20051354 Ver 1_Year 4 Monitoring Report_2018_20181212

Monitoring Report Year 4
Watts Site
DMS Project No. 413
NCDENR Contract # 6113
USACE Action ID SAW -2005-11813
NCDWR Project # 05-1354v2
State Construction Project No. 09-07804-01 A-01-1
Prepared for the
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones St.
Raleigh, NC 27603
Environmental
Quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Submission Date: December 2018
Data Collection Date: October 2018 and November 2018
NOT AN INSTRUMENT PROJECT

Mitigation Services
E N V I R O N M E N TA L Q UA L I TY
December 12, 2018
Heather Smith
Ecological Engineering
Subject: DMS Comments on the Draft MY4 Report
Watts, Project ID #413 (Contract #6113) and
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL REGAN
Secretary
Heather,
After receiving the draft Mitigation Plan on November 29, 2018, DMS conducted its initial review.
Please make the following updates prior to submitting the final monitoring report.
• Page 2, removed "but are not related to project success" in the final paragraph. The Mitigation
Plan does indicate that these are a monitoring requirement.
o Removed
• Page 2 Monitoring Results, discussion of groundwater gauges, can you add the following
statement after the sentence `It is expected the site will continue to recharge groundwater. The
gauges showing lower hydrology may be attributable to site micro -topography installed during
construction grading. Additionally, staff observed several areas outside the creditable wetlands
that indicate wetland hydrology, vegetation, and function."
o The following was inserted "The gauges showing lower hydrology may be attributable to
site micro -topography installed during construction grading. Additionally, staff
observed several areas outside the creditable wetlands, as shown in the November 2012
Mitigation Plan, which indicate wetland hydrology, vegetation, and soils."
• Page 2, Monitoring results, vegetation plots. Please indicate that the two plots that did not
achieve success are in the streamside area where a full re -plant is planned for this dormant
season. Remove comment about veg plot 3 achieving success with volunteers because this is
mostly loblolly and baccaris that makes that possible.
o Updated text "Vegetation plots 3 and 7 (VP3 and VP7) did not meet the success criteria.
These plots are located in the streamside area and a full re -plant is scheduled for the
2018-2019 dormant season."
• Update success reference to 260 at MY5, because there is nothing in the MP about 288 at MY4.
o Updated text "Six of the CVS vegetation plots met success criteria for MY5 of 260
planted stems/acre."
• Page 2, Monitoring results, at the end of the last paragraph here where you reference a replant,
please include a reference to the map provided by DMS and insert this as a figure in the report
(Streamside and Invasive Planting Plan 2010-2020).
o Updated text "A supplemental planting of 3.3 acres is scheduled for the 2018-2019
dormant season (Figure 2)."
• Although we did not require the random plots in MY4, these will be needed in MY5 to show that
2% of the planted area was monitored. That was a DMS mistake.
o No change to text but random plots will be conducted in MY5 and one of these will be in
the wetland enhancement area unless DMS directs Ecological Engineering otherwise.
• Table 1. Please provide a footnote as to why the credit is reduced to 1.5:1 ratio for this stream.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center 1217 W. Jones Street, Suite 3000 I Raleigh, NC 27609-1652
919 707 8976 T

o The following was added to the footer of Table 1, "^=1.5:1 was agreed upon via emails
in the 11/12 Mit Plan"
• Table 1. There was a 0.06 -acre area of wetland enhancement at 1.5: 1 shown in the mitigation
plan, but it is removed from the monitoring (although it's shown in the RE section of this table).
Why was it was removed?
o The wetland enhancement area is shown on the CCPV and the shapefile is on the Final
Monitoring Report CD.
• Table 2. Add invasive treatment with the dates 7/2018 and 10/2018 please.
o Dates were added.
• Table 5 Visual assessment. Your table five areas don't match the CCPV. When I looked at these
acreages in GIS and although I could not find all those shapes, it can't be more than 2 acres for
the low stem density areas. Please review GIS and correct table 5 to update.
o The acreages and number of polygons in Table 5 match the GIS file. The GIS file is on
the Final Monitoring Report CD.
• CCPV: the color coding on the gauges shows gauge 7 not meeting, and gauge 8 meeting but the
text and data shows the opposite. Update those success color -coding on the CCPV.
o The gauge coloring has been updated.
Thanks for your work,
J-,
1-}6110..0 eq
Lindsay Crocker, DMS

Prepared by:
0iECOLOGICAL
ENGINEERING
1151 SE Cary Parkway, Suite 101
Cary, NC 27518
919.557.0929
Heather Smith, LSS, Project Scientist
This assessment and report are consistent with NCDENR Division of Mitigation Services Template Version Feb. 2014
for Baseline Monitoring Document Format, Data Requirements and Content Guidance.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paqe
1.0 Project Summary................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Project History and Background................................................................................1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives....................................................................................1
1.3 Project Success Criteria............................................................................................2
1.4 Annual Monitoring Results...........................................................................................2
2.0 Methodology....................................................................................................... 3
3.0 References.......................................................................................................... 3
Appendix A. Project Information Tables
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Current Condition Plan View
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Figure 2. Streamside Invasive and Planting Plan 2018-2020
Vegetation Plot Photos
Appendix c,. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 7. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 8. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Table 9. Random Vegetation Strip Plots -Not Included
Appendix L. Stream Geomorphology
Cross Sections
Stream Formation Photos
Appendix E Hydrology Data
Hydrographs
Table 10. Wetland Hydrology Attainment
Rainfall Data
Headwater Channel Hydrology Graph

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
1.1 Project History and Background
The Watts Property (Site) is in eastern Perquimans County, approximately 13 miles southeast of US -
17 on Norma Drive. The Site is owned in fee by the State of North Carolina. To access the Site from
Hertford, drive north along US -17 and turn right onto New Hope Rd and follow for approximately 13
miles and turn left on Little River Shores Rd, turn left onto Tuscarora Trail and left on Norma Dr. The
Site is on the left approximately 0.1 mile down Norma Dr. It is situated in the Coastal Plain
physiographic region and the Pasquotank River Basin (Hydrologic Unit 03010205).
The Site encompasses approximately 48 acres of former agriculture land and has a direct hydrologic
connection with the Little River. The Site watershed consists of agricultural land and forest. There is
no impervious area within the drainage area. The drainage area for the Site is 136 acres at the lower
end of the stream.
Prior to construction activities the stream was deepened and
wetland complex was drained for row crop agricultural production
significant alterations to surface and groundwater hydrology in
terrestrial habitats within the Site.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
channelized and the surrounding
. These modifications resulted in
addition to degraded aquatic and
The Site is located in the Pasquotank River Basin; eight digit CU 03010205 and the 14 -digit HUC
03010205060020. The Pasquotank River Basin Restoration Priorities (EEP, 2009) restoration goals
for CU 03010205 include supporting implementation of the NC Coastal Habitat Protection Plan
(NCCHPP). The following are the goals of the NCCHPP:
• Improve effectiveness of existing rules and programs protecting coastal fish habitats
• Identify, designate, and protect strategic habitat areas.
• Enhance habitat and protect it from physical impacts.
• Enhance and protect water quality.
In addition to the above mentioned CU goals the following are Site specific goals established in the
mitigation plan (NCDENR, 2012):
• Restore ditched wetlands to improve the habitat, fishery and flood control functions;
• Reduce sediment loading and other pollutants from the surface runoff by increasing the soils
retention, filtration and nutrient uptake functions of wetland and riparian areas;
• Restore and protect wildlife corridors and other key links to high value habitat areas; and
• Restore and protect natural breeding, nesting and feeding habitat to promote species richness
and diversity.
The goals established in the 2012 mitigation plan were addressed through the following project
objectives:
Promote wetland hydrology by filling drainage ditches;
Reduce pollutant runoff by grading the headwater valley for increased residence time of
stormflows;
Promote wildlife habitat by reforestation with native hardwoods.
Monitoring Report Year 4 (2018)
Watts Site, Perquimans County, NC
Prepared by Ecological Engineering, LLP
Page 1
December 2018

1.3 Project Success Criteria
The stream and wetland restoration success criteria for the Site were established in the approved
mitigation plan. The success criteria were discussed with the Interagency Review Team (IRT) during
the finalization of the mitigation plan. The agreed upon success criteria are a compromise between
the current requirements in the Monitoring Requirements and Performance Standards for
Compensatory Mitigation in North Carolina (USACE, 2013) and the success criteria found in the
Information Regarding Stream Restoration in the Outer Coastal Plain of North Carolina (USACE,
2005) which was the current reference document when the Site was originally acquired for mitigation.
The stream and wetland restoration and enhancement sections of the project were assigned specific
performance criteria components for hydrology, vegetation and morphology (streams only).
Performance criteria will be evaluated for a minimum of five years post -construction monitoring. If all
performance criteria have been met the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) may propose the Site
for closeout after five years of monitoring.
The project success criteria for stream, wetland and vegetation are as follows:
• Stream restoration success includes visual documentation of flow within the low point of the
valley, during monitoring years 1-4 and visual documentation of a primary flow path, stream
channel or ordinary high water mark, post monitoring year 4;
• Wetland hydrology success will include a minimum of a 8% hydroperiod in years of normal
rainfall;
• Vegetation success will include stem densities of 320 stems/acre in MY3 and 260 stems/acre
in MY5.
Two pressure transducers were installed. The information gathered from the transducers will be
included in the monitoring report as supplemental data.
1.4 Annual Monitoring Results
The headwater channel was visually assessed two times throughout MY4 for success criteria. During
the winter the channel exhibited several visual indicators for the MY 1-4 success criteria. Wrack lines
were observed adjacent to the channel, vegetation was laid over in the direction of stream flow, a
small bank was starting to form near the upstream portion of the stream, and standing water was also
observed (Appendix D). The stream restoration met the success criteria described in the mitigation
plan. Additionally, the three (3) cross-sections were stable throughout MY4 and the pressure
transducers demonstrated 118 consecutive days of surface water in the restored channel. There
were 117 consecutive days with greater than two inches of water in the headwater channel.
Six groundwater gauges were originally installed to determine the wetland hydroperiod. An additional
two gauges were added in March 2017 and March 2018, for a total of 10 groundwater gauges. Seven
of the ten groundwater gauges met the minimum 8% hydroperiod; successful hydroperiods ranged
from 13.8% to 43.9%. Three gauges (nos. 5, 8 & 9) did not meet the success criteria. The on-site
rain gauge experienced above average rainfall in most months this year with the exception of June,
August, and October. It is expected the Site will continue to recharge groundwater. The gauges
showing lower hydrology may be attributable to site micro -topography installed during construction
grading. Additionally, staff observed several areas outside the creditable wetlands, as shown in the
November 2012 Mitigation Plan, which indicate wetland hydrology, vegetation, and soils.
Monitoring Report Year 4 (2018) Page 2
Watts Site, Perquimans County, NC
Prepared by Ecological Engineering, LLP
December 2018

Eight CVS vegetation plots have been established to monitor vegetation success. The random strip
plots were not conducted during MY4 but they will be completed during MY5. Six of the CVS
vegetation plots met success criteria for MY5 of 260 planted stems/acre. Vegetation plots 3 and 7
(VP3 and VP7) did not meet the success criteria. These plots are located in the streamside area and
a full re -plant is scheduled for the 2018-2019 dormant season. Areas with thicker herbaceous
vegetation had lower stem densities across the site. A few stems of Bradford pear (Pyrus calleryana)
were noted throughout the site but are not widespread.
Invasive vegetation was treated twice during 2018 along the streamside and the non -riparian wetland
areas, and pines were thinned. A supplemental planting of 3.3 acres is scheduled for the 2018-2019
dormant season (Figure 2).
2.0 METHODOLGY
Vegetation plot monitoring data were collected following the standard CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Level II, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008). The rain gauge, groundwater gauges
and pressure transducers are monitored quarterly. Two additional groundwater gauges were installed
in 2017 and 2018. Gauges 7 and 8 were installed on March 15, 2017 and gauges 9 and 10 on March
15, 2018. Rain data from the CRONOS website, station KECG, was used for portions of October and
for the month of November. The on-site rain gauge was clogged during the November data download
and was corrected during the November 19, 2018 site visit. The remaining months utilized the on-site
rain data. Information for the CCPV was collected using a Garmin GPS.
3.0 REFERENCES
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation Version 4.2. Available at:http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-
protocol-v4.2-levl -2. pdf.
NCDENR Division of Mitigation Services, 2009. Pasquotank River Basin Restoration Priorities,
September 2009. Available at
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?uuid=336f3816-416e-4ee1-854e-
056021 e726f8&groupld=60329.
NCDENR Division of Mitigation Services, 2012. Watts Final Mitigation Plan. Prepared by Ecological
Engineering, LLP.
NCDENR Division of Mitigation Services, 2014. Annual Monitoring and Closeout Reporting Format,
Data Requirements, and Content Guidance. Available at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?p I id=60409&folderld=18877169&name=
DLFE-86604.pdf
NCDENR Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 2010. Basin Overview, Pasquotank River Subbasin
03-01-52. Available at: http://h20.enr.state.nc.us/tmdI/documents/303d Report.pdf.
North Carolina State Climate Office, 2018. Elizabeth City Station, Available:
http://www.ncclimate.ncsu.edu/cronos/normals.php?station=312719
US Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-1. AD/Al76.
Monitoring Report Year 4 (2018) Page 3
Watts Site, Perquimans County, NC
Prepared by Ecological Engineering, LLP
December 2018

US Army Corps of Engineers, 2013. Monitoring Requirements and Performance Standards for
Compensatory Mitigation in North Carolina. Wilmington, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers and NCDENR Division of Water Quality (USACE & NCDWQ), 2005.
Information Regarding Stream Restoration in the Outer Coastal Plain of North Carolina.
Wilmington, NC.
Monitoring Report Year 4 (2018) Page 4
Watts Site, Perquimans County, NC
Prepared by Ecological Engineering, LLP
December 2018

Appendix A
Project Information Tables

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Watts/ 413
Mitigation.
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Stream
Riparian Wetland Non-riparian wetland Buffer
Nutrient
Nutrient
Offset
Offset
Type R
RE R RE R
RE
Totals 1,003
20.4 0.04
ComponentsProject
Project
Restoration or
Existing Footage/
Restoration
Mitigation
Component
Stationing/Location Acreage Approach Restoration
Footage or
Ratio
Equivalent
Acreage
UT Little River
10+00 to 25+05 1,505 CPHSR' Restoration
1,505
1.5:1^
Non-Riparian
n/a 0 ac n/a Restoration
20.4
1:1
Wetland
Component
Restoration Level
Stream (linear feet) Riparian Wetland (acres) Non-riparian Wetland
Buffer
Upland
(acres)
(square feet)
(acres)
Riverine Non-riverine
Restoration
1,505 20.4
26.8
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Creation
Preservation
HQ Preservation
BMP Elements
Element
Location I Purpose/Function I Notes
BMP Elements
CPHSR= Coastal Plain Headwater Stream Restoration (USACE et. al., 2007) BR = Bioretention
Cell; SF = Sand Filter; SW
= Stormwater Wetland;
WDP = Wet Detention Pond; DDP = Dry Dentention Pond; FS = Filter Strip; S = Grassed
Swale; LS =
Level Spreader; NI
= Natural Infiltration Area; FB = Forested Buffer .A=l .5:1 was agreed upon via emails in the 11/12 Mit Plan

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Watts/ 413
ReportActivity or Data Collection Complete
Mitigation Plan October -11
Completion or Delivery
November -12
Final Design - Construction Plans
June -10
June -13
Construction
Firm Information/ Address
February -15
Temporary S&E Mix Applied to Entire Project Area
Bill Wright
June -14
Permanent Seed Mix Applied to Streamside
Firm Information/ Address
June -14
Bare Root, Live Stake and Tubling Plantings Applied
George Morris
December -14 & March -15
Baseline Monitoring Document
January -15 & April -15
May -15
Year 1 Monitoring
December -15
December -15
Warranty Replant
N/A
February -16 & January -17
Year 2 Monitoring
August -16 & November -16
November -16
Year 3 Monitoring
August -17 & November -17
November -17
Invasive Treatment
N/A
July -18
Invasive Treatment
N/A
October -18
Year 4 Monitoring
October -18 & November -18
December -18
Year 5 Monitoring
Firm Information/ Address
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Watts/ 413
Designer Firm Information/ Address
Ecological Engineering, LLP 1151 SE Cary Parkway Ste. 101, Cary, NC 27518
Jenny S. Fleming, PE [phone]
Construction Contractor
Firm Information/ Address
River Works, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 800, Cary, NC 27518
Bill Wright
[phone]
Planting Contractors
Firm Information/ Address
River Works, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 800, Cary, NC 27518
George Morris
[phone]
Keller Environmental, LLC
7921 Haymarket Ln. Raleigh, NC 27615
Jay Keller
[phone]
Seeding Contractor
Firm Information/ Address
River Works, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 800, Cary, NC 27518
George Morris
[phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource [phone]
ArborGen [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Claridge Nursery [phone]
Dykes and Son Nursery [phone]
Monitoring Performer
Firm Information/ Address
Ecological Engineering, LLP
1151 SE Cary Parkway Ste. 101, Cary, NC 27518
G. Lane Sauls Jr. (stream, vegetation & wetland)
[phone]
Invasives Contractor
Firm Information/ Address
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd., Charlotte, NC, 28723
Gregg Antemann
[phone]

Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Watts/ 413
Project Information
Project Name
Watts
County
Perquimans County
Project Area
48.09 acres
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
Project Watershed
36.1652791 N and 76.2676037 W
Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Coastal Plain
River Basin
Pasquotank
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit 3010205
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit 1 3010205060020
DWQ Subbasin
03-01-52
Project Drainage Area
136 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
0 acres
CGIA Land Use Classification
Reach Summary
Agricultural Land
Information
Parameters
Reach 1 (upper) Reach 2
Length of Reach
750 755
Valley Classification
n/a n/a
Drainage Area
110 136
NCDWQ Stream ID Score
25 33.25
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
SC (receiving water) SC (receiving water)
Morphological Description (stream type)
G5 or similar G5 or similar
Evolutionary Trend
C to G to F C to G to F
Underlying Mapped Soils
Roanoke silt loam Roanoke silt loam
Drainage Classification
Poorly drained Poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric A Hydric A
Slope
< 2% < 2%
FEMA Classification
Zone AE Zone AE
Native Vegetation Community
N/A N/A
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasive Species
Wetiand
< 5% < 5%
Summary Information
Size of Wetland
0.06 acre
Wetland Type
Hardwood Flat (NCWAM)
Mapped Soil Series
Roanoke silt loam
Drainage Classification
Poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric A
Source of Hydrology
Groundwater and Surface
Hydrologic Impairment
Clay confining layer
Native Vegetation Community
N/A
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasive Species
Regulatory
< 5%
Considerations
Applicable Resolved/
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404
Yes Resolved/ 404 Permit
Waters of the United States - Section 401
Yes Resolved/401 Permit
Endangered Species Act
Yes Resolved/Categorical Exclusion
Historic Preservation Act
Yes Resolved/Categorical Exclusion
Coastal Zone/Area Management Acts (CZMA/CAMA)
Yes Resolved/Email from CAMA
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes Resolved/EEP Flood Checklist
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Yes Resolved/Categorical Exclusion

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

MONITORING FEATURES
p> r STREAM
CROSS-SECTIONS (XS)
*� F MONITORING GAUGES (GW)
Met Hydrology Success Criteria
RG
No
VP4/GW4 XS3 O
O Yes
Wetland Enhancement (0.06 acres)
PROBLEM AREAS
Bare Areas
Low Stems
VEGETATION PLOTS (VP)
MY 4 Met Success Criteria
No
Yes
Installed 3/15/17 VP7 rd�
0 0 GW8�
GW9 ._ VP5/GW5Installed �3/15/17x' y
,kms
Installed 3/15/18 XS2 C _
.. `` «P ;.
. 1 PT Stream
Watts Property
- Boundary
/GW1
VP1
XS13
Wetland Restoration
`.. s p3 20.4 acres
Prepared For: Figure 1: Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Watts Property 0 400 800 N
=a DMS Project # 413
Monitoring Year 4 w �
Environmental 1 400' S
Quality Perquimans County

Table 5.
Vegetation Condition Assessment
Watts DMS # 413
Planted Acreage 23.9 Easement Acreage 48.1
4. Invasive Areas of
Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons
at map scale)
0.1 ac
Category
Definitions
MappingVegetation
D•.Polygons
NumberThreshold Acreage
Acreage
1. Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous
0.1 ac Yes
2
0.47
1.97%
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons
at map scale)
material
No
0
0
0.0%
2. Low Stem Density
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels
0.1 ac
Yes
5
2.01
8.41%
Areas
based on MY 3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria
Total
7
2.48
10.38%
3. Areas of Poor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that is
0.25 ac
n/a
0
0
0%
Growth Rates or Vigor
obviously small given the monitoring year
Cumulative Total
7-1
2.48
10.38%
4. Invasive Areas of
Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons
at map scale)
0.1 ac
No
0
0
0.0%
5. Easement
Encroachment Areas
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons
at map scale)
0.1 ac
No
0
0
0.0%

Figure 2 Watts Project I D #413
Streamside Invasive and Planting Plan 2018-2020

Photostation Comparison
Watts- MY 4 (2018)
Photo # and Baseline Condition 2015 MY 1 2015 (9/16/2015) MY 2 2016 (8/4/2016) MY 3 2017 (8/16/2017) MY 4 2018 (10/24/2018)
Location
Photostation 1. Facing ,.. - } `
southwest along
diagonal of Vegetation
Plot 1.
Photostation 2. Facing
southwest along
diagonal of Vegetation
Plot 2.
..AMINO X.
Photostation 3. Facing<
southwest along ;. N
diagonal of Vegetation = `
Plot 3.
r r°
W -W
Tk
• • • k (
77'{1,1 ;' X
7"
:S

Photostation
Comparison -
Page 2
Photostation 5. Facing
southwest along
diagonal of Vegetation
Plot 5
Photostation 6. Facing
southwest along
diagonal of Vegetation
Plot 6.
Photostation 7. Facing
southwest along
diagonal of Vegetation
Plot 7.
Photostation 8. Facing
southwest along
diagonal of Vegetation
Plot 8.
Baseline Condition 2015
�•. ' is '�•f
MY 1 2015 (9/16/2015)
MY 2 2016 (8/4/2016)
MY 3 2017 (8/16/2017)
MY 4 2018 (10/24/2018)

Appendix C
Vegetation Data

Table 6. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Watts DMS # 413
ThresholdVegetation Plot ID Vegetation Survival Met?
1 Yes
Tract Mean
88%
2 Yes
3 Yes
4 Yes
5 Yes
6 Yes
7 No
8 Yes

Table 7. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Watts -UT Little River DMS # 413
Report Prepared By Heather Smith
Date Prepared 11/8/2018 14:53
database name Ecological Engineering-2018-WattsYear-4.mdb
database location P:\50000 State\EEP 50512\50512-010 Watts
Mon itori ng\Reports\MY4_201 8
computer name WKST7
file size 48234496
Metadata Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of
project(s) and project data.
Proj, planted Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year.
This excludes live stakes.
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year.
Proj, total stems This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all natural/volunteer
stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead
project Name
stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and
Required Plots (calculated)
percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each
plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and
ALL Stems by Plot and spp natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are
excluded.
Project Code
413
project Name
Watts -UT Little River
Description
Stream and Wetland
River Basin
Pasquotank
length(ft)
1,505
Required Plots (calculated)
8
Sampled Plots
8

Table 8. Planted and Total Stems
Project Name: Watts #413
Scientific Name
Common Name
413-01-0001
Species Type PnoLS P -all T
413-01-0002
PnoLS P -all T
413-01-0003
PnoLS P -all T
Current Plot Data (MY4 2018)
413-01-0004 413-01-0005
PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P-a
413-01-0006
noLS P -all T
413-01-0007
PnoLS P -all T
413-01-0008
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
1 1
1
4 4
4
2 2
2
2 2
2 4 4
4
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
4
4
7
4
15
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1 1
1
1 1
1
Carpinus caroliniana
American hornbeam
Tree
1 1
1
1 1
1
Carya
hickory
Tree
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1 1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
1 1
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
2
2
3
1
Morella cerifera
wax myrtle
shrub
3
1
3
4
4
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
2 2
2
1 1
1
2 2
2
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
6
10
6
Quercus
oak
Tree
1
11
11 11
1 11
1
3 3
3
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
I1
1
1
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
5 5
5
3 3
3
3 3
3
7 7
7
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1 1
1
3 3
3
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
3 3
3
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
1 1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2 2
2
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1 1
1
Rhus copallinum
flameleaf sumac
shrub
axodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
10 10
10
1 1
1
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
1 1
1
Vaccinium stamineum
deerberry
Shrub
Stem count 10 10 25 10 10
size (ares) 1 1
size (ACRES) 0.02 0.02
Species count 4 4 8 1 1
Stems per ACRE 404.71 404.71 10121404.71 404.71
17 5 5 25 8 8
1 1
0.02 0.02
4 5 5 8 5 5
6881202.31 202.31 10121323.71 323.71
15 9 9 13 9 9 34 6 6 6 13 13 13
1 1 1 1
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
71 51 51 61 31 31 31 31 31 41 41 4
6071 364.21 364.21 526.11 364.21 364.21 13761242.81 242.81 242.81526.11 526.11 526.1

Table 8. Planted and Total Stems
Project Name: Watts #413
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
MY4 (2018)
Pnol-S P -all T
MY3 (2017)
Pnol-S P -all T
MY2 (2016)
Pnol-S P -all T
MY1 (2015)
Pnol-S P -all T
MYO (2015)
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
13
13
13
15
15
15
18
18
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
34
91
6
2
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
Carpinus caroliniana
American hornbeam
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
Carya
hickory
Tree
1
2
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
2
2
2
4
4
4
5
5
5
8
8
8
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
7
7
8
6
3
Morella cerifera
wax myrtle
shrub
15
1
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
5
5
5
5
5
5
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
22
7
Quercus
oak
Tree
4
4
4
4
4
4
10
10
10
22
22
24
34
34
34
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
18
18
18
22
22
22
17
17
17
15
15
15
15
15
15
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
4
4
4
7
7
7
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
11
11
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
2
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
11
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
Rhus copallinum
flameleaf sumac
shrub
2
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
12
12
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
8
8
8
Vaccinium stamineum
deerberry
Shrub
2
2
2
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
70
161
354.1
701 148
8
0.20
161 20
354.1 748.7
871
17
440.1
871 97
8
0.20
17 20
440.1 490.7
105
171
531.1
1051
8
0.20
171
531.1
215
22
1088
119
161
602
1191 133
8
0.20
16 18
602 672.8
136
171
688
136 141
8
0.20
171 19
688 713.3

Appendix D
Stream Geomorphology

Watts / UT to Little River - XS 1 MY4
3
40
2
1
0
c
0
>
v
w
GJ
N
-2
-3
-4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
Water Surface Baseline XS1 Baseline XS1 MY1 XS1 MY2 XS1 MY3 XS1 MY 4

Watts / UT to Little River - XS 2 MY4
2
1
0
c
0
�
LU
GJ
0100
N
\
-2
,
-3
-4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
(Water Surface Baseline XS2 Baseline XS2 MY1 XS2 MY2 XS2 MY3 XS2 MY4

Watts / UT to Little River - XS 3 MY4
3
40
2
1
.. 0
C
0
0
a
-1
W
GJ
(C
G1
-2
-3
-4
-5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
(Water Surface Baseline XS3 Baseline XS3 MY1 XS3 MY2 XS3 MY3 XS3 MY4

Stream Formation Photos MY 4
Flow path near in channel pressure transducer (PT)
3-15-2018
Flow Path upstream of PT 3-15-2018
Upstream portion: Evidence of flow 3-15-2018 Upstream portion: Evidence of flow 3-15-2018

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

10
6
I
0
t
CL -15
-20
-25
-30
1111111
1
1 IL I I
II li.'
1 l
II III
1 IJ II
li
II I
111E
II.
111
I.
I. 1 11111
lyl.1
I III l
it
11
p
1
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00 00
M
N
M
N
M
M
M
ti
t
CO
N
M
O
M
ti
O
t
CO
N
M
M M
N
N
N
N
M
N
(D
r --
-
M
-
N
-
N
C)
N
N
N
N
M
M
M
CO
ti
ti
00
00
m
M
-
O
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 1 -Consecutive Days
9
8.5
8
7.5
7
6.5
6
5.5
c
5
0
4.5 0
.Q
4 v
L
a
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

10
9
0
-15
-20

5
-5
0
s
0 -20
G
-25
-30
-35
00
T
T
\
T
Start of Growing Season
34 Days Gauge 3 MY4
End of Growing Season
y
LL
i,
----- - - -
- ------ t.
CC) CC) CC) CC) CC) CC) CC) CC)
T T T T T T T T
LO m N (0 N cc m CO
\
_
0.5
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 3 —Consecutive Days
0
T T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
ti
0\0
N
CD
O
M
ti
O
CO\
N
Ln
m
M
L N
C
�
-
M
-
N
-
N
C)
N
N
Ln
CD
I-
I-
CO
CO
m
m
T
Q
T
T
T
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 3 —Consecutive Days

_
3
0
L
0
0
++
5
2
1.5
_
-15
0.5
-20 ; 1111111 l I I ill I I II li II IIII , l l II li ILII ill lTI .I. ITiI I l II II I IIIII illlll I lit I,I I. I. 1 1 li I 1 P 1 0
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
M N M N M M M ti M N M O M ti O t M N M M M
N N N "t N M N M - � - M - N - N \O N - - N
N N M M � M CD � 00 00 � M - O
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 4 —Consecutive Days

_
-5
-20
-25
00 CO CO CO 00 CO CO CO CO CO CO 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO CO CO CO CO
M N M N M M M ti M N M O M ti O M N M M M
N N N "t N M N M - � - M - N - N \O N - - N
N N M M � M CD I� CO CO m M O
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 5 —Consecutive Days

_
5
I
2
1.5
_
-10
CL
m
D
-15
0.5
-20 ; 1111111 l I I 11 I I II li II IIII , l l II li ILII illlTI .I. ITiI I l II II I IIIII illlll I lit I,I I. I. 1 1 li I 1 P 1 0
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
M N M N M M M ti M N M O M ti O t M N M M M
N N N "t N M N M - � - M - N - N \O N - - N
N N M M � M CD � 00 00 � M - O
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 6 —Consecutive Days

5
I
-5
-10
L
d
3 -15
0
L
0 -20
s
CL
m
-25
-30
-35
2
1.5
_
0.5
-40 T II I I. II II II IIII , I I II IIII ILII II��IITI IIITII I I II II I �IIII iIIIIi I I iI I,� I I I II I P 1 0
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T
r M N M N M M M ti M N M O M ti O t M N M M M
r N N N "t N M N M - � - M - N - N \O N - - N
T T N N M M � M CD � 00 00 � M T O T T T
T T
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 7 —Consecutive Days

5
x
-5
-10
L
d
3 -15
0
L
0 -20
s
CL
m
-25
-30
-35
2
1.5
_
0.5
-40 ; "' 111 I I I II I I. II II II IIII , I I II III ILII MITI .I. IIITII I I II II I IIIII illlll I I it I,I I. I. L. ' ' 'I ' 1 P 1 0
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
M N M N M M M ti M N M O M ti O t M N M M M
N N N "t N M N M - � - M - N - N \O N - - N
N N M M � M CD � 00 00 � M - O
Date
� Precipitation –4--Gauge8 —Consecutive Days

10
5
I
2
1.5
_
-20
CL
m
D
-25
-30
-35
0.5
-40 ; "' 111 I I I II I I. II II II IIII , I I II III ILII MITI .I. IIITII I I II II I IIIII illlll I I it I,I I. I. L. ' ' 'I ' 1 P 1 0
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
M N M N M M M ti M N M O M ti O t M N M M M
N N N "t N M N M - � - M - N - N \O N - - N
N N M M � M CD � 00 00 � M - O
Date
� Precipitation Gauge 9 —Consecutive Days

10
5
x
-5
O
-20
CL
d
0
-25
-30
-35
-40

Table
Wetland Hydrology Attainment Table
10
Watts Stream and Wetland Restoration DMS
#413
Greater
than 8%
Continuous
Saturation
Gauge
MY- 1
MY- 2
MY- 3
MY- 4
MY- 5
#
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Yes/25
Yes/54
Yes/53
Yes/59
1
10.2%
21.9%
21.5%
24.0%
Yes/63
Yes/65
Yes/130
Yes/108
2
25.6%
26.4%
52.8%
43.9%
No/7
No/12
No/12
Yes/34
3
2.8%
4.9%
4.9%
13.8%
Yes/71
Yes/46
Yes/54
Yes/54
4
28.9%
18.7%
22.0%
22.0%
No/8
No/10
No/9
No/13
5
3.3%
4.1%
3.7%
5.3%
Yes/25
Yes/61
Yes/26
Yes/85
6
10.2%
24.8%
10.6%
34.6%
No/11
Yes/36
7
4.5%
14.6%
No/8
No/14
8
3.3%
5.7%
No/19
9
7.7%
Yes/34
10
13.8%
Growing season is assumed to be 246 days.

14
12
10
2
0
Watts Property Monitoring Year 4
2018 Monthly Precipitation Data 30170 Graph
Month - Year
2018 Rainfall 70% 30%
N
�t
Ge'

3
2.5
2
Headwater Channel Depth
Pressure Transducer Data MY 4
A measurement of 0 feet
indicates the water level in the
channel is either at or below the
9
-0.5
1
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00 00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
Ln
N
n\
-I
l\D
-1
lDD
1\-I
M
O
M
O
M
M
000
M
000
N n
.--I
\
.-i
N
\
\
\
M
\
\
Ln
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\ \
rl
ri
N
M
Ln
Ln
lD
lD
I�
n
00
00
a)
a)
O
O
rl ri
r -I
r -I
Date