20020492 Ver 1_Mitigation Plan Review_20090727

Kulz, Eric
From: Kulz, Eric
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 1:37 PM
To: Dorney, John; Eaton, Larry
Subject: FW: Homestead
Attachments: image003.gif; image002.gif; image001.gif
Eric Alsmeyer is pressuring me to give an opinion on the Homestead site (intermittent vs perennial).
Larry and I are to discuss Wednesday afternoon. John, any time to join us??
From: O'Rourke, Michael [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:31 PM
To: Alsmeyer, Eric C SAW; Eric Kulz; [e-mail]; John Dorney; Larry Eaton;
[e-mail]; Chambers, Marla J.
Cc: Samanns, Edward; Bode, Raymond; Sekula, Tina
Subject: FW: Homestead
Eric,
Ed asked me to send you the cumulative data for Homestead Creek which, Berger feels, makes the case for
the stream credits being labeled perennial as opposed to intermittent.
The first graphic shows that the only time the stream at homestead approached running dry was in the
extremely severe drought of 2007, but it recovered as soon as the rains returned in the Spring of 2008. On the
second graphic, the precipitation graph shows that 2007 never exceeded the 30th percentile for precipitation.
The third graphic included provides five years of longitudinal profile data for the reach closest to the gauge to
illustrate the conditions found each year - note that only 2007 shows low flow conditions.
Inferring that the three data sets provided show proof that flow consistently existed throughout the five years
(with the exception of a couple of months during the drought of 2007), it is Berger's position that the stream
ought to be considered perennial and not intermittent.
Please feel free to contact Ed or me if you have any questions.
Homestead Creek Stream Gauge
July 2004 - Nov 2008 (Only Growing Season Shown)
677.0
676.5
q 676.0
675.5
0
.p
w 675.0
674.5
674.0
Chaim el Bed Ele -,ition (ft: NGNT)
--2004 Water Surface Elevat on (ft. NG?T)}
2006 Rater Suuface Elevation (ft. NGITf)
?008 Wtiter Suuface Elegy ition (f t. NG'.T})
- - - Bankfull Elevation (ft.
2005 Water Surf ace El
100' Water Surface El
2
N W J [ 7 hJ ll1 N t J ?D • N W `1 NJ t*J .A --? --? N) ? M.+ t J
.a oo N c ?, w o 44 , W - M l11 Vr N
Li 'Li Lq z
tece
P .. i-. P.-. U4 04 f1Q 00
`C ?C C
Homestead Creek 2004-2006
676.5
676.0
675.5
0
r-
1 675.0
W
674.6
674.0
673.5
L ongitudinal Station
Longtidunal Profile °*-2004 WSE -$-2005 WSE x`2006 WSE --0-2007 WSE X200
Michael
Michael O'Rourke
Senior Environmental Scientist
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
1001 Wade Ave.
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27605
[phone] Direct
[phone] Main
[phone] Fax
[phone] Cell
moro urkekl oui sberger. com
www.berger-nc.com
www.berger.com
600 660 600 660 700 760 800
Yadlm?30-70 Bprca?7e Graph
kh&uW, Nw& Cara hm
Mom3l& Rah&R Ac nmuk6uw 2004-2008
60
50
., 10
q
.Fh
30
w
20
10
Ramf REach Month
? 2004 Rainfall D 2005 Rah&R D 2006 Rah&R ? 2007 Rak&R ? 2000 Rah&R - -30th Per
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep c
t
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland A9itigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
diversity at both sites as last year experienced severe drought conditions. No Ephemeroptera (mayflies),
Plecoptera (stoneflies), or Trichoptera (caddisflies) were identified at any of the six sample sites in 2008.
Sample results at Homestead indicate the macrobenthic invertebrates in greatest abundance were isopods
(Isopoda) and chironomidae (Diptera). Sample results at both Second Creek indicate the macrobenthic
invertebrates in greatest abundance were isopods, amphipods (Amphipoda), and Oligochaetes
(Oligochaeta). The following table reports sampling results from October 6, 8, and 15, 2008.
TABLE 14: HOMESTEAD AND SECOND CREEK BENTHIC SURVEY RESULTS
Homestead Creek Second Creek
SPECIES T.V. F.F.G. Upper Middle Lower Upper Middle Lower
MOLLUSCA
Bivalvia
Veneroida
S haeriidae *8 FC
Pisidium s p. 6.5 FC 14
S haerium s p. 7.6 FC 4 24
Gastro oda
Basommato hora
L mnaeidae SC
Pseudosuccinea columella 7.7 SC 5 2
Ph sidae
Ph sella s p. 8.8 CG 1 2
Planorbidae *6 SC
Planorbella s p. 6.8 1
ANNELIDA
Oli ochaeta *10 CG
Tubificida
Tubificidae w.h.c. 7.1 CG 1
Tubificidae w.o.h.c. 7.1 CG 1 51 2
Hirudinea P
Arh nchobdellida
Er obdellidae P 1
ARTHROPODA
Arachnoidea
Acariformes 5.5
Arrenuridae 5.5
Arrenurus s p. 5.5 1
Crustacea
Ostracoda 12 5
C clo oida 5
Cladocera
Da hnidae
Ceriodaphnia sp. 7
Iso oda
Asellidae SH
Caecidotea s p. 9.1 CG 22 10 1 6 169 195
Am hipoda CG
Cran on ctidae
Crangonyx sp. 7.9 CG 1 31 3 48 3
Page 38

Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Table 14 Continued
SPECIES T
V F
F
G Hom estead C reek Se cond Cr eek

Decapoda
Cambaridae
Procambarus s p, .
.
7.5
7 .
.
.
SH Upper Middle Lower Upper

2 Middle Lower

Insecta _
Collembola 6
Odonata
Aeshnidae P
E iaeschna heros 1 2
Coena rionidae P 2 2
Arias. 8.2 P 1
Libellulidae P
E themis Sp. 3 1
Pach di lax lon i ennis 9.9 4
Coleoptera
D tiscidae P 1
Co elatus s p, 10 2
H daticus s p. P 1
Neo orus s p. 8.6 1
H dro hilidae P 1
Sta h linidae P 1
Di tera
Cerato 0 onidae P 3 1
Atrichopo on s p. 6.5 P 1
Chironomidae
Chironomus s p. 9.6 CG 2 2 1
Clinotan us s p. p 8
Goeldichironomus s p. 2 80
Poly edilum illinoense 9 SH 3 1 2
Procladius s p. 9.1 P 1
Tan us s p.
9.2
P
1
Tribelos 'ucundum 6.3 5
Dixidae CG 1
Culicidae FC 2
Tabanidae PI
Ch so s s p. 6.7 PI 2
Ti ulidae SH
Ormosia sp. 6.3 CG 1
SPECIES Homestead Creek Second Creek
Upper Middle Lower Upper Middle Lower
TOTAL NO. OF ORGANISMS 67 69 76 50 221 295
TOTAL NO. OF TAXA 17 6 10 15 5 11
EPTINDEX 0 0 0 0 0 0
NC BIOTIC INDEX 8.65 8.21 7.38 7.30 8.59 8.76
Page 39

Louis Berger Stream and N•'etland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT }'ear 5 Monitoring Report
Table 14 Notes:
Identification analysis provided by Pennington & Associates, Inc.
1: T.V. - Tolerance Value: Tolerance values for individual species have a range of 0-10, with higher numbers indicating more
tolerant species or more polluted conditions.
2: F.F.G. - Functional Feeding Group
CG - Collector/Gatherer FC - Filtering/Collectors
SC - Scrapers SH - Shredders
P - Predators PI - Piercer
TABLE 15: HOMESTEAD AND SECOND CREEK BENTHIC SURVEY SUMMARY
FROM 2004 TO 2008
Monitoring Year 1 Homestead Creek Second Creek
2004 Upper Middle Lower Upper Middle Lower
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 32 34 24 42 30 23
TOTAL NUMBER OF EPT TAXA 4 6 1 10 6 3
EPT NUMBER 24 17 1 50 28 16
NC BIOTIC INDEX
Monitoring Year 2 7.57 7.55 7.55
Homestead Creek 6.66 7.85 7.68
Second Creek
2005 Upper Middle Lower Upper Middle Lower
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS
44
34
39
257
161
327
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 20 17 18 17 19 20
EPT TAXA 0 0 0 2 1 2
NC BIOTIC INDEX 8.14 7.86 7.41
_j 8.49
I 6.49 7.32
Monitoring Year 3 Homestead Creek Second Creek
2006 LUpper Middle Lower Upper Middle Lower
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS
14
15
33
11
3
DRY
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 5 4 2 2 2 DRY
EPT TAXA 0 0 0 1 0 DRY
Monitoring Year 4 Homestead. Creek Second Creek
2007 -Upper Middle Lower Upper Middle Lower
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS
N/A*
N/A*
DRY
N/A*
DRY
DRY
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA N/A* N/A* DRY N/A* DRY DRY
EPT TAXA N/A* N/A* DRY N/A* DRY DRY
Monitoring Year 5
2008 Homestead Creek
Upper Middle Lower Second Creek
Upper Middle Lower
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS
67
69
76
50
221
295
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 17 6 10 15 5 11
EPT TAXA 0 0 0 0 0 0
NC BIOTIC INDEX 8.65 8.21 7.38 7.30 8.59 8.76
-• ••• •••• ••?•• r ?• ?•• ?u wuat waa pivviucu uy me wennncanon ianoratory for each monitoring year.
N/A*: Species and number of taxa found in Year 4 were similar to those found in Year 3. Because of severe drought
conditions. several sampling sites did not contain sufficient flow for adequate sampling: therefore, samples were not
sent to the lab for analysis.
Page 40