20140705 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20190123

ID#* 20140705
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review
Completed Date
01/24/2019
Mitigation Project Submittal -1/23/2019
Version* 1
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site? *
Type of Mitigation Project:*
W Stream r Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Brad Breslow
Project Information
Existing 20140705
(DWR) (nunbers only no dash)
I D#: *
Project Name: Selma Mill
County: Johnston
Document Information
r Yes r No
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Existing 1
Version: (nun-bersonly)
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Selma Mill MY1 Report.pdf 11.47MB
Rease upload only one RDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Ryan Medric
Signature:*
�zw

SELMA MILL STREAM
MITIGATION SITE
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
YEAR I MONITORING REPORT
Neuse River Basin
CU 03020201
Provided by:
fires
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
919-209-1052
December 2018

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Summary..................................................................................................................................... 2
1.1 Project Location and Description.............................................................................................. 2
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives.................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Project Success Criteria............................................................................................................. 3
Stream Success Criteria................................................................................................................... 3
VegetationSuccess Criteria............................................................................................................. 4
1.4 Project Components......................................................................................................................... 4
1.5 Design/Approach.............................................................................................................................. 5
1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions............................................................................................. 5
1.7 Year 1 Monitoring Performance..................................................................................................... 5
Vegetation........................................................................................................................................ 5
StreamGeomorphology................................................................................................................... 6
StreamHydrology............................................................................................................................ 6
2.0 Methods.................................................................................................................................................. 6
3.0 Reference................................................................................................................................................ 7
Appendix A: Background Tables
Table 1: Project Mitigation Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts Table
Table 4: Project Contacts Table
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2: Current Conditions Plan View
Vegetation Plot Photos
Stream and Vegetation Problem Areas
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 5: Planted Species Summary
Table 6: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Appendix D: Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
MY1 Overlay Cross -Section Plots
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Table 10. Stream Reach Morphology Data Table
Appendix E: Hydrology Data
Table 11. 2018 Rainfall Summary
Table 12. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Crest Gauge Reading Photos
MY1 Headwater Valley Restoration Stream Flow Hydrograph

1.0 Proiect Summary
1.1 Project Location and Description
The Selma Mill Stream Mitigation Site (the "Site") is located within a watershed dominated by agricultural
and residential land use in Johnston County, North Carolina. Prior to construction, the project streams were
significantly impacted by channelization and agricultural practices. The project involves the restoration and
protection of streams in the Neuse River watershed. The purpose of this mitigation site is to restore and
enhance a stream/wetland complex located within the Neuse River Basin. The Site has been designed in
concurrence with the Selma Mill Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Bank. EBX-Neuse I, LLC
("EBX"), acting as the Bank Sponsor, established a Conservation Easement and will monitor the Site for a
minimum of seven years in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Neu -Con Wetland and Stream
Umbrella Mitigation Bank.
The Site is in Johnston County immediately north of Selma, NC (Figure 1). The latitude and longitude for
the site is 35.547353 ON and -78.282503 °W. The site extends approximately 2,300 feet north on the west
side of NC HWY 96 beginning immediately north of W Chestnut Street. A tributary crosses NC HWY 96
approximately 1,900 feet north of W Chestnut Street and extends approximately 1,600 feet west.
The Site consisted of stream restoration on tributaries that drain directly to Mill Creek. The project presents
6,771 linear feet of Stream Restoration generating 7,305 Stream Mitigation Units (SMU). A combination
of Priority 1 and Priority 2 restoration was used on Reaches A and B and Headwater Valley Restoration on
Reach C. Benefits include the storage of excess water during flood events, preventing erosion of stream
banks, reducing in -stream sedimentation, and nutrient reductions. SMU totals were adjusted using the most
recent non-standard buffer width guidance documents.
The Site consisted of agricultural fields, cattle pastures and wooded areas. The total easement area is 34.2
acres. The wooded areas along the easement corridor designated for restoration activities are classified as
mixed pines and hardwoods. Invasive species are present throughout the wooded areas. Restoration
channels were degraded to a point where they could no longer access their floodplain, lack riparian buffers,
allow livestock access, and aquatic life was not supported. Little aquatic habitat was available to support
aquatic life, and the riparian buffers were not maximizing their potential to filter nutrients.
The Site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the site will be conducted at a
minimum of twice per year throughout the seven-year post -construction monitoring period, or until
performance standards are met. These site inspections will identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance. The measure of stream restoration success will be documented by bankfull flows and
no change in stream channel classification. Sand bed channels are dynamic and minor adjustments to
dimension and profile are expected. The measure of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of
at least 210 seven-year old planted trees per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of year seven
of the monitoring period.
Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the North
Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation (NCWHF). The NCWHF will be responsible for periodic inspection
of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the Conservation Easement or the deed restriction
document(s) are upheld.
Selma Mill 2 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site December 2018

1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The 2010 Neuse River Basin River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) identified several restoration needs
for the entire Neuse River Basin, as well as for HUC 03020201, specifically. The Site was identified as a
stream restoration opportunity to improve water quality, habitat, and hydrology within the Neuse 01 River
Basin.
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following:
• Nutrient removal,
• Sediment removal,
• Invasive species treatment,
• Filtration of runoff, and
• Improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Exclusion of livestock,
• Treatment of exotic invasive species,
• Restoration of forested riparian stream buffers,
• Stabilization of eroding stream banks due to lack of vegetation and livestock hoof shear,
• Addition of large woody debris, such as log vanes, log weirs, root wads,
• Preservation and enhancement of hydrology in existing riparian wetland seeps, and
• Restoration of appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile in stream channels.
1.3 Project Success Criteria
The Site follows the USACE 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent guidance. The Mitigation
Plan was approved in August 2016 and therefore does not adhere to the 2016 Wilmington District Stream
and Wetland Mitigation Update. Cross section data will be reported in Years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and vegetation
and stream hydrology data will be reported annually.
Stream Success Criteria
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The two bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until two bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
There should be little change in as -built cross-sections. If changes do take place, they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down -cutting or
erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross-sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross-sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed
1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within restored reaches. Channel stability should
be demonstrated through a minimum of two bankfull events documented in the seven-year monitoring
period.
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should
not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
Selma Mill 3 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site December 2018

series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Headwater valley restoration reaches will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface flow.
This will be accomplished through direct observation, photo documentation, and the use of stream gauge
transducers with data loggers. Reaches must demonstrate a minimum of 30 consecutive days of flow.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site will follow
IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size, and cover a minimum
of two percent of the planted area. Vegetation monitoring will take place annually between July 15 and
leaf drop. The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least 320 planted
three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 five-year old trees at the end of Year 5, and the final
vegetative success criteria will be 210 trees per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of Year
7. The site includes 25 monitoring plots to monitor the 29.8 planted acres. Volunteer trees will be counted,
identified to species, and included in the yearly monitoring reports, but will not be counted towards the
success criteria of total planted stems.
1.4 Project Components
The project area is comprised of a single easement area along three tributaries that flow into Mill Creek.
The easement is separated by a crossing at NC HWY 96. The western portion of the project originates near
the intersection of Hwy 96 and W Chestnut Street and includes Reaches A 1, A2, and B3. The eastern portion
of the project is located in an agricultural field to the east of NC HWY 96. This area includes Reaches B 1,
B2, and C. The stream mitigation components are summarized below and in Table 1.
Mitigation
Stationing
Existing
ProposedMitigation
845
Base
Adjusted
Reach Type*
(Proposed)
Length
Length
Ratio
SMUs**
SMUs***
504
1:1
(LF)
(LF)
C
HWV Restoration 0+96 to 11+31 852
875
A P2 Restoration
0+61 to 19+42
1,514
1,881
1:1
1,881
2,068
A P1/P2 Restoration
19+72 to 27+30
630
758
1:1
758
821
A P1 Restoration
27+60 to 34+45
571
685
1:1
685
801
B
P2 Restoration 1+94 to 10+39 741
845
1:1
845
903
B
P1/P2 Restoration 10+72 to 22+95 1,062
1,223
1:1
1,223
1,334
B
P2 Restoration 23+55 to 28+59 405
504
1:1
504
503
C
HWV Restoration 0+96 to 11+31 852
875
1:1
875
875
Total 5,775
6,771
6,771
7,305
*P1 =
Priority 1; P2 = Priority 2; HWV- Headwater Valley
**Reach C SMUs based on valley length minus 30 feet for the proposed crossing
***See Mitigation Plan for SMU adjustments based on non-standard buffer widths.
Selma Mill 4 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site December 2018

1.5 Design/Approach
The design approach for the Selma Mill Site combined the analog method of natural channel design with
analytical methods to evaluate stream flows and hydraulic performance of the channel and floodplain. The
analog method involves the use of a "template" stream adjacent to, nearby, or previously in the same
location as the design reach. The template parameters of the analog reach are replicated to create the features
of the design reach. The analog approach is useful when watershed and boundary conditions are similar
between the design and analog reaches (Skidmore, et al., 2001). Hydraulic geometry was developed using
analytical methods in an effort to identify the design discharge.
Priority Level 2 restoration was done on Reaches Al, A2, B1, B2, and B3. Priority 1 Restoration was done
on Reach A2 below the confluence with Reach B. For most of the restoration reaches, the channel was
rerouted to adjacent natural valley features. By rerouting the channel and constructing floodplain benches,
the design allows the channel frequent access to its floodplain and the opportunity to create small,
depressional areas within the buffer to enhance habitat for wildlife and aquatic organisms. The headwater
valley restoration approach was done along Reach C. The ditch was plugged and then backfilled to the
extent possible such that cut and fill is balanced along the reach.
1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions
Stream construction was completed in August 2017. The Site was built to design plans and guidelines. No
major changes or modifications were made during construction activities. Final floodplain grading was
completed in May 2018 along with planting and fencing.
1.7 Year I Monitoring Performance
The Selma Mill Year 1 Monitoring (MY1) activities were completed in November 2018. All MY1 data is
present below and in the appendices. The Site is on track to meeting vegetation and stream interim success
criteria.
Vegetation .
Monitoring of the 25 permanent vegetation plots was completed during November 2018. Vegetation data
are in Appendix C and associated photos are in Appendix B. MY1 data indicates that 24 of the 25 plots
are exceeding the interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities ranged from
283 to 1,335 planted stems per acre with a mean of 874 planted stems per acre across all plots. Vegetation
Plot 20 fell one tree short of the interim success criteria. The area in and around this plot as well as a small
area on the other side of Reach B will be replanted in 2019. A total of 19 species were documented within
the plots. Volunteer species were noted in four of the vegetation plots. The average tree height observed
was 2.2 feet.
Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is
becoming well established throughout the majority of the project. The old road used to haul the excess dirt
from the site along the top of Reach B, however, may need to be reseeded in 2019. RES will keep an eye
on this area during future monitoring events. Additionally, the lower end of Reach A will be revisited in
2019 to treat any Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) that may be re -sprouting. There is a small (0.05 acre)
area of encroachment along Highway 96 that RES will continue to monitor and communicate to the
landowner that mowing is prohibited in the easement.
Selma Mill 5 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site December 2018

Stream Geomorphology
Geomorphology data for MY1 was collected during November 2018. Summary tables and cross
section/profile plots are in Appendix D. Overall the MY1 cross sections relatively match the proposed
design. Cross Section 19 showed about one foot of bed scour. This cross section is located in a pool, so
RES is not concerned in MY1 but will continue to monitor above and below this cross section for bed
degradation. Bank height ratios remain less than 1.2 and entrenchment ratios greater than 2.2.
Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding
banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. The channel is transporting sediment as designed
and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation.
Stream Hydrology
Flow and crest gauges were installed on Reach A and Reach B and a flow gauge was installed on Reach
C. 15 total bankfull events were recorded in 2018; 12 on Reach A and three on Reach B. The flow gauge
recorded 238 consecutive flow days on the Headwater Valley Restoration Reach C. Gauge locations can
be found on Figure 2 and hydrology data is in Appendix E.
2.0 Methods
Stream monitoring was conducted using a Topcon GTS -312 Total Station. Three-dimensional coordinates
associated with cross-section data was collected in the field (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200).
Morphological data was collected at 28 cross-sections. Survey data was imported into CAD, ArcGIS®, and
Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis. In April 2018 crest gauges and flow gauges were
installed on Reaches A and B and a flow gauge and time-lapse camera were installed on Reach C. The flow
gauges were installed within the channel and will continuously record flow conditions at an hourly interval.
The crest gauges were installed on the bank at the bankfull elevation. During quarterly visits to the Site, the
height of the corkline will be recorded. HOBO data from the flow gauges will be corrected using bankfull
recordings from the crest gauges. The time-lapse camera takes a photo every day at 12:30 pm. These photos
will be used to show consecutive flow days in accordance with the flow gauge.
Vegetation success is being monitored at 25 permanent monitoring plots. Vegetation plot monitoring
follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) and includes
analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data is processed using the CVS data entry
tool. In the field, the four corners of each plot were permanently marked with PVC at the origin and metal
conduit at the other corners. Photos of each plot are to be taken from the origin each monitoring year.
Selma Mill 6 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site December 2018

3.0 Reference
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function -
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). "Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities
2009." (September 2014).
Resource Environmental Solutions (2016). Selma Mill Stream Mitigation Site Final Mitigation Plan.
Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
Fourth Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. April 2008 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W.
Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR -10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center.
Selma Mill 7 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site December 2018

Appendix A
Background Tables

Table 1. Selma Mill Stream Mitigation Site - Mitigation Assets and Components
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
on -riparian
Stream Riparian Wetland Wetland
Restoration Level (linearfeet) (acres) (acres)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 6.771
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement 11
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Pres
Overall Assets Summary
Existing
Asset Category
Mitigation
Stream
RNR Wetland
NR Wetland
Project
Wetland Footage
Plan
Approach
Adjusted
Component
Position and or
Footage or
Restoration
Priority
Mitigation
Mitigation
Mitigation
(reach ID, etc.)'
HydroType2 Acreage
Stationing
Acreage
Level
Level
Ratio (X:1)
Credits
Credits°
Notes/Comments
Full Channel Restoration, Channel Relocation, Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock, Permanent
R;each
1,514
0+61 to 19+42
1,881
R
P2
1
1,881
2,068
Conservation Easement
Full Channel Restoration, Channel Relocation, Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock, Permanent
Reach A
630
19+72 to 27+30
758
R
P1/P2
1
7581821
Conservation Easement
Full Channel Restoration, Channel Relocation, Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock, Permanent
Reach A
571
5
685
R
P1
1
685
801
Conservation Easement
Reach B
741
1,062
845
R
P2
1
845
903
Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Permanent Conservation Easement.
Reach B
5
Fto
1,223
R
P1/P2
1
1,223
1,334
Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Permanent Conservation Easement.
Full Channel Restoration, Channel Relocation, Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock, Permanent
Reach B
405
9
504
R
P2
1
504
503
Conservation Easement
ch C
852
1
875
R
HWV
1
875
875
HWV Rsetoration, Planted Buffer, Permanent Conservation Easement
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
on -riparian
Stream Riparian Wetland Wetland
Restoration Level (linearfeet) (acres) (acres)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 6.771
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement 11
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Pres
Overall Assets Summary
General Note - The above component table is intended to be a close complement to the asset map. Each
entry in the above table should have clear distinction and appropriate symbology in the asset map.
1- Wetland Groups represent pooled wetland polygons in the map with the same wetland type and
restoration level. If some of the wetland polygons within a group are in meaningfully different
landscape positions, soil types or have different community targets (as examples), then further
segmentation in the table may be warranted. Wetland features impacted by credit modifiers such as
utilities shall be listed as a distinct record with the impacted acreage tallied as discreet records in the
table (See Wetland 7 above)
2- Wetland Position and Hydro Type- Indicates Riparian Riverine,(RR), riparinan non-riverine(RNR) or
Non-Riverine (NR)
3- Buffer Assets- due to the complex nature of buffer and nutrient offset assets they are not included
in this example table. Please see the DMS buffer mitigation plan template for the required asset table
information.
4 - Adjusted Mitigation Credits are based on the non-standard buffer widths.
Overall
Asset Category
Credits
Stream
RNR Wetland
NR Wetland
General Note - The above component table is intended to be a close complement to the asset map. Each
entry in the above table should have clear distinction and appropriate symbology in the asset map.
1- Wetland Groups represent pooled wetland polygons in the map with the same wetland type and
restoration level. If some of the wetland polygons within a group are in meaningfully different
landscape positions, soil types or have different community targets (as examples), then further
segmentation in the table may be warranted. Wetland features impacted by credit modifiers such as
utilities shall be listed as a distinct record with the impacted acreage tallied as discreet records in the
table (See Wetland 7 above)
2- Wetland Position and Hydro Type- Indicates Riparian Riverine,(RR), riparinan non-riverine(RNR) or
Non-Riverine (NR)
3- Buffer Assets- due to the complex nature of buffer and nutrient offset assets they are not included
in this example table. Please see the DMS buffer mitigation plan template for the required asset table
information.
4 - Adjusted Mitigation Credits are based on the non-standard buffer widths.

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Selma Mill Stream Mitigation Site
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 1 year 3 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 6 months
Number of reporting Years :
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Restoration Plan
NA
Aug -16
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
Feb -17
Construction
NA
Aug -17
Containerized, bare root and B&B plantings for reach/segments 1 &2
NA
May -18
As -built (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline)
May -18
Jun -18
Year 1 Monitoring
Nov -18
Dec -18
Year 2 Monitoring
Year 3 Monitoring
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring
= The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Selma Mill Stream Mitigation Site
Designer
Primary project design POC
WK Dickson
Frasier Mullen [phone]
Construction Contractor
Construction contractor POC
Wright Contracting / PO Box 545, Siler City, NC 273444
Joseph Wright / [phone]
Survey Contractor
Survey contractor POC
Matrix East, PLLC / 906 N. Queen St., Suite A, Kinston, NC
28501
James R. Watson, PLS / [phone]
Planting Contractor
Planting contractor POC
H&J Forestry
Matt Hitch
Seeding Contractor
Contractor point of contact
Wright Contracting / PO Box 545, Siler City, NC 273444
Joseph Wright / [phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arborgen [phone]
Monitoring Performers
RES / 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110, Raleigh, NC 27605
Stream Monitoring POC
Ryan Medric [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC
Ryan Medric [phone]
Wetland Monitoring POC
N/A

Table 4. Project Background Information
Project Name
Selma Mill
County
Johnston
Project Area (acres)
34.2
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
Latitude: 35.542346 N Longitude: -78.284053 W
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)
29.8
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Coastal Plain
River Basin
Neuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
3020201 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
3020201100050
DWR Sub -basin
03-04-02
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)
583
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
35%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Agriculture; Residential; Forest; Industrial/Commercial
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Al A2
61 B2
B3
C
Length of reach (linear feet)
938 1625
1396 278
444
921
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined) X X
X X
X
X
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)
267 583
138 189
189
42
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Perennial Perennial
Perennial Perennial
Perennial
Intermittent
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
Stream Classification (existing)
G5c/B5 G5c
G5c G5c
G5c
G5c
Stream Classification (proposed)
E5 E5
E5 E5
E5
HWV
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
II / IV II
VI II
II
II
FEMA classification
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Docs?
Water of the United States - Section 404
Yes
Yes
SAW -2015-
00710
Water of the United States - Section 401
Yes
Yes
DWR # 14-
0705
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
USFWS
(Corr. Letter)
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
SHPO (Corr.
Letter)
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
Yes
Town of
Selma (Corr.
Letter)
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A

s3J� �f
I
t�4 Od
grroh� � �ell
0e
ad -
r'�
za
� I
xP I
Boykin Are
pr
9�
Kr �.
i Ic
nc �eitianan
�AYe
Primrose $t
Q C
W Walnu4 Sl G
Z
Legend
® Conservation Easement
f
z
11 Bennett Dr
- Y
o/
yy W chests Nl s.[ aSf
�dryQ, ip ,p Pecan U,
s+ tk sf I.'" yr Oixis pr
tia e$ F
ro
� FAaf fg�o+ Wo4Q St �
_t• h, S 4f
6N
•++rota r. rr! � v � _ �
-
Nob a°yi a S+ a ch
S+
4+fid y fiery. °ro Sf es � .'q
Sa1mil
61
Rif ah Sf � 4�4
d'rySf 3s h� k Ca
�0 r
9 �`•'H y Sef �i E 'z
S SfaA 7 as f,pd 'Qryae i 4 �. +
toSources Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri
eai,r sv - y� ro y - Ja an,
Ae h PMETI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC,
dfp f mh v OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
N
Date: 12/11/2018
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
W e Drawn by: RTM res
Selma Mill Buffer/Nutrient Site
v s Checked by: BPB
0 500 1,000
Johnston County, North Carolina
1 inch = 1,000 feet
Feet

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

fires
HWV Restoration = ' ' N
Yom, < n W — E
?0'I Reach B
�`- P2 Restoration s
744
0 150 300
-
=u -'m" Feet
.4# r f Figure 2
IReacCurrent Conditions
h A `. �, ,; - � I�w" ,
P1 Restoration ,. Overview
MY1 2018
Selma Mill Stream
Mitigation Site
F • 1
r ti tr - _ ', �• P1 Restoration Johns :-> � ,.' � � �, � y
NC
Johnston Count
Date: 12/10/2018 Drawn by: RTM
rrx Y
� t 35 542346
� � Long -78.2840
:...�
Let: 53
� LEGEND
O Conservation Easement
�► Vegetation Plot Success
Reach A <} I= >320 stems/acre
=Ji P v
P2 Restoration rr Reach B`^ <320 stems/acre
—Restoration
P2 Restoration F
t
HWV Restoration
+ v
a� ( ►'` Top of Bank
ILr
Cross Section
]P- F r �x� 9 • Flow/Crest Gauge
.,
:... � •
Rain Gag /Ambient
J
t �► , w;,
-
~� gar Vegetation Condition Assessment
F
,+ � � *�„ '; - ,��.:. 2•, � ,�.'' Target Community
_ , Y d Present Mar final Absent
49A,', o.^ M Absent No Fill
]Ddf•. `, �` - i ,k, l�MlAilw pl.: - '4.* Reach NHtigation TypesNng Length Propos ed Length Ratio BaseSMUs* AsjustedSMOs**
(LF) H Present
A P2 Restoration 1,514 1,881 1:1 1,881 2,068 >
" `lj ¢ µ`'• 't, x :I - - A PI/P2 Restoration 630 758 1:1 758 821
x.�,� ., - ��"'• fir �A rtr'.� - j bra --� A P1 Restoration 571 685 1:1 685 801
B P2 Restoration 741 845 I:1 845 903
mowREFERENCE
_ r _ B Pl/P2Restorahon 1,062 1,223 1:1 1,223 1,334
B P2 Restoration 405 504 1:1 504 503
C HWVResloralion 852 875 1:1 875 875 Aerial imagery from NC One M 2017.
1. A agery f Map
_ TOTAL 5,775 6,771 6,771 7,305 )
t: o- t * ` 2.) Horizontal Datum is NAD83 UTM Z17N.
*Reach C SMUs based on valley length minus 30 feet for the proposed crossing.
r **See Figure IIfor SMUadjustmentsbas edonnon-standardbuffer widths. 3. The parceldata information/property
�-
� q _ ? moi.° i' -a , :, ,r••w4 � � # „�, *.� boundaries depicted on this map is for
prospect assessment purposes only.
� � � y � �� � � ` �. '�: � � �� -„ • ��� ''., I'� � Cen r for e • • raphic Information 8r An'alysis It is not to be used as final boundaries.

����' �. �t 4 rig < � „. • r
•Y a ti i • 1 • ' i INt q e.
, 6J � 1 'p>• 'til �r � ,�•e ... '�..�. � _i
f
r
, i it 1LT.y t 44 a + . . s . �•. 'l; '3'a'�
214 ,} y l•,{'1.�y 4 [•1 wi`
•
r• r ,
q;% ,
IN' JA
,�. !? y e ••1 OM1• + f r
Iwo
e
tjres
s.
4*
fir'• � }._ �'• Y
V.
�. s
0 50 100
- 'f+r.» 91 • i ` e, Feet
Figure 2
Current Conditions
•' Plan View
4tilllll Selma Mill Stream
. ' Restoration Site
MY1 2018
a y ► _. �. Johnston County, NC
�.. z,• f �.t�
J< d Date: 12/10/2018 Drawn by: RTM
(Page 1)
�4 T49
W.
IN
r
.41:
` W
LEGEND
• 4 �, try -
\
O Conservation Easement
Vegetation Plot Success
l
M >320 stems/acre
IIII! <320 stems/acre
.
—Restoration
— HWV Restoration
Cross Section
Top of Bank
® Flow/Crest Gauge
0 Rain Gauge/Ambient
Vegetation Condition Assessment
U) Target Community
a
m Present Mar inal Absent
i• -
p, Absent
No Fill
N �
y
r
Y '
d
•N Present
-
-
m
c
REFERENCE
1.) Aerial imagery from NC One Map 2017.
2.) Horizontal Datum is NAD83 UTM Z17N.
3.) The parcel data information/property
boundaries depicted on this map is for
prospect assessment purposes only.
It is not to be used as final boundaries.

6,
Reach
M ar Lir ` I , "�y�"}',�:•rya
- J0a .
WWW
N
. , �'Ilk
!•
t !
� � s � } yn�• - -
y} 21 `Np
�N
rq Reach6 ery�,,�� 4
rt�
M
fires
0 50 100
Feet
Figure 2
Current Conditions
Plan View
Selma Mill Stream
Restoration Site
MY1 2018
Johnston County, NC
Date: 12/10/2018 Drawn by: RTM
(Page 3)
LEGEND
O Conservation Easement
Vegetation Plot Success
77771 >320 stems/acre
E771 <320 stems/acre
— Restoration
— HWV Restoration
Cross Section
Top of Bank
® Flow/Crest Gauge
0 Rain Gauge/Ambient
Vegetation Condition Assessment
a Target Community
Present Mar inal Absent
U
L Absent No Fill
N
d
N
Present
A
REFERENCE
1.) Aerial imagery from NC One Map 2017.
2.) Horizontal Datum is NAD83 UTM Z17N.
3.) The parcel data information/property
boundaries depicted on this map is for
prospect assessment purposes only.
It is not to be used as final boundaries.

fires
D;7 y 1 I
mom s
J
iiiiv f , - 1 50 100
Feet
9 7r
18
Figure 2
fes.
Current Conditions
Plan View
Selma Mill Stream
Restoration Site
MY1 2018
Johnston County, NC
1 Date: 12/10/2018 Drawn by: RTM
(Page 4)
LEGEND
O Conservation Easement
Vegetation Plot Success
M >320 stems/acre
IIII! <320 stems/acre
— Restoration
— HWV Restoration
Cross Section
Top of Bank
® Flow/Crest Gauge
i 0 Rain Gauge/Ambient
a-
Vegetation Condition Assessment
p w Target Community
m Present Mar inal Absent
i, Absent No Fill
N
r N
Present
A
y
C
REFERENCE
- 1.) Aerial imagery from NC One Map 2017.
2.) Horizontal Datum is NAD83 UTM Z17N.
l;
3.) The parcel data information/property
boundaries depicted on this map is for
p ` prospect assessment purposes only.
Center for Geographic Informan & A� a Isis It is not to be used as final boundaries.

Selma Mill Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1
Vegetation Plot 3
Vegetation Plot 5
Vegetation Plot 2
Vegetation Plot 4
Vegetation Plot 6

Vegetation Plot 7
Vegetation Plot 9
Vegetation Plot 11
Vegetation Plot 8
Vegetation Plot 10
Vegetation Plot 12

Vegetation Plot 13
Vegetation Plot 15
Vegetation Plot 17
Vegetation Plot 14
Vegetation Plot 16
Vegetation Plot 18

Vegetation Plot 19
Vegetation Plot 21
Vegetation Plot 23
Vegetation Plot 20
Vegetation Plot 22
Vegetation Plot 24

Vegetation Plot 25

Stream Problem Areas
Selma Mill
Label / Feature Issue / Location Photo
N/A N/A
Vegetation Problem Areas
Selma Mill
Label / Feature Category / Location / Size
Photo
VPA1 / Encroachment / Reach B / 0.05 acres
rj
VPA2 / Low Stem Density / Reach B / 0.77 acres

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 5. Planted Species Summary
Common Name
Scientific Name
Total Stems Planted
Green Ash
Froxinus pennsylvanica
6500
Water Oak
Quercus nigra
5500
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
5000
Willow Oak
Quercus phellos
5000
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus michauxii
4100
Blackgum
Nyssasylvatica
4000
Yellow -Poplar
Liriodendron tulipifera
3000
River Birch
Betula nigra
2600
Baldcypress
Taxodium distichum
1300
Shumard Oak
Quercus shumardii
1000
Overcup Oak
Quercus lyrata
995
Silky Dogwood
Cornus amomum
502
Buttonbush
Cephalanthus occidentalis
500
Cherrybark Oak
Quercus pagoda
500
Persimmon
Diospyros virginiona
500
Water Tupelo
Nyssaaquatica
400
2.3
Total
41,397
Table 6. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Plot #
Planted Volunteer Total
Stems/Acre Stems/Acre Stems/Acre
Success
Criteria
Metz
Average
Stem
Height (ft)
1
1012
0
1012
Yes
2.1
2
809
0
809
Yes
1.9
3
971
0
971
Yes
2.2
4
1174
0
1174
Yes
2.2
5
1295
0
1295
Yes
2.0
6
1093
0
1093
Yes
2.1
7
1133
0
1133
Yes
2.5
8
890
0
890
Yes
2.3
9
567
0
567
Yes
1.6
10
728
0
728
Yes
1.8
11
647
0
647
Yes
1.9
12
769
81
850
Yes
2.1
13
769
0
769
Yes
2.4
14
728
0
728
Yes
2.4
15
769
0
769
Yes
2.0
16
1052
0
1052
Yes
1.6
17
850
81
931
Yes
2.1
18
567
0
567
Yes
2.0
19
445
0
445
Yes
2.0
20
283
0
283
No
1.8
21
890
0
890
Yes
1.9
22
1255
1619
2873
Yes
2.5
23
971
0
971
Yes
4.3
24
890
283
1174
Yes
2.4
25
1335
0
1335
Yes
2.2
Project Avg
876
83
958
Yes
2.2

Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Selma Mill
Current Plot Data (MY12018)
Current Plot Data (MY12018)
Annual Means
05232018-01-0015
05232018-01-0016
05232018-01-0017
05232018-01-0018
05232018-01-0019
05232018-01-0020
05232018-01-0001
05232018-01-0002
05232018-01-0003
05232018-01-0004
05232018-01-0005
05232018-01-0006
05232018-01-0007
05232018-01-0008
05232018-01-0009
05232018-01-0010
05232018-01-0011
05232018-01-0012
05232018-01-0013
05232018-01-0014
Scientific Name
Common Name Species Type PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
river birch Tree
PnoLS P -all T
5
PnoLS
P -all T
6
Betula nigra
river birch Tree
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
6
6
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
11 11 11
6
6
6
3
3
3
2
2
2
Cornusamomum
silkydogwood Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
Cornusamomum
silkydogwood Shrub
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
4
4
4
Crataegus aestivalis
may hawthorn Shrub Tree
Crataegus aestival is
may hawthorn Shrub Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Diospyrosvirginiana
common persimmon Tree
Diospyrosvirginiana
common persimmon Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
Fraxinuspennsylvanica
green ash Tree
2
2
2
17
17
17
4
41
41
4
41
41
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash Tree
11
11
S
5
5
1
31
3
31
71
7
7
4
4
77
1
1
1
1
7
7
7
1
11
11
2
2
2
Liquidambarstyraciflua
sweetgum Tree
2
4
I
Liriodendron tulipifera
1
2
2
1
1
1
Liriodendrontulipifera
tuliptree Tree
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
9
9
46
1
1
1
1
1
1
Nyssa
tupelo Tree
1
1
1
Nyssa aquatica
watertupelo Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
Nyssa aquatica
watertupelo Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
5
5
5
33
33
33
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
7
7
7
1
1
1
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum Tree
5
5
5
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
7
7
7
1
1
1
6
6
6
1
1
1
40
Pinus taeda
loblollypine Tree
5
45
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
1 1
1
7
7
7
5
5
5
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore Tree
2
2
2
40
40
40
4
4
4
6
6
6
2
2
2
1
1
1
4 4 4
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus
oak Tree
5
16
16
16
49
49
49
Quercus falcata
southern red oak Tree
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
2
5
5
3
3
3
Quercus falcata
southern red oak Tree
12
12
18
18
18
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak Tree
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
7
7
7
1
1
1
69
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak Tree
74
74
74
4
4
4
7
7
7
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
11 11 11
1
1
1
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
13
13
13
Quercus nigra
wateroak Tree
13
Quercus phellos
willow oak Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
6
6
6
1
1
1
7
7
7
8
8
8
13
13
1
1
1
1
18
18
18
107
107
107
114
114
Quercus phellos
willow oak Tree
2
2
2
10
10
10
3
3
3
1
1
1
10
10
10
8
8
8
2 2 2
2
2
2
7
7
3
3
3
7
7
7
23
23
23
1
1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak Tree
11
34
34
34
35
35
35
Stem count
19
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress Tree
26
26
26
21
21
23
14
14
14
101
101
10
71
71
7
11
11
1
31
71
1
241
24
22
22
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
12
12
12
1
Stem count
25
25
25
20
20
20
24
24
24
29
29
29
32
32
32
27
27
27
28 28 28
22
22
22
14
14
14
18
18
18
16
16
16
19
19
21
19
19
19
18
18
18
size (ares)
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.02
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
1
5
5
1
3
3
size (ACRES)
Species count
6
0.02
6
6
5
0.02
5
5
6
0.02
6
6
7
0.02
7
7
9
0.02
9
9
9
0.02
9
9
0.02
4 4 4
10
0.02
10
10
4
0.02
4
4
7
0.02
7
7
7
0.02
7
7
6
0.02
6
7
5
0.02
5
5
4
0.02
4
4
5671
StemsperACRE
1012
10121
10121
8091
8091
8091
9711
9
8901
12551
1741
1174
12951
129SI
12951
10931
10931
10931
11331 11331 1133
8901
8901
8901
5671
S671
567
728
7281
7281
6471
6471
6471
7691
7691
8SOI
7691
7691
7691
7281
728
728
Selma Mill
Current Plot Data (MY12018)
Annual Means
05232018-01-0015
05232018-01-0016
05232018-01-0017
05232018-01-0018
05232018-01-0019
05232018-01-0020
05232018-01-0021
05232018-01-0022
05232018-01-0023
05232018-01-0024
05232018-01-0025
MY1(2018)
MYO(2018)
Scientific Name
Common Name Species Type PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
PnoLS P -all T
Betula nigra
river birch Tree
51
5
5
6
6
6
2
2
2
5 5
5
1
1
1
60
60
60
74
74
74
Cornusamomum
silkydogwood Shrub
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
4
4
4
Crataegus aestivalis
may hawthorn Shrub Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Diospyrosvirginiana
common persimmon Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
Fraxinuspennsylvanica
green ash Tree
2
2
2
17
17
17
4
41
41
4
41
41
1
1
11
S
5
5
8
8
8
4
4
4
77
77
77
79
79
79
Liquidambarstyraciflua
sweetgum Tree
2
4
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree Tree
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
18
18
20
46
46
46
Nyssa
tupelo Tree
1
1
1
Nyssa aquatica
watertupelo Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
33
33
33
44
44
44
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
34
34
34
47
47
47
Pinus taeda
loblollypine Tree
40
5
45
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
1 1
1
7
7
7
5
5
5
40
40
40
56
56
56
Quercus
oak Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
16
16
16
49
49
49
Quercus falcata
southern red oak Tree
3
3
3
2
2
2
5
5
5
2
2
2
12
12
12
18
18
18
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak Tree
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
7
7
7
1
1
1
69
69
69
74
74
74
Quercus nigra
wateroak Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
1 1
1
3
3
3
11
11
11
13
13
13
Quercus phellos
willow oak Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
6
6
6
1
1
1
7
7
7
8
8
8
13
13
13
1
1
1
18
18
18
107
107
107
114
114
114
Quercus rubra
northern red oak Tree
16
16
16
7
7
7
23
23
23
23
23
23
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress ITree
34
34
34
35
35
35
Stem count
19
19
19
26
26
26
21
21
23
14
14
14
11
11
11
7 7
7
22
22
22
311
31
71
24
241
24
22
22
29
331
331
33
5411
5411
592
679
679
679
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25
25
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.62
0.62
Species count
7
7
7
5
5
5
3
3
4
5
5
5
7
7
7
3 3
3
7
7
7
6
6
7
6
6
6
5
5
7
7
7
7
17
17
19
16
16
16
Stems per ACRE
7691
7691
7691
10521
10521
10521
8501
8501
9311
5671
5671
5671
4451
4451
4451
2831 2831
2831
8901
8901
8901
12551
12551
28731
9711
9711
9711
8901
8901
11741
13351
13351
1335
8761
8761
958
10991
10991 1099

Appendix D
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data

Upstream
Downstream
167
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 1 - Shallow
c
.�
a)
166
165
164
163
162
161
_ _ _ _ _
_ _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
LU
160
159
158
157
0
10
Baseline
20
MY1
30 40 50
Distance (ft)
— — •Approx.Bankfull RoodproneArea
Cross Section 1 (Shallow)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
161.8
161.8
Bankfull Width ft
13.2
13.1
Floodprone Width ft
>50.2
>50.2
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.0
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.8
1.8
Low Bank Height ft
1.8
1.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (fl)
13.1
13.1
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
13.3
13.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
>3.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 2 - Pool
166
165
164
163
162
161
Cross Section 2 Pool
Bas ed on fixed bas elinecrosssectionalarea
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
161.7
161.5
Bankfull Width (ft)
.6
160
12.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.1
LU
159
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.5
1.7
158
2.9
3.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
157
3.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
21.5
21.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.5
7.5
156
0 10 20 30 40 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline —MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 2 Pool
Bas ed on fixed bas elinecrosssectionalarea
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
161.7
161.5
Bankfull Width (ft)
14.3
12.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.1
>50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.5
1.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.9
3.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.9
3.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
21.5
21.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.5
7.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 3 - Shallow
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
165
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
160.1
160.2
Bankfull Width (ft)
12.1
164
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
>50.0
163
0.9
0.6
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
162
1.4
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
160.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
10.6
10.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
161
27.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>4.1
>2.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
0.9
c
160
159
LU
158
157
156
155
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — •Approx.Bankfull FloodproneArea
Cross Section 3 Shallow
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
160.1
160.2
Bankfull Width (ft)
12.1
17.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
>50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
0.6
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
1.4
1.4
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
160.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
10.6
10.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
13.8
27.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>4.1
>2.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
0.9

Upstream
Downstream
164
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 4 - Pool
163
162
v
c
161
160
159
w
158
157
156
155
154
0
5 10 15 20
Baseline
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
—MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 4 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
160.0
160.1
BankfUll Width (ft)
13.2
20.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
>49.8
>49.9
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.4
0.9
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.8
2.9
LowBank Height (ft)
2.8
2.8
Bankfull CrossSectional Area (ft2)
18.2
18.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.6
24.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
BankfUll Bank Height Ratio
N/A
I N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 5 - Pool
163
Cross Section 5 Pool
Basedon fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
162
158.8
158.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
161
11.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
>50.3
160
1.3
1.3
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
2.1
2.0
159
2.1
2.2
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
15.3
15.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.4
8.9
c
0 158
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A
157
a�
W
156
155
154
153
0 10 20 30 40 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 5 Pool
Basedon fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
158.8
158.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
12.0
11.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
>50.3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.3
1.3
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
2.1
2.0
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.1
2.2
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
15.3
15.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.4
8.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A

Sal.
i
Upstream
Downstream
163
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 6 - Shallow
162
161
—
160
159
158
-"S
—
--
-- —
--
-- --
--
--
157
LU
156
155
154
153
0 5 10 15
20
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline
MY1
— — -Approx. Bankfull Floodpron .Are.
Cross Section 6 Shallow
Basedon fixedbaseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY 7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
158.7
158.8
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.4
12.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.2
>50.1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.6
1.7
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.6
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
12.8
12.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.0
12.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
>3.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratiol
1.0
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
163
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 7 - Shallow
162
161
160
x 159
°
158
157
W
156
155
154
153
0
5 10 15
20
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline
MY1
— —-Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Cross Section 7 (Shallow)
Basedon fixedbaseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
158.2
158.3
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.2
13.6
Flood rove Width (ft)
>52.8
>52.9
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.8
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.4
1.4
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
1.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftz)
10.5
10.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
16.5
17.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio I
>4.0
>3.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratiol
1.0
1 1.0

Upstream
Downstream
163
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 8- Pool
162
161
160
159
c
158
157
LU
156
155
154
153
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 8 Pool
Basedon fixedbaseline bankfull elevation
Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
158.1 158.2
Bankfull Width (ft)
11.3 12.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
>48.1 >48.2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.5
1.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.5
2.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.5
3.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
16.5 16.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
7.7
9.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A N/A

Upstream
Downstream
162
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 9 - Shallow
161
160
159
158
_
°
157
156
W
155
154
153
152
0
5 10 15
20
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline
MY1
— — -Approx. Bankfull F oodprone Area
Cross Section 9 Shallow
Basedon fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
157.2
157.3
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.9
18.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.1
>50.1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
0.9
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.0
1.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.0
1.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
16.3
16.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.8
22.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.6
>2.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratiol1.0
1 1.0

Upstream
Downstream
162
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 10 - Pool
161
160
159
158
c
°
157
156
W
155
154
153
152
0 5 10 15 20 25
Baseline
30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Distance (ft)
MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 10 Pool
Bas ed on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
156.7
156.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.4
13.4
Flood rove Width (ft)
>50.6
>55.2
BankfullMean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.4
2.5
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.4
2.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (f42)
16.7
16.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.8
10.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A

S'•
'Aw 161�
KIILIL Rk
Upstream
Downstream
160
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 11 - Pool
159
—
158
157
x
c
156
155
— — —
W
154
153
152
151
150
0
5 10 15 20
Baseline
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 11 (Pool)
Bas ed on fixed bas eline cros s s ectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
155.6
155.6
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.0
14.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.1
>50.1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.1
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
2.2
2.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.2
2.4
Bankfull Cro s s Sectional Area (ft2)
15.7
15.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.8
12.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
I N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 12 - Shallow
161
160
159
Cross Section 12 Shallow
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) use
155.9
155.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.3
13.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
158
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.1
BankfullMaxDepth (ft)
x 157
° 156
155
2.1
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.1
2.1
LU
154
15.6
15.6
BankfuH Width/Depth Ratio
11.4
12.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.7
>3.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1
153
152
1.0
151
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
r Baseline MY1 — — •Approx.Bankfull RoodproneArea
Cross Section 12 Shallow
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) use
155.9
155.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.3
13.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
>50.1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.1
BankfullMaxDepth (ft)
2.1
2.1
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.1
2.1
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
15.6
15.6
BankfuH Width/Depth Ratio
11.4
12.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.7
>3.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1
1.0
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
160
Selma Mill Reach A Cross Section 13 - Pool
159
158
157
156
_
°
155
154
lip
W
153
77
152
151
150
0 5 10 15 20
Baseline
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 13 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY—
Record elevation (datum) used
155.4
155.5
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.4
14.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50
>50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.5
1.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.7
2.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.7
2.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
19.7
19.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.2
9.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio I
N/A
N/A
BankfullBank Height Ratio I
N/A
N/A

Upstream
AK
` •,1 .. -
Downstream
174
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 14 - Pool
173
172
-
171
0010
x
°
170
169
LU
168
167
166
165
164
0
5 10 15 20
Baseline
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
—MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 14 Pool
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
167.9
167.9
BankfuH Width (ft)
12.2
17.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
>42.7
>43.4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.1
0.7
BankfullMax Depth (ft)
2.0
1.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.0
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
13.0
13.0
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.4
23.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
I N/A

Upstream
Downstream
173
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 15 - Shallow
172
171
170
c
169
168
167
eEL
W
166
165
164
163
0
5 10 15
20
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline
MY1
— —-Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Cross Section 15 (Shallow)
Basedon fixedbaseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
167.8
167.8
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.5
15.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.4
>50.4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.5
Bankfull Max Depth (8)
1.6
1.4
LOW Bank Height (ft)
1.6
1.4
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
8.6
8.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
12.9
29.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio I
>4.8
>3.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1
1.0
1 1.0

Upstream
Downstream
172
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 16 - Shallow
171
—
170
169
c
168
167
166
W
165
164
163
162
0
5 10 15
20
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline
MY1
— —-Approx. Bankfull FloodproneArea
Cross Section 16 1 Shallow
Bas ed on fixed bas elinebankfullelevation
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
166.9
167.1
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.0
13.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
>49.8
>50.1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.6
BankfullMaxDe th(ft)
1.4
1.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
1.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
8.2
8.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
12.3
22.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio I
>5.0
>3.7
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1 0.9

Upstream
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 17 - Pool
171
Cross Section 17(Pool)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Recordelevution (datum) used
170
166.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.7
13.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>49.7
>50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.0
169
2.2
2.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.2
1.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
12.6
12.6
Bankftrll Width/Depth Ratio
9.0
13.7
Bankfull Fntrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio I
N/A
I N/A
168
167
c
166
165
LU
164
163
162
161
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 17(Pool)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Recordelevution (datum) used
166.7
166.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.7
13.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>49.7
>50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.0
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
2.2
2.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.2
1.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
12.6
12.6
Bankftrll Width/Depth Ratio
9.0
13.7
Bankfull Fntrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio I
N/A
I N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 18 - Shallow
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
170
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
164.9
165.1
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.6
169
Floodprone Width (ft)
>56
>56.4
168
0.9
0.8
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
167
1.7
LOW Bank Height (ft)
1.5
1.7
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
9.4
9.4
166
11.8
16.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.3
>4.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
c
165
164
Lu
163
162
161
160
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — •Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.
Cross Section 18 Shallow
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
164.9
165.1
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.6
12.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
>56
>56.4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
0.8
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
1.5
1.7
LOW Bank Height (ft)
1.5
1.7
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
9.4
9.4
Bankfull W idth/Depth Ratio
11.8
16.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.3
>4.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0

Upstream
ti
T rim-
�.
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 19 - Pool
169
168
167
166
x 165
° 164
LU
163
162
161
160
159
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Distance (ft)
Baseline —MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 19 Pool
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
164.9
164.8
Bankfull Width (ft)
11.1
9.8
Floodprone Width (ft)
>61.1
>61.1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.6
3.4
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.6
3.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
13.5
13.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.1
7.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 20 - Pool
168
167
Cross Section 20 (Pool)
Bas ed on fixed has elinecrosssectionalarea
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY[
Record elevation (datum) used
163.7
166
Bankfull Width (ft)
7.4
8.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.1
>50.1
165
0.9
0.8
BankfullMaxDepth (ft)
1.5
1.7
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.5
1.6
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
6.7
6.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
8.2
x 164
° 163
_ _ _ _ _ _
_ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
_ _
_ _
N/A
162
W
161
160
159
158
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 20 (Pool)
Bas ed on fixed has elinecrosssectionalarea
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY[
Record elevation (datum) used
163.7
163.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
7.4
8.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.1
>50.1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
0.8
BankfullMaxDepth (ft)
1.5
1.7
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.5
1.6
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
6.7
6.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
8.2
9.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
169
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 21 - Shallow
168
167
166
165
c
°
164
163
W
162
161
160
159
0 5 10 15
Baseline
20
MY1
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
— —-App..Bankfull FloodproneAre.
Cross Section 21 Shallow
Based on fixedbaseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
163.9
163.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.1
11.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.3
>50.2
BankfullMean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.6
Bankfull MaxDe th (ft)
1.0
1.0
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.0
0.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
6.6
6.6
Bankfull W idth/Depth Ratio
15.4
18.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.0
>4.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
0.8

Upstream
Downstream
168
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 22 - Shallow
167
166
165
164
c
°
163
162
w
161
160
159
158
0 5 10 15
Baseline
20
MY1
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
— —-App..Bankfull FloodproneAre.
Cross Section 22 1 Shallow
Basedon fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
162.6
162.7
BankfullWidth (ft)
11.7
14.6
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.4
>50.2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.3
1.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
9.7
9.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.1
22.1
Bankfull Fntrenchment Ratio
>4.3
>3.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratiol
1.0
0.9

Upstream
Downstream
165
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 23 - Pool
x
c
°
164
163
162
W
161
160
159
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 23 Pool
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
162.0 162.1
Bankfull Width (ft)
11.0 12.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
>48 >50.3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.1
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.0
2.4
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.0
2.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
12.5 12.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.8
12.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A I N/A

Upstream
- U4
Downstream
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 24 - Pool
164
163
162
Cross Section 24 Pool
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
158.4
161
Bankfull Width (ft)
11.3
12.8
Floodprone Width (ft)
160
>44.4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
0.8
c
°
1.7
1.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
159
aa) 158
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
10.7
10.7
BankfullWidth/Depth Ratio
W
157
15.4
Bankftxll Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
156
N/A
N/A
155
154
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 24 Pool
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY]
Record elevation (datum) used
158.4
158.5
Bankfull Width (ft)
11.3
12.8
Floodprone Width (ft)
>44.4
>44.4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
0.8
BankfullMax Depth (ft)
1.7
1.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
10.7
10.7
BankfullWidth/Depth Ratio
11.8
15.4
Bankftxll Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A

Upstream
Downstream
163
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 25 - Shallow
Based on fixed baseline cross secjDepth
162
161
160
MYl MY2 MY3 MYS MY7 MY+
Record elevatio
158.4
158.4
Ban
10.3
10.3
Floodpr)
>50
>50.1
_
°
159
0.7
BankfullMax Depth (8)
1.3
1.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.3
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
7.0
7.0
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
15.1
158
157
Bankfull Fntrenchment Ratio
>4.8
>4.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
W
156
155
154
153
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — —-Approx.Bankfull FloodproneArea
Cross Section 25 Shallow
Based on fixed baseline cross secjDepth
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MYS MY7 MY+
Record elevatio
158.4
158.4
Ban
10.3
10.3
Floodpr)
>50
>50.1
BankfullM
0.7
0.7
BankfullMax Depth (8)
1.3
1.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.3
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
7.0
7.0
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
15.1
15.3
Bankfull Fntrenchment Ratio
>4.8
>4.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
163
Selma Mill Reach B Cross Section 26 - Shallow
162
161
160
c
°
159
158
157
__
__ _ _
_ __ __
__ __
W
156
155
154
153
0
5 10 15
Baseline
20
MY1
25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
— —-Approx.Bankfull FloodproneArea
Cross Section 26 (Shallow)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base
MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
157.8
157.8
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.2
10.0
Floodpmne Width (ft)
>50.3
>50.3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.7
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
1.3
1.3
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
7.1
7.1
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.9
14.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>5.5
>5.0
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0

Upstream
Downstream
173
Selma Mill Reach C Cross Section 27 - Run (HWV)
172
171
170
x 169
° 168
167
LU
166
7-7
165
164
163
0 5 10 15 20
Baseline
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Distance (ft)
—MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 27 (HNW)
Based on fixedbaseline cross sectional area
Base
I MY] MY2 I MY3 I MYS I MY 7 I MY+
Record elevation (datum) use
(Headwater Valley Restoration)
No Morphological Parameters were determined for HW V Reach C
Bankfull Width (ft)
Flood rove Width (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)
Low Bank Height (ft)
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft2)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio

I Incfroam
rinwncfroam
Selma Mill Reach C Cross Section 28 - Run (HWV)
c
LU
169
168
167
166
165
164
163
162
—
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
161
160
159
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Distance (ft)
Baseline MY1 — — -Approx. Bankfull
Cross Section 28 (HWV)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area
Base MYl MY2 I MY3 I MYS I MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) use
(Headwater Valley Restoration)
No Morphological Parameters were determined for HWV Reach C
Bankfull Width (ft)
Floodprone Width (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Low Bank Height (ft)
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio

Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
* - Reach was split into 2 segments for the purpose of pre-existing data collection.
1 - The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2 - For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach (added hankfult verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull Floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 - Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Selma Mill Mitigation Site -Reach A: 3,324 feet
Parameter Gauge Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition*
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Shallow Only
LL UL Eq.
Min
Mean Med Max SD
n
Min
Mean Med Max SD
n Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
--- --- ---
267.0
--- 425.0 583.0 ---
2
---
--- 10.9 --- ---
--- ---
13.0
---
12.1
13.2
13.3 13.9
0.6
6
Floodprone Width ft
32.0
--- 36.0 40.0 ---
2
---
--- 50.0 --- ---
--- ---
>50
---
50.0
50.6
50.2 52.8
1.1
6
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
--- --- ---
1.6
--- 2.0 2.4 ---
2
---
--- 1.0 --- ---
--- ---
1.3
---
0.8
1.0
1.0 1.2
0.2
6
113ankfull Max Depth ft
2.5
--- 3.0 3.5 ---
2
---
--- 1.7 --- ---
--- ---
1.7
---
1.4
1.7
1.7 2.1
0.3
6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1
-- --- --
20.2
1 --- 1 28.5 1 36.8 1 ---
1 2
--
--- 1 11.0 --- I --- I
--- ---
1 16.5
---
1 10.5
13.2
1 13.0 16.3
2.4
6
Width/Depth Ratio
6.4
--- 7.0 7.6 ---
2
---
--- 11.9 --- ---
--- ---
10.2
---
11.4
13.5
13.6 16.5
1.8
6
Entrenchment Ratio
2.1
--- -- >2.2
2
---
>2.2
>2.2
3.6
3.8
3.8 4.1
0.2
6
B
'ank Height Rati
---
--- --- --- ---
--
---
-- --- --
--
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
0.0
6
Profile
Shallow Length (ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
4
--- 11.5 19.9 ---
--- 13
30.5
48
22.2
15.3 71.1
16.1
43
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
---
--- --- --- ---
--- ---
---
---
0.00759 0.00652 0.05285 0.01491
43
Pool Length (ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
6.9
--- 17.1 21.6 ---
--- 13
21
29
a27651
26.8
26.7 55.8
11.3
43
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
---
--- --- --- ---
--- ---
---
---
2.6
2.6 4.0
0.4
43
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
40.3
--- 63.1 109.8 ---
--- 48
103.5
159
80.6
60.1 170.2
37.8
42
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
41.2
--- 42.3 43.5 ---
--- 46
52
58
46
---
52 58
---
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
13.1
--- 18.4 24.6 ---
--- 27
36.5
46
27
---
36.5 46
---
---
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
---
--- --- --- ---
--- ---
---
---
---
---
---
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
--- --- --- ---
---
49.4
--- 50.7 64.9 ---
--- 89
120.5
152
89
---
120.5 152
---
---
Meander Width Ratio
---
--- --- --- ---
---
3.8
3.9 4 ---
--- 3.5
4
4.5
3.5
---
4 4.5
---
---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/f2
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
G5c/135 / B5
E5
E5
E5
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
--- ---
---
27
Valley length (ft)
1137/1545
285
2674
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1146/1584
375
3342
3419
Sinuosity (ft)
1.01 /1.03
1.32
1.25
1.25
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
---
0.0023
---
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.0004 / 0.0021
0.0025
0.002
0.0022
3Bankfull Floodplain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Bank
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
- -
-
Biological or Other -A
---
- -
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
* - Reach was split into 2 segments for the purpose of pre-existing data collection.
1 - The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2 - For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach (added hankfult verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull Floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 - Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
** = Reach was split into 3 segments for the purpose of pre-existing data collection.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2= For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach (added hankfult verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull Floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Selma Mill Mitigation Site -Reach B: 2,572 feet
Parameter Gauge Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition-
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Shallow Only
LL UL Eq.
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean Med Max SD
n Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
--- --- ---
7.3
8.6
9.2 9.4
1.2
3
---
--- 10.9 --- ---
--- ---
10.0
---
9.2
10.3
10.3
11.7
0.8
7.0
Floodprone Width ft
8.0
11.7
13.2 14.0
3.3
3
---
--- 50.0 --- ---
--- ---
>50
---
49.8
51.0
50.3
56.0
2.2
7.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
--- --- ---
0.9
1.1
1.2 1.2
0.2
3
---
--- 1.0 --- ---
--- ---
0.9
---
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.1
7.0
113ankfull Max Depth ft
1.1
1.5
1.7 1.8
0.4
3
---
--- 1.7 --- ---
--- ---
1.3
---
1.0
1.3
1.3
1.6
0.2
7.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1
-- --- --
8.7
1 9.6
1 8.7 1 11.4 1
1.6
1 3
11.0
9.4
6.6
8.1
1 8.2
9.7
1.2
7.0
Width/Depth Ratio
6.2
8.0
9.9
1.9
3
11.9
10.7
11.8
13.4
12.9
15.4
1.5
7.0
Entrenchment Ratio
1.1
1.3
d.4-1.5
0.2
3
>2.2 --- ---
--- ---
>2.2
---
4.3
5.0
5.0
5.5
0.4
7.0
'Bank Hei ht Rati
---
---
--
---
--
- -
-- --- --- ---
--- ---
--
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
7.0
Profile
Shallow Length (ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
4
--- 11.5 19.9 ---
--- 8
18.5
29
14.7
41.1
9.9
50
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
---
--- --- --- ---
--- ---
---
---
0.00909 0.00443 0.04809 0.01066
50
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
6.9
--- 17.1 21.6 ---
--- 5
14.5
24
E4.O15.8
17.5
15.7
35.6
6.3
43
Pool Max depth ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
---
--- --- --- ---
--- ---
---
---
1.7
1.8
2.8
0.7
40
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
40.3
--- 63.1 109.8 ---
--- 43
91
139
60.7
51.8
119.1
26.7
42
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
41.2
--- 42.3 43.5 ---
--- 26
36.5
47
26
---
36.5
47
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
13.1
--- 18.4 24.6 ---
--- 19
27.5
36
19
---
27.5
36
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
---
--- --- --- ---
--- ---
---
---
---
---
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
---
--- ---
---
---
49.4
--- 50.7 64.9 ---
--- 70
90.5
111
70
---
90.5
111
---
---
Meander Width Ratio
---
---
--- ---
---
---
3.8
3.9 4 ---
--- 2.6
3.7
4.7
2.6
---
3.65
4.7
---
---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/f2
---
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
G5
E5
E5
E5
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
--- ---
---
15
Valley length (ft)
1392 / 352 / 394
285
2204
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1414 / 382 / 405
375
2619
2695
Sinuosity (ft)
1.02 / 1.09 / 1.03
1.32
1.19
1.19
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
---
0.0023
---
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.0036 / 0.0030 / 0.003
0.0025
0.003
0.0045
3Bankfull Floodplain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Bank
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
---
...
Biological or Other
---I
---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
** = Reach was split into 3 segments for the purpose of pre-existing data collection.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2= For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach (added hankfult verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull Floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

* Annual measurements are based on fixed baseline cross sectional area.
Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Selma Mill - Reach A 3,324 feet
Cross Section 1 (Shallow)
Cross Section 2 (Pool)
Cross Section 3 (Shallow)
Cross Section 4 (Pool)
Cross Section 5 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
1160.0
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
1158.8
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
161.8
161.8
161.7
161.5
160.1
160.2
160.1
158.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.2
13.1
14.3
12.7
12.1
17.1
13.2
20.9
12.0
11.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.2
>50.2
>50.1
>50.0
>50
>50.0
>49.8
>49.9
>50
>50.3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.7
0.9
0.6
1.4
0.9
1.3
1.3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.8
1.8
2.9
3.2
1.4
1.4
2.8
2.9
2.1
2.0
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.8
1.8
2.9
3.4
1.4
160.1
2.8
2.8
2.1
2.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft)
13.1
13.1
21.5
21.5
10.6
10.6
18.2
18.2
15.3
15.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
13.3
13.2
9.5
7.5
13.8
27.7
9.6
24.0
9.4
8.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
>3.8
N/A
N/A
>4.1
>2.9
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio1.0
1.0
N/A
N/A
1.0
0.9
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
d50 (mm)
Cross Section 6 (Shallow)
Cross Section 7 (Shallow)
Cross Section 8 (Pool)
Cross Section 9 (Shallow)
Cross Section 10 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
158.7
158.8
158.2
158.3
158.1
158.2
157.2
157.3
156.7
156.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.4
12.7
13.2
13.6
11.3
12.2
13.9
18.9
13.4
13.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
>50.2
>50.1
>52.8
>52.9
>48.1
>48.2
>50.1
>50.1
>50.6
>55.2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
1.5
1.4
1.2
0.9
1.2
1.2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.4
2.5
2.9
2.0
1.9
2.4
2.5
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.4
2.5
3.0
2.0
1.8
2.4
2.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
12.8
12.8
10.5
10.5
16.5
16.5
16.3
16.3
16.7
16.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.0
12.6
16.5
17.6
7.7
9.0
11.8
22.0
10.8
10.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.8
>3.9
>4.0
>3.9
N/A
N/A
>3.6
>2.6
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.0
N/A
N/A
d50 mm
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
Record elevation (datum) used
Bankfull Width ft
Floodprone Width ft
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
Bankfull Max Depth ft
Low Bank Height ft
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
d50 mm
Base
155.6
13.0
>50.1
1.2
2.2
2.2
15.7
10.8
N/A
N/A
Cross Section 11 (Pool)
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
155.6
14.2
>50.1
1.1
2.2
2.4
15.7
12.8
N/A
N/A
MY+ Base
155.9
13.3
>50
1.2
2.1
2.1
15.6
11.4
>3.7
1.0
Cross Section 12 (Shallow)
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
155.9
13.9
>50.1
1.1
2.1
2.1
15.6
12.4
>3.6
1.0
MY+ Base
155.4
13.4
>50
1.5
2.7
2.7
19.7
9.2
N/A
N/A
Cross Section 13 (Pool)
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
155.5
14.0
>50.0
1.4
2.8
2.8
19.7
9.9
N/A
N/A
MY+
* Annual measurements are based on fixed baseline cross sectional area.

Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
Cross Section 24 (Pool)
Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Selma Mill - Reach B (2,572 feet) Reach C (875 Feet)
Cross Section 26 (Shallow) Cross Section 27 (HWV) Cross Section 28 (HWV)
Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
Cross Section 14 (Pool)
MY+ Base
Cross Section 15 (Shallow) Cross Section 16 (Shallow)
MY1
Cross Section 17 (Pool)
MY3
Cross Section18 (Shallow)
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
167.9
167.9
167.8
167.8 166.9 167.1
166.7
166.9
164.9
165.1
Bankfull Width (ft)
12.2
17.5
10.5
15.9 10.0 13.4
10.7
13.1
10.6
12.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
>42.7
>43.4
>50.4
>50.4 >49.8 >50.1
>49.7
>50.0
>56
>56.4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.1
0.7
0.8
0.5 0.8 0.6
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.8
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.0
1.9
1.6
1.4 1.4 1.2
2.2
2.2
1.5
1.7
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.0
1.7
1.6
1.4 1.4 1.1
2.2
1.9
1.5
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
13.0
13.0
8.6
8.6 8.2 8.2
12.6
12.6
9.4
9.4
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.4
23.7
12.9
29.4 12.3 22.0
9.0
13.7
11.8
16.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A 1 1
>4.8
>3.2 1 1 >5.0 >3.7
N/A
N/A
>5.3
>4.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.0 1.0 0.9
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.0
d50 (mm)
Cross Section 19 (Pool)
Cross Section 20 (Pool) Cross Section 21 (Shallow)
Cross Section 22 (Shallow)
Cross Section 23 (Pool)
Base
MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7 MY+ Base MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7 MY+
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
Bankfull Max
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft`)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Heioht Ratio
Annual measurements are based on fixed baseline cross sectional area.
am
10.7 1 10.7
7.0 1 7.0
(I leadwater Valley Restoration) (Headwater Valley Restoration)
No Morphological Parameters were determined for HWV I No Morphological Parameters were determined for HWV
Reach C Reach C
Cross Section 24 (Pool)
Cross Section 25 (Shallow)
Cross Section 26 (Shallow) Cross Section 27 (HWV) Cross Section 28 (HWV)
Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
Bankfull Width (ft)
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+ Base
MY1
MY2
•••• • •
®=_____=M_____MM_____mm_____mm_____
MY7
MY+
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
DepthBankfull Mean
BankfullMaxDepth(ft)M=MMMMMMMMMMMM=MMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Record elevation (datum) used
158.4
158.5
158.4
1
158.4
157.8
157.8
Bankfull Width ft
11.3
12.8
• :. •
®®_____®=_____MM_____®®_____m®_____
9.2
10.0
Floodorone Width (ft)
>44.4
>44.4
>50
>50.1
>50.3
>50.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
BankfullWidth/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
Bankfull Max
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft`)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Heioht Ratio
Annual measurements are based on fixed baseline cross sectional area.
am
10.7 1 10.7
7.0 1 7.0
(I leadwater Valley Restoration) (Headwater Valley Restoration)
No Morphological Parameters were determined for HWV I No Morphological Parameters were determined for HWV
Reach C Reach C
Cross Section 24 (Pool)
Cross Section 25 (Shallow)
Cross Section 26 (Shallow) Cross Section 27 (HWV) Cross Section 28 (HWV)
Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
MY+ Base
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+ Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Based on fixed baseline cross sectional area*
Record elevation (datum) used
158.4
158.5
158.4
1
158.4
157.8
157.8
Bankfull Width ft
11.3
12.8
10.3
10.3
9.2
10.0
Floodorone Width (ft)
>44.4
>44.4
>50
>50.1
>50.3
>50.3
Bankfull Max
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft`)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Heioht Ratio
Annual measurements are based on fixed baseline cross sectional area.
am
10.7 1 10.7
7.0 1 7.0
(I leadwater Valley Restoration) (Headwater Valley Restoration)
No Morphological Parameters were determined for HWV I No Morphological Parameters were determined for HWV
Reach C Reach C

Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3
Table 10. Stream Reach Data Summary
Selma Mill - Reach feet)Dimension
and Substrate . only®
-.
B©
-.
®� -. ©Min I Mean I Med I Max EU©Min I Mean I Med ®� -.SIN
Bankfull Width (ft)
Floodprone Width (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
IBankfull Max Depth
Low Bank Height
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
I Bank Height Rati#
Shallow Length (ft)MMMM
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
Pool Length (ft)
Pool Max depth (ft)
Pool Spacing (ft)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
of Curvature (ft)
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Meander Width Ratio
AdditionalRadius
Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
Channel Thalweg length
(ft)
Water Surface SlopeSinuosity
- .p
% of Reach with Eroding Bark�,-
Channel StabilityHabitat-
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3
Table 10. Stream Reach Data Summary
Selma Mill - Reach B (2,572 feet)
Dimension and Substrate -Shallow only
Bankfull Width (ft)
Floodprone Width (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Low Bank Height (ft),
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (fe)
Entrenchment
'Bank Height
Shallow Length (ft)
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
Pool Length (ft)
Pool Max depth (Ft)
Spacing (ft)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
Radius of Curvature (ft)
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft),
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Meander Width Ratio
AdditionalPool
Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
ThalwegChannel
•.
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface ..
Channel ..-
��-
of Reach Eroding :. -
Channel Stability or Habitat- .
Biological Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

Table 11. 2018 Rainfall Summary
Month
Average
Normal Limits
Selma Station
Precipitation
30 70
Percent Percent
January
4.24
3.18
4.95
3.02
February
3.66
2.46
4.37
0.52
March
4.57
3.38
5.36
0.31
April
3.24
1.93
3.93
4.24
May
4.16
2.83
4.97
3.57
June
4.14
2.63
5.00
2.30
July
5.14
3.37
6.17
4.99
August
4.58
2.97
5.51
5.43
September
4.54
2.15
5.54
7.96
October
3.16
1.75
3.89
1.71
November
2.95
1.81
3.57
3.38
December
3.05
1.96
3.67
0.78
Total
47.43
30.42
56.93
38.21
Table 12. Documentation of Significant Flow Events
Year
Number of
Bankfull Dents
Maximum Bankfull Height (ft)
FstimatedDate of Highest Event
Crest Gauge 1 (Reach A)
MYl 2018
1 12
0.90
9/17/2018
Crest Gauge 2 (Reach B)
MYl 2018 3 0.35
11/13/2018
Year Number of Flow Days
Number of Flow Events
Crest Gauge 3 (Reach C - Headwater Valley Restoration)
MY] 2018 F 238
1

r
r
!
46

MY1 2018 Selma Mill Crest Gauge 3 (HWV Reach C
12
10.0
9.0
10
8.0
8
7.0
.-.
C
N
r6.0
Q
6
JI LdC
V
d
5.0
..
4
4.0
Q
2
3.0
d
2.0
0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.0
-2
" 0.0
A M J J A S O N
Months
l� Rainfall CG3