
12.4
9.5
Floodprone Width ft
>21
>21
c
° 2138
>21
>21
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
2137.5
0.7
0.6
0.5
_a)
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.3
1.7
LU 2137
1.2
0.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft)
9.4
8.3
7.4
6.5
2136.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.3
16.5
19.1
23.6
32.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
2136
>1.8
>1.8
>1.7
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
2135.5
1.0
N/A
2135
0
5 10 15 20
Distance (ft)
Baseline -
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 - --Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 15 Pool
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5
Record elevation datum used
2138.7
2138.7
2138.7
2138.7
2138.7
Bankfull Width ft
11.6
11.7
11.9
12.4
9.5
Floodprone Width ft
>21
>21
>21
>21
>21
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.3
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.3
1.7
1.4
1.2
0.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft)
9.4
8.3
7.4
6.5
2.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.3
16.5
19.1
23.6
32.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>1.8
>1.8
>1.8
>1.7
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A

2160
2159
2158
2157
2156
2155
2154
2153
2152
2151
2150
y 2149
w
2148
0
% 2147
W 2146
2145
2144
2143
2142
2141
2140
2139
2138
2137
2136
Junes Branch - Sheet 2
Longitudinal Profile
Staioning 200+97 to 215+15
20
�Px2s 21X, 212x26 llIrx2s
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/11 TW - MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 11/11/15 TW - MY3 12/7/16 TW - MY4 12/12/17 ♦ Structure - WO ♦ BKF------- WS
Bankfull Slope
Average
wV
--------- XS -11 R
-----------
7U_
r
.i
XS -10-P
20
�Px2s 21X, 212x26 llIrx2s
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/11 TW - MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 11/11/15 TW - MY3 12/7/16 TW - MY4 12/12/17 ♦ Structure - WO ♦ BKF------- WS

2162
2161
2160
2159
2158
2157
2156
2155
2154
2153
2152
a�
2151
° 2150
2149
W
2148
2147
2146
2145
2144
2143
2142
2141
2140
2139
Bumgarner Branch I
Longitudinal Profile
Staioning 100+37 to 107+27
x�o 1p�x�o Ip�x�o l�6X�o
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/14 TW - MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 7/07/15 TW - MY3 8/10/16 TW - MY4 12/14/17 ♦ Structure - MYO ♦ BKF------- WS
• XS -1-R
'------------------ •
VT/
•
Average Bankfull Slope
•
r�
i
XS -2-P
•
XS -3-R
x�o 1p�x�o Ip�x�o l�6X�o
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/14 TW - MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 7/07/15 TW - MY3 8/10/16 TW - MY4 12/14/17 ♦ Structure - MYO ♦ BKF------- WS

2145
2144
2143
2142
2141
2140
2139
4.
...
0
2138
W
2137
2136
2135
2134
2133
2132
Bumgarner Branch II
Longitudinal Profile
Staioning 107+27 to 112+35
l�jx�s 1199x2s
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/14 TW- MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 10/07/15 TW - MY3 8/31/16 - TW - MY412/13/17 • BKF------- WS 0 Structure - MYO
•
A
"-
Average Bankfull Slope
i•
•
XS -4-P
•
l�jx�s 1199x2s
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/14 TW- MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 10/07/15 TW - MY3 8/31/16 - TW - MY412/13/17 • BKF------- WS 0 Structure - MYO

2142
2141
2140
2139
y 2138
c.
0
2137
W
2136
2135
2134
2133
Doris Branch
Longitudinal Profile
Staioning 400+00 to 402+82
stOOxOO srOO610 XIP,9
XsO YO , srOz srO�XOO STO?XSO
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/14 TW - MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 11/10/15 TW - MY3 7/21/16 t TW - MY4 12/13/17 0 Structure - MYO ♦ BKF------- WS
•
Average Bankfull Slope
XS -14-R
•
XS -15-P
V 14
stOOxOO srOO610 XIP,9
XsO YO , srOz srO�XOO STO?XSO
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/14 TW - MYl 1/15/15 TW - MY2 11/10/15 TW - MY3 7/21/16 t TW - MY4 12/13/17 0 Structure - MYO ♦ BKF------- WS

2146
2145
2144
2143
2142
c�
c 2141
W 2140
2139
2138
2137
2136
Hidgon Branch
Longitudinal Profile
Staioning 300+46 to 304+22
.202xs ���x2s �0,xs
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/11 TW - WI 1/15/15 TW - MY2 11/10/15 TW - MY3 6/28/16 t TW - MY4 12/13/17 o Structure - MYO------- WS ♦ BKF
Average Bankfull Slope
•
_i
XS -12-R
Vj
-
_ _
.202xs ���x2s �0,xs
Station (feet)
TW - MYO 5/10/11 TW - WI 1/15/15 TW - MY2 11/10/15 TW - MY3 6/28/16 t TW - MY4 12/13/17 o Structure - MYO------- WS ♦ BKF

Appendix D — Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 12. Pebble Count Data Summary
�6
Table 12. Pebble Count Data Summary
Junes Branch
Stream Reach
MY l - 2014 MY2 - 2015 MY3 - 2016 MY4 - 2017 MY5 - 2018 MY6 - 2019 MY7 - 2020
Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count
D50 (mm) D84 (mm) D50 (mm) D84 (mm) D50 (mm) D84 (mm) D50 (mm) D84 (mm) D50 D84 D50 D84 D50 (mm) D84 lll]Ill�
Bum arner I
25 63
0.675 54
0.9 27.0 14.5 75
Bum arner II
27 61
6.4 55
6.1 54 57 81
Junes Branch
6.7 47
0.33 55
2.108 18 10.567 56
Higdon Branch
15 50
0.13 55
0.062 0.062 0.062 0.062
Doris Branch
0.062 32
0.062 7.9
0.062 0.062 0.062 0.062
MY4 Stream Reach Substrate Composition Charts 1-6
Chart 1.
Junes Branch MY4 Substrate Composition
120% -
100% -
80% M -
60% —
40%
20%
0%
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble
■ B I B II Junes ■ Higdon ■ Doris
Boulder Bedrock

Chart 2.
Chart 3.
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Appendix D — Stream Geomorphology Data
Bumgarner I - Substrate Composition
Silt/Clay
1
Silt/Clay
In
Sand
Gravel
■ MY1 ■ MY2
Cobble Boulder Bedrock
MY3 MY4
Bumgarner II - Substrate Composition
Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0 MY1 0 MY2 0 MY3 0 MY4

Chart 4.
Chart 5.
Appendix D — Stream Geomorphology Data
Junes - Substrate Composition
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0/o
o 1
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
■ MY1 ■ MY2 MY3 MY4
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Higdon - Substrate Composition
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble
0 MY1 0 MY2 MY3 MY4
Boulder Bedrock

Chart 6.
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Appendix D — Stream Geomorphology Data
Doris - Substrate Composition
11
Silt/Clay Sand
Ill. ■.
Gravel Cobble Boulder
■ MY1 ■ MY2 MY3 MY4
Bedrock

Appendix E
Hydrology Data
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Figure 11. Photo Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 13. 2017 Rainfall Summary
Chart 10. 2017 Junes Branch Site Precipitation Data

Appendix E - Hydrology Data
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Crest Gauge
Stream
Reach
Number of
Bankfull Events
Date of Highest
Bankfull Event
Maximum Bankfull
Height ft.
Photo
Number
Crest Gauge 1
Junes
2
October 2017
0.6
1
Crest Gauge 2
Bum II
0
NA
NA
NA
Figure 11. Photo Verification of Bankfull Events
Photo 1: Crest Gauge 1 - Junes Branch
Data collected on 12/12/2017

Appendix E - Hydrology Data
Table 13. Sylva, NC Rainfall Summary 2017
Month
Average
Normal Limits
30 Percent 70 Percent
Sylva, NC
CoCoRaHS Station
January
4.92
3.36
5.87
--
February
4.69
3.22
5.59
0.79
March
5.43
3.83
6.45
4.37
April
3.91
2.51
4.7
5.33
May
4.86
3.49
5.75
5.09
June
4.34
2.73
5.24
2.16
July
4.27
2.76
5.14
2.41
August
3.91
2.29
4.75
4.88
September
3.57
2.07
4.34
2.15
October
3.20
1.51
3.91
6.67
November
4.28
3.28
4.98
1.7
December
4.33
2.981
5.16
--
Totals
51.71
34.031
61.88
35.55
*Janurary Data missing from Station
**Switched from NJCY RAWS Station to NC -JC -17 CoCoTaHS Station on June 1, 2017

Appendix E - Hydrology Data
Chart 10. MY4 Precipitation Data
2017 Precipitation Data for Junes Branch Site
10
Growing Season
9
8
7
U 6
' 4
U
:a
3
v-
2
1
ii
0
A u
hk
I J.1 4L. all
L ii
I
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
Sylva Daily Rainfall Growing Season —6 Sylva Monthly Rainfall 30th/70th Percentile
*Daily rainfall data not reported by Station until Feb. 25, 2017

Appendix F
Memorandum
Junes Branch IRT Site Visit on 4/18/2017 Meeting Summary

fires
1/ 1/ • : _ \ UPICT11
To: Paul Wiesner, NCDMS
From: Daniel Ingram, RES
Re: Junes Branch IRT Site Visit on 4/18/2017, DMS project #(95027), FD contract #(003979)
Date: 4/24/2017
Meeting Summary
Date: 4/18/2017, 8:30am to 11:00am
Location: Junes Branch Site, Jackson County
Attendees: Todd Tugwell, Kim Browning, David Brown, and Steve Kichefski (USACE); Mac Haupt
(NCDWR); Paul Wiesner and Matthew Reid (NCDMS), Daniel Ingram and Brian Hockett (RES)
RES and NCDMS requested a site visit at Junes Branch during the 2017 Credit Release IRT
meeting. Specific items to review were two reaches with sediment aggradation (Doris Branch and
Higdon Branch). IRT members also wanted to discuss the monitoring schedule over the previous three
years. Junes Branch is entering into Monitoring Year 4 of 5. The IRT intends to revamp the close-out
process by providing increased review of monitoring reports and providing feedback in advance of close-
out. In light of that approach, the IRT members wanted to walk the entire project area to review all
project components. Their comments are presented below by reach. At the outset of the meeting RES
presented a detailed monitoring schedule to the IRT and DMS staff (see below). IRT feedback on the
schedule was they do not want to see two monitoring events in the same calendar year. RES explained
the reasoning behind the schedule, noted that over six months had elapsed between each monitoring
event, and noted the lack of clear guidance and interpretation of the mitigation guidelines. Paul W.
stated that he approved the compressed monitoring schedule. RES asked what remedy the IRT
proposed and was answered that we just shouldn't do it again on other sites, but no specific remedy or
consequence for Junes Branch was proposed. RES and DMS noted the clear direction from the IRT and
will incorporate these comments into future project activities.
412 N. 4th St. #300 1200 Camellia Blvd. #220 1434 Odenton Rd. 10055 Red Run Blvd. #130 302 Jefferson St. #110 33 Terminal Way #431
Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Lafayette, LA 70508 Odenton, MD 21113 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Raleigh, NC 27605 Pittsburgh, PA 15219
701 E. Bay St. #306 5020 Montrose Blvd. #650 2750 Prosperity Ave. #220 1521 W. Main 2"d Floor 3751 Westerre Pkwy. #A 5367 Telephone Rd. 1371/2 East Main St. #210
Charleston, SC 29403 Houston, TX 77006 Fairfax, VA 22031 Richmond, VA 23233 Richmond, VA 23220 Warrenton, VA 20187 Oak Hill, WV 25901

fires
Activity
Date of Data
Collection
Notes
Earthwork Complete
May 2014
Planting Complete
May 2014
As -Built Veg
June 2014
As -Built Survey
June 2004
Year 1 Veg
Jan 2015
7 months from As -Built
Year 1 Survey
Jan 2015
7 months from As -Built
Year 2 Veg
Sep 2015
8 months from Year 1
Year 2 Survey
Oct -Nov 2015
9 months from Year 1
Year 3 Veg
June 2016
9 months from Year 2
Year 3 Survey
Aug -Dec 2016
10 months from Year 2
Junes Branch
• No specific problem areas or concerns were noted on Junes Branch.
• Overall the system has a high sediment load but appears to be maintaining appropriate
geomorphology.
Bumgarner I and II
• No problems or concerns were noted on Bumgarner I and II.
Higdon Branch
• Sediment accumulation was noted in Higdon Branch, but a defined channel was present.
• No maintenance, remedial actions, or credit deductions were requested by the IRT.
412 N. 4th St. #300 1200 Camellia Blvd. #220 1434 Odenton Rd. 10055 Red Run Blvd. #130 302 Jefferson St. #110 33 Terminal Way #431
Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Lafayette, LA 70508 Odenton, MD 21113 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Raleigh, NC 27605 Pittsburgh, PA 15219
701 E. Bay St. #306 5020 Montrose Blvd. #650 2750 Prosperity Ave. #220 1521 W. Main 2"d Floor 3751 Westerre Pkwy. #A 5367 Telephone Rd. 1371/2 East Main St. #210
Charleston, SC 29403 Houston, TX 77006 Fairfax, VA 22031 Richmond, VA 23233 Richmond, VA 23220 Warrenton, VA 20187 Oak Hill, WV 25901

fires
Doris Branch
• Sediment accumulation was observed in Doris Branch and distinct channel features are absent
along much of the reach.
• No specific maintenance was requested by the IRT.
• Todd T. stated the system appeared to be more of a linear wetland seep.
• Mac H. and David B. both observed that some aquatic function was still provided by the
restoration.
• Mac H. commented that a reduced credit ratio, such as 2:1, may be warranted.
• David B. and Paul W. both stated the pre -construction condition was a shallow ditch/swale
through a disturbed old field with groundwater flow.
• Based on monitoring data the reach appears to have spring fed perennial flow, but limited
watershed size and is lacking channel -forming flow events.
• IRT members did not request any specific remedial actions and recommended a final decision on
crediting be made after additional monitoring.
412 N. 4th St. #300 1200 Camellia Blvd. #220 1434 Odenton Rd. 10055 Red Run Blvd. #130 302 Jefferson St. #110 33 Terminal Way #431
Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Lafayette, LA 70508 Odenton, MD 21113 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Raleigh, NC 27605 Pittsburgh, PA 15219
701 E. Bay St. #306 5020 Montrose Blvd. #650 2750 Prosperity Ave. #220 1521 W. Main 2"d Floor 3751 Westerre Pkwy. #A 5367 Telephone Rd. 1371/2 East Main St. #210
Charleston, SC 29403 Houston, TX 77006 Fairfax, VA 22031 Richmond, VA 23233 Richmond, VA 23220 Warrenton, VA 20187 Oak Hill, WV 25901