20040325 Ver 1_Mitigation Plans_19991201

Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan
BAR RA FARMS CAPE FEAR
REGIONAL MITIGATION BANK
Prepared for:
Ecosystems Land Mitigation Bank Corporation
6200 Falls of the Neuse Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Prepared by:
Environmental Services, Inc.
1100 Wake Forest Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
December 1997
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan
BAR RA FARMS CAPE FEAR
REGIONAL MITIGATION BANK
Prepared for:
Ecosystems Land Mitigation Bank Corporation
6200 Falls of the Neuse Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609.
Nu VV L- 1L/v--
RESTORATION
a. .
Prepared by:
? II •

O
O p? gE
N

= O
m
? U
El
?
R E°
G o d d
y L.-
y s c Z >
06o
•?m c
El
0
O U
V

El -

a

o ?
o
m
in„
- H ?
w = m
?
E ? ? _ -

o ?o
oe
m?

= oPo9
z cod °'
vd= ? E
E _
-°a
x v t
wa
El El
a ddo
? ?
qr E

rn o
40

3
``n

c

d

UE
? ?-y
V

F f A
ui

u, +i
v

cx.

ur r--

_j Vj
ir
ti-

p=oi

E '

?i
m

ao 45

t\f
o
0
`o
am
m
c
0
F
r" z
_z R
UU
?Q?
? m 3
?
c
a Ra„
m
a
c7 U
O
o-
mE
r
R _
O -_
F
d?
3.4
d
t
y o
? v 3g
N
n
IV lL?o
f/J
li ?
?Ma
v j
Saw
.z
m
°
-` A oz Q
t E m C
0
? a Eo

d ° E
m o

© T° E m
r
N ?
to
C®
N -
m?
0 0 0
a s n n ? o EJ ? D r o ?--' a??° a o a A c° o?< o a m x ? y
m m H S a ??? -' ? d d? m
a ? m 'O .»
3?< =. m m o< on Q 0' m<. ?' y
' o d n? a o ?? 3< o ?+ n ?. ? a o m o c? ?_ ° O O 0,
0 0 °' m any o - m 0_ 20 g
N w y? ? w< °w N 3 °° y< c° m< m 'G s s ?D o 0 ? o' o ?l
-p ?o fJ y _ ?. Z m ?' N
S,
d o o m d'? c -3 H r ? y? d co ?, c Q>y m'm m ?' N o-?° 6 \1
? ? p ?? ? n ? ai ca N ? os ? -< .. m v s m 'Or, .=o-. c7 .N.. o c W m ° -
?° in s° ti m C ° m 3 m 07 C° d m y<
d ° ? n
`'? o- 0 9?oa m= fO m m n n n a ° `° m ?-? m? ° y m o m .? _ ?° c N
T X m y o= s m n ?' °c o_ p o m C1 0 - m m a Y' m
12.
y o d F o m c ?° c o can d o o v I I i
n< Zm H o E d'3o °o'o°s gyn. a ?.? o o ?< ° n3 `e
1-3 m m y Fn n< a- N - c? s fD m ? ?* H N m oc m m o o °
t0 ?n (? N C= O Sv n M ti n N ?. O n C C 30 n Ol S>> tD
to N p (C" O 3 < y' .-r rr 3 p y N
w Q a. m n o 3 o_ ° o m o o o E,2 EI m g' o c_
m
S m 3< w s o m m 'n o n _P ?' o_O o ?. y?.
(D O- N O N< f0 S = 3 N .=i n° .3w t0 O lp' h
o n o m? a o o m c ?- n? d N o 0 0< 9 o s a y.
a_.m g ti o c I
m y .°.. v o? I w o I m o °' a' m o d o- d °, a oo* m ?c ??
a° x m o n °o Sa o. N c m o? F'i, ?- a° o =. F-.
c °
E ° ° m x y N a p n y m 3 \\
io < .. o 0
2L o
y m 3 3 o m o. m° m > >- m m w o a
o. o
X m o 3 s n ? ? ? _n n n ? ti rn r°°. ? o°
- c -f°Fn °_'
3 O 00 ti< K p y J
7 p n .i N D ?° m a m H m w 3 m ?° m m a c o (n o m m o 7
° m 01 m, a'O o w o a m J7 m O °° -O. N° o n o a y <, ai (?
c0 Q y n .» '° O --., G c o 0 o N 3 0 m .o°-. d, 3< m Ct
o? ?0 y?? ? p N ?? ?- n C! o O ? Q m ? ?? o. n? y m <o c ? 3
3 a? c? C a x ?! - N Q-p' s N CY 3 m °- = o m o '°" c °- <
O a 0 C1 ; a= N O N a' d ?- 0_' ry - .°e. 0 0 6 v °?. C
3 '? ° < o '°" m m 3 -ao 0 0 m m m o 5D 04 3 cc C
o. fD c o ?. o m 3 -?' m n
'°"' ti m o cn -o' m 3?
0 0 ?? m m? _ N
w c 3 .°_+ ? ? nsi m D m ? o ° ° w ? ? °c ? 0 3 ? .°..• ? .? n rn ?
o 0 o y m m 3' o o c cn
? tD - 3 C7 n' y r- G7 ?_ = _ ?' o ? t0 = a ?' o o° 0• ? y
< m n v y °? m Q° m m
(O ;G Om 2 d n L7
? o w

1

? L {
371,9 £

AuG-H uuL'4ud '4!V
J'eaA ads D suz
L-aJV aatn.zaS 31UPI
0£
( O
f - ^
I
00 92
C ° 01 QS
`ra 'J L? V?1? 1
vgvu
j ,.
f• -
uu 5:
oo b ?.
5 I(_ X11. -`t ? ? ? ?J `(1 F'?i )?J"? ????1/?° ?L? }• ? 'ti ? ...l. Y??% ?/??? ? ???zS ? •?
'1 .7
` ??? ? \ ( ' -•- ? ?//??}/?-mot ?? (` I`/`?1) ? ? ? - ? _
r

(JI

^r- J
°'?g}?,"rte,\?1' t, ?"? 3. ? '' 1 'l '' l l.:.?-..d t? a,r3>?(1-ir? ? ? ?( j s7 ??( Y ?/
`? \ ? ., S_?? ?J 1. h° r ? • 1 ?
AUO
l `?f .f f
I? ,
1 .r >\ ?5u I p
\lC
l y 0 0000 <
5 y it ` z 1 t`
03
f f' r.
/?r?_. i 1 1 1- ? t t,, -039 0
trY 1
1 1
Wmber Mdge 3 36 0100 o
' Rad.SpAap \,. Remsrt ?? > ? \? ? (( C
J
, ,j 1 f L r
.
v
-.,1 1 .. /
r
/ Ratay.m
!? FNtlpoat S' f
° •t
S
i ou'°_
Wb.
JO 00 0 ker r? ?S, ?
-
r e r r'
i
00 r
i B Fa C P..
` i rr
,
?? r d3bf 00 1 1ww.
0 1
` O 1
\ O ?
0 03 61
n
rirfew \\\ ? 1? ?'°Z
n Bank Service Area
Farms Cape Fear ?j ,l
al Mitigation Bank
l
11
n l? \ i
1

>- 7r.°"?e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
40
ECOBANK, a private sector mitigation banking company, has established a regional stream and
wetland mitigation bank within the Coastal Plain region of the Cape Fear River Basin. The
mitigation bank is designed to provide up-front, compensatory wetland and stream mitigation
for in-kind, unavoidable wetland and stream impacts in the region. The mitigation bank
comprises the Barra Farms property located along upper reaches of Harrison Creek in
Cumberland County. The Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank (Bank) is composed
of approximately 2247 acres (ac) of interstream flats, former Carolina Bays, historic stream
origins, and floodplains which have been ditched, levelled, and drained to support agricultural
and silvicultural activities. A conceptual mitigation plan was developed in April, 1997 which
described existing conditions within the entire 2247-ac mitigation site and presented a
conceptual plan for restoring wetlands in a phased approach.
Phase 1 mitigation, as proposed in the conceptual plan, encompasses approximately 623 ac
surrounding the historic origin of Harrison Creek in lower reaches of the wetland system.
Phase 1 mitigation will provide up-front, in-kind wetland restoration to compensate for NCDOT
projects in the region. Wetland mitigation will be performed prior to permit submittal and
construction of specific highway projects. Mitigation will be in-kind and within basin, thereby
replacing lost wetland functions and acreage before impacts occur.
This mitigation plan details restoration and enhancement procedures for Phase 1 of the Barra
Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank. Components of this plan have already been
implemented at the site with project completion scheduled for January 1998. A mitigation
banking review team (MBRT) has been established and a mitigation banking instrument (MBI)
prepared for Phase 1 wetland mitigation.
The mitigation site (Site) is located on lower portions of a broad coastal plain interstream divide
which supports the NC 21-0 highway corridor, extensive crop lands, small commercial and
residential development, flog' farms, several state roads, and discharges influent waters into
Harrison Creek, a tributary bf the Cape Fear River.
The Site contains the historic stream origin of. Harri on` Creek. Adjacent flats and ridges
comprise a watershed encompassing approximately 9.8 square miles (mil) of land with
groundwater and surface water discharging fror^n'these flats and terraces towards the Site.
A majority of the Site has been cleared; ditched, drained, with wetlands effectively eliminated.
The drainage network includes approxin?a(ely ,10,800 linear feet' (ft) of ditches and canals
distributed systematically throughput this Side-. ' This drainage ne1w : rk has redirected a 9.3 mil
watershed into constructed canals and,-away from the historic` origin of Harrison Creek.
Restoration of wetland hydrology 4n' d diversion of ditch flows from the upper watershed into
the Site will redirect groundwater slope and'riverine wetland functions towards more stable,
historic conditions. Based on. hydraulic models, 2-year stream. flows in the restored section
of Harrison Creek will increase from approximately 30'cubic ft/second (CFS) under existing
conditions to approximately 116 CFS after wetland restoration. Currently, these flows are in

??A
0

canal systems that bypass former in-stream aquatic habitat, abandoned floodplains, and former
Coastal Plain cypress-gum swamps. Influent surface flows and flood storage capacity are
expected to increase regional water quality functions including pollutant removal, nutrient
uptake, and sediment retention. Stream and floodplain functions will be restored within the
2400-foot stream reach on-site and within the approximately 4600-foot downstream segment
of Harrison Creek.
Proposed mitigation credit includes 2400 feet of stream restoration, 376 acres of wetland
restoration, and 172 acres of wetland enhancement apportioned among three regional wetland
types: groundwater (precipitation) flats, headwater slopes, and riverine floodplains. In
addition, 75 acres of upland/wetland ecotones and upland buffers will be restored to augment
wetland replacement benefits. In summary, 240 wetland replacement credits and 2400 feet
of stream replacement credits are proposed to become available for compensatory mitigation
use. A mitigation credit release schedule and Bank service area have also been proposed.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES .................................................. iv
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................1
2.0 METHODS ..................................................3
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ......................................... 5
3.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use ....................... . 5
3.2 Geology .............................................. .6
3.3 Soils ................................................. .6
3.3.1 Hydric Soils ....................................... . 7
3.3.2 Nonhydric Soils .................................... . 8
3.4 Plant Communities ....................................... . 9
3.5 Hydrology ............................................. 11
3.5.1 Groundwater ...................................... 11
3.5.2 Surface Water (Streams) .............................. 12
3.6 Water Quality .......................................... 14
3.7 Wildlife ............................................... 15
3.8 Protected Species, Regional Corridors, and Adjacent Natural Areas ..... 15
3.8.1 Protected Species .................................. 15
3.8.2 Regional Corridors and Adjacent Natural Areas .............. 16
4.0 WETLAND RESTORATION STUDIES ............................... 18
4.1 Groundwater Modeling .................................... 18
4.1.1 Model Description .................................. 18
4.1.2 Model Applications and Results ......................... 19
4.2 Surface Water Analyses ................................... 21
4.2.1 Drainage Area Alterations ............................. 22
4.2.2 Stream Flow Alterations .............................. 23
4.2.3 Flood Storage ..................................... 23
4.2.4 Impacts to Adjacent Properties ......................... 23
4.3 Reference Ecosystem ..................................... 24
4.3.1 Reference Plant Communities .......................... 24
4.3.2 Reference Stream Reaches ............................ 26
5.0 WETLAND RESTORATION PLAN .................................. 28
5.1 Wetland Hydrology Restoration .............................. 28
5.1.1 Ditch Backfilling .................................... 28
5.1.2 Compacted Ditch Plugs ............................... 28
5.1.3 Off-Site Drainage Redirection .......................... 29
5.1.4 Seasonal Pool Construction ............................ 29
5.1.5 Stream Restoration, Monitoring, and Improvements ........... 29
5.1.6 Off-Site Roadway Improvements ........................ 30
5.1.7 Wetland Surface Modifications ......................... 30
5.2 Wetland Community Restoration ............................. 30
5.2.1 Planting Plant ..................................... 31
5.3 Wetland Soil Restoration ................................... 33
6.0 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ................................... 35
7.0 MONITORING PLAN ........................................... 36
7.1 Hydrology Monitoring ..................................... 36
7.2 Hydrology Success Criteria ................................. 36
7.3 Vegetation ............................................37
7.4 Vegetation Success Criteria ................................ 38
7.5 Report Submittal ........................................ 38
7.6 Contingency ........................................... 39
8.0 DISPENSATION OF PROPERTY ................................... 40
9.0 WETLAND FUNCTIONAL EVALUATIONS ............................ 41
9.1 Riverine Floodplains and Streams ............................. 41
9.2 Headwater Slopes ....................................... 41
9.3 Groundwater Flats ....................................... 42
9.4 Upland/Wetland Ecotones .................................. 43
10.0 MITIGATION CREDIT AND CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE ................. 44
11.0 MITIGATION BANK SERVICE AREA ................................ 46
12.0 FUTURE MITIGATION BANK PHASES .............................. 47
13.0 REFERENCES ................................................48
14.0 APPENDICES ................................................52
Appendix A: Mitigation Banking Review Team Comments on the Conceptual
Mitigation Plan (April 1997)
Appendix B: NCDOT Correspondence
Appendix C: Piezometer Profile Logs
Appendix D: Rainfall Data: 1950-1980
Appendix E: Wildlife Species Observed at Barra Farms
Appendix F: Sensitive Plants, Animals, and Communities Documented by NCNHP in
the Barra Farms Region
Appendix G: DRAINMOD Parameters and Outputs
Appendix H: Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis
LIST OF FIGURES Following Page
Figure 1: Site Location ............................................ 1
Figure 2: 1994 Aerial Photograph: Barra Farms /Harrison Creek Wetlands ........ 3
Figure 3: 1997 Aerial Photograph: Phase 1 - Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation
Bank ..................................................3
Figure 4: Physiography, Topography and Land Use ........................ 5
Figure 5: Soil Map Units and Hydric/Nonhydric Soil Boundaries ................ 6
Figure 6: Existing Plant Communities .................................. 9
Figure 7: Inferred Groundwater Flow for 11-4-97 ........................ 12
Figure 8: Protected Species and Adjacent Natural Areas ................... 16
Figure 9: DRAINMOD Estimates: Pre-Restoration Conditions ................ 20
Figure 10: DRAINMOD Estimates: Post-Restoration Conditions ............... 21
Figure 10A: Existing Condition Flow Diagram ............................. 21
Figure 10B: Revised Condition Flow Diagram ............................. 21
Figure 10C: Modeling Cross-Sections ................................... 21
Figure 10D: Flood Frequency Analysis: Stream Gauges ...................... 22
Figure 11: Hydrology and Soil Restoration .............................. 28
Figure 12: Target Landscape Ecosystems ............................... 30
Figure 13: Community Restoration Map Units ............................ 30
Figure 14: Monitoring Plan ......................................... 36
Figure 15: Mitigation Bank Service Area ................................ 46
LIST OF TABLES Following Page
Table 1: Groundwater Elevations and Precipitation Data ................... 11
Table 2: Reference Wetland Hydroperiods for Croatan Soils ................. 19
Table 3: Zone of Wetland Loss and Zone of Wetland Degradation for Croatan Soil . 20
Table 4: Estimated Peak Flows ..................................... 23
Table 5 Reference Forest Ecosystems, Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest
Plots Summary (Canopy Species) ............................. 25
Table 6 Reference Forest Ecosystems, Streamhead Atlantic White Cedar Forest
Plots Summary (Canopy Species) ............................. 25
Table 7 Reference Forest Ecosystems, Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp Forest
Plots Summary (Canopy Species) ............................. 25
Table 8 Reference Forest Ecosystems, Nonriverine Swamp Forest
Plots Summary (Canopy Species) ............................. 26
Table 9 Planting Regime ......................................... 33
Table 10: Phase 1 Mitigation Credit .................................. 44
Table 11: Mitigation Credit Release Schedule ........................... 45
iv
STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN
BARRA FARMS CAPE FEAR REGIONAL MITIGATION BANK
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
1.0 INTRODUCTION
ECOBANK, a private sector mitigation banking company, has established a regional stream and
wetland mitigation bank within the Coastal Plain region of the Cape Fear River Basin. This
region is expected to sustain unavoidable wetland impacts associated with projected
population growth, infrastructural development, and highway construction planned in the river
basin. The mitigation bank is designed to provide up-front, compensatory wetland and stream
mitigation for in-kind, unavoidable wetland and stream impacts associated with development.
The mitigation bank comprises the Barra Farms property located along upper reaches of
Harrison Creek in Cumberland County (Figure 1). The Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional
Mitigation Bank (Bank) is composed of approximately 2247 acres (ac) of interstream flats,
former Carolina Bays, historic stream origins, and floodplains which have been ditched,
levelled, and drained to support agricultural and silvicultural activities. This Bank offers
opportunities for nonriverine and riverine (stream) wetland restoration and enhancement which
can be phased in over a period of time. A conceptual mitigation plan was developed in April
1997 which describes existing conditions within the entire 2247-ac mitigation site and
presents a conceptual plan for restoring wetlands in a phased approach. Resource agency and
Mitigation Banking Review Team (MBRT) comments to the conceptual plan are contained in
Appendix A.
Phase 1 mitigation, as proposed in the conceptual plan, encompasses approximately 623 ac
surrounding the historic origin of Harrison Creek in lower reaches of the wetland system.
Phase 1 mitigation will provide up-front, in-kind wetland restoration to compensate for highway
related projects in the region. Specific highway related wetland mitigation needs associated
with pending North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects include NC 24
improvements in Cumberland, Sampson, and Duplin Counties (R-2303); NC 87 widening and
bypasses in Cumberland and Bladen Counties (R-2562 and R-522); and NC 24 improvements
around Fayetteville (X-2). These Traffic Improvement Projects (TIPs) are immediate and in
potential need of compensatory wetland mitigation (NCDOT letter; Appendix B). The selection
for appropriate use of this mitigation will be made by NCDOT.
The benefits of up-front wetland mitigation are numerous. Mitigation will be performed prior
to permit submittal and construction of a specific highway project. This mitigation will allow
resource and regulatory agencies the opportunity to evaluate the success of proposed
mitigation efforts early in the Section 404 process. Mitigation will be in-kind and within the
same basin, thereby replacing lost wetland functions and acreage before impacts occur.
1
_:;;?' - 4 •°j - ae .._ ? ? ?.' boll . ? / t ePy ` ? ~?„
t o ,? ae 4 , Ck s
i ,?E ' It - -{t •`t kehpptd'
<i:- tJlll ?. MJ1poM f q+ere
-- eus ? r '?? ' ea+"p ao - :??$ •Ky "• w _ ? 3 ?4'?. ? I ..- ' .6'? r-_•
4, 'Y'r'`ath+ Qefl .oWe .'? -?._i sieaxu.o e0 - ' ?$ _€?.
r r ? _? ? •Q?. ? S° ? J i C h 8?' _T "ttt+t e0 _.\ ? .-... b' ? _...?
6Y[ i00WYN0 Ile t ?r ,:a / ? , `? p I'a0 dur aahn +i ? ? _.` 110 .S 4, ? ?. `?? /m
- -
r? ?: ~ _ ? 3 <40 9 3 P6
Ali
iver
P-
Q LBW
% B1=
flip ?x ' I 53
i.:
r. ?
NC 8-
/ l ?\• //f .. /? i ?? } / ?. \ `` .rowan ???:..? ? ` - ?'b _? ' ,r.Cd? ~ ,?._r - _
ix?1I.l? r ?? tm ?? 210 _ Red -
t y'p? t0?
---4?1}f011-:''zi` $ /' o i •i._._i ?- .. '?' ?..' _ °C}ffi 1• ,,?. ,p4 t
Caeek 'RJR .o -. - _ ?_?\` d$`_•`1 \aN? •f • `,,'?f
ATEjMTUMI Ate'
.A?.i--J-
I ti' _ -fuagelo..- -1 Pav ,^ ` ?''" +t
r_-
Study Area
O 1 2 3Miles
0 1 2 3 4 fGlometers
RepAtlasmdeoed with permission from the North Carolina
and Gazetteer, DeLomw Mapping. 1993 I _ ?! ^-
C J,
.-._ - _?' '? ?.; _ ? J C _ '? \ . °, '? `?A,. '; ,/:".f Vii."?,^??•.% - a.
I Site Location Figure: 1
Environmental Barra Farms/Cape Fear Regional
s Services, Inc. Mitigation Bank Project: ER97047
Cumberland County, North Carolina Date: Dec 1997
a
W
Private sector mitigation relieves NCDOT and developers of the responsibility for site selection,
acquisition, implementation, monitoring, and long term management. In addition, scheduling
delays for highway construction can be eliminated by having mitigation in place and approved
early in the planning process. The long term success of this private sector mitigation project
will be ensured through financial assurances in accordance with State and Federal guidelines
established for contingency, remedial actions, monitoring, and long term management.
This mitigation plan details restoration and enhancement procedures for Phase 1 of the Barra
Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank. This document also outlines measures designed
to facilitate wetland restoration success and evaluates wetland functional replacement benefits
potentially realized from up-front mitigation activities. Components of this mitigation plan have
already been implemented at the site with project completion scheduled for the winter of
1997/1998.
A mitigation banking instrument (MBI) has been developed for Phase 1 mitigation and
represents a supplemental document to this mitigation plan. This plan and expedited project
implementation are designed to promote consensus from various resource and regulatory
agencies regarding wetland restoration success and to facilitate confirmation of the MBI.
2
2.0 METHODS
Natural resource information for the Phase 1 mitigation site (the Site) was obtained from
available sources. U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping and Natural Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS) soil surveys (USDA 1990, USDA 1984) were utilized for base
mapping and to evaluate existing landscape and soil information prior to on-site inspection.
Current 0 994 and 1997) aerial photography was obtained and evaluated to determine primary
hydrologic features and to map relevant environmental features. Figure 2 portrays the entire
2247 ac tract slated for wetland mitigation in the region. Figure 3 depicts the 623-ac Site
selected for Phase 1 mitigation use.
Detailed topographic mapping was developed through corrected aerial photography and land
elevation surveys. Additional land surveys were performed to establish property boundaries
and to obtain accurate water surface elevations at groundwater piezometers, within
streams/ditches, and within the Harrison Creek floodplain.
To characterize existing hydrologic conditions, mitigation planning included the following
activities: 1) installation of 55 soil borings and development of soil and/or geologic profile
descriptions at each location; 2) conversion of 13 soil borings into piezometers (Appendix C)
and periodic sampling for an 1 1-week period; 3) installation of three rain gauges to track
groundwater/rain fall fluctuations; 4) installation of four stream gauges within canals and
ditches to model surface water flow and groundwater discharge; 5) performance of hydraulic
conductivity tests by soil horizon; and 6) establishment of episodic groundwater flow
gradients. Groundwater conditions were modeled using DRAINMOD, a computer model for
simulating relatively shallow soils with high water tables. Surface water drainage and stream
flows were modeled by interpreting a series of USGS stream gauges in the region and by using
HEC-RAS, a program for establishing water surface profiles for various peak flow return
intervals (2 year, 10 year, etc.).
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) data bases were evaluated for the presence
of protected species and designated natural areas which may serve as reference (relatively
undisturbed) wetlands for restoration design. Regional management areas administered by The
Nature Conservancy (TNC), the N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation (NCDPC), and the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) were also evaluated for potential reference
use. Identified sites were sampled to provide baseline information on target (post-restoration)
wetland condition. Characteristic and target natural community patterns in reference sites
were classified according to constructs outlined in Schafale and Weakley's, Classification of
the Natural Communities of North Carolina 0 990). Forty two soil borings and five
groundwater piezometers were also placed in reference wetlands to compare subsurface
conditions between reference and the mitigation site.
3
jou 'J-„ i x n ,Ir^;,3.a'9 N M�:l �,�` i• L h _ � s. �'
rdG •rya �' � 3; R�`}'M'G�! _ rs �� xize r '�7 t s �� $'.
v
�d�if. r i ) ? n y 4t � j�� •

Field investigations were performed in the Spring, Fall, and Winter of 1997, including soil
classifications, stream delineations, land surveys, hydrological evaluations, and landscape
ecosystem classifications. Existing plant communities, surface water flow, soil map units, and
potential jurisdictional wetlands were delineated, mapped, and described by structure and
composition.
Field survey information was compiled within Geographic Information System (GIS) base
mapping and analyzed to develop detailed wetland restoration plans. Phase 1 of proposed
mitigation at Barra Farms is designed to provide suitable nonriverine wetland and limited
riverine (stream) wetland replacement for potential roadway projects in the region.
4
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY, TOPOGRAPHY, AND LAND USE
The Site is located in the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of North Carolina within
the Inner Coastal Plain region of the Cape Fear River Basin. The Cape Fear Basin extends from
the Piedmont/Coastal Plain boundary (Fall Line) north of Fayetteville southeast to the City of
Wilmington (Hydrologic Unit #0303000.4, #03030005, and #03030006 [USGS 19741). The
Site is located approximately 20 mi southeast of the Fall Line and approximately 95 mi
northwest of the coast.
The Site comprises approximately 623 ac situated 4 miles south of NC 24, 7 mi east of NC
87, and 10 mi southeast of Fayetteville (Figure 1). The Site, situated 3 mi east of the Cape
Fear River, is located on a broad coastal plain interstream divide which supports the NC 210
highway corridor, extensive crop lands, small commercial and residential development, hog
farms, several state roads, and discharges influent waters into Harrison Creek, a tributary of
the Cape Fear River.
The Site contains the historic stream origin of Harrison Creek. Adjacent, elevated sandy
terraces and flats comprise a watershed encompassing approximately 9.8 square miles (mil)
of land with groundwater and surface water discharging from these flats and terraces towards
the Site. Elevations within upper reaches of the watershed extend to approximately 140 ft
above mean sea level (MSL) along elevated sand rims and relict dunes. Conversely, elevations
within the Site range from approximately 118 ft above MSL at the upper boundary, to
approximately 113 ft above MSL along the historic stream channel (Figure 4). Therefore,
historic wetlands along the interstream divide were complex, influenced primarily by
precipitation and vertical groundwater fluctuations in interior wetland areas as well as radial
to lateral groundwater and surface water (stream) discharge in lower reaches of the Site.
The Site has been subdivided into three physiographic landscape units for wetland
classification and restoration planning: 1) groundwater (precipitation) flats; 2) headwater
slopes; and 3) riverine floodplains (Figure 4; Brinson 1993b). The primary variables utilized to
segregate wetland landscape units comprise land slope, the expected direction of groundwater
flow, and the influence of these groundwater interactions on wetland functions. Under historic
conditions, groundwater flats, concentrated in eastern and northern portions of the Site, are
expected to exhibit primarily vertical groundwater flow and recharge. Headwater slopes,
concentrated in central regions above the stream system, are expected to exhibit increasing
periods of semi-radial to radial groundwater flow and discharge towards the riverine floodplain.
The riverine floodplain is expected to sustain permanent lateral discharge of groundwater into
the stream channel and periodic overbank flooding from the stream channel into the floodplain.
A majority of the Site has been cleared, ditched, drained, with wetlands effectively eliminated.
The original drainage system was installed to facilitate agricultural production and to convey
drainage from upslope areas through the Site. Subsequently, additional drainage systems and
5
a dirt road network were constructed periodically over the last several decades. These
expanded canals, ditches, and culverts appear to have been installed in response to changing
agricultural land uses and additional drainage requirements. The patchwork of antecedent
ditch networks and current drainage structures includes approximately 100,800 linear feet of
ditches/canals distributed systematically throughout the Site. This drainage network has
redirected a large majority of the 9.8 mil watershed into constructed canals and away from
the historic origin of Harrison Creek.
3.2 GEOLOGY
The site is located in the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of North Carolina. The
Coastal Plain is comprised of sediments deposited since the Cretaceous Period, 138 million
years before present (m.y.B.P.). The sediments were deposited - during a series of
transgressions and regressions of the Atlantic Ocean.
The primary geologic unit at the Site comprises the Black Creek Formation of Cretaceous Age
(from 138 m.y.B.P. to 65 m.y.B.P.) (Brown et a/. 1985). The Black Creek Formation is
described as a gray-black, lignitic clay which contains thin beds and laminae of fine-grained
micaceous sand and thick lenses of cross-bedded sand. This unit also contains glauconitic,
fossiliferous, clayey sand lenses in the upper part (Brown et a/. 1985). An additional geologic
feature characteristic of the region includes the presence of Carolina Bays. Carolina Bays are
elliptical, palustrine or lacustrine features of unknown origin which are common in Coastal Plain
counties of North Carolina. The bays are present as both lakes and swamps near the Site.
3.3 SOILS
Surficial soils have been mapped by NRCS (USDA 1990). In addition, supplemental soil
mapping was prepared by DEHNR, Division of Soil and Water Conservation in 1994. Soils
were verified in the Fall of 1997 by licensed soil scientists to refine soil map units and to
locate inclusions and taxadjunct areas. Systematic transects were established and sampled
to ensure proper coverage. Refined soil mapping is depicted in Figure 5.
The mitigation area occurs along a landscape-soil gradient characterized as the Stallings-
Croatan-Lynn Haven-Johnston catena. Elevated flats and Carolina bay sand rims along the site
periphery consist of somewhat poorly drained, sandy sediments (Stallings, Leon map units)
while interior portions of the site are dominated by very poorly drained, organic soils
associated with the Croatan and Lynn Haven series. However, southern portions of the
historic wetland comprise a complex of organic material, coarse marine deposits, and fine
alluvial sediments that have been mixed and reworked by fluvial actions. Soil patterns and
land slope suggest that southern portions of the site, including the Johnston soil map unit
(Figure 5), historically consisted of a complex supporting groundwater recharge areas and
groundwater (headwater) discharge areas serving as sources for intermittent, ephemeral, and
permanent blackwater streams.
6
:r<a iv4i ??sar
Z
O
KH :3 11:11 a-
S + i'i 4 0•
{(D ! n. -1 0 -1 0 C7 e r r C7 i i l l l l i l i i i i i! aaaadaaa ?
I I I I I ! I QaQaavap 0 n O S 3 3 0 0 a
=3 p 3 3 3 p ? I I I I I I I!!
N ?- I I i l l l l l i 1 1 aaaaaa
3• N
I i l i l l l l l 1 1 1 aaaaaa
?p V) o? 3 0 =_:3 O ? I l l i i l l l i l l l
Q -• I I I I I I I I I I I I datldaa
to 3 1 3 p p Q. ` 111111111111111111111111 aaaaaa
I-0- p_ r cD CD Q i l l l l l l l i l 1 1 aaatlaaaa
r I I I 1 I I i I I I i i a a a d d
p? 3 0 3 3 0 -0 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 f l l 4 a a a a
! I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a a a a a
3 in ? 0 a
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4
D I I i i l i i l l l l aaaaaaaaaaaa
'< p^ I I I i l l i l l i l l l i (I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I aaaaaa
0 p ^O ?. --i I I I I I I I I I i i l l l atlatl
c0 {/) I i I I i I I I 1 I I I I I i a
N C7 i l l i l l i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 + d 4
p= ?p ? C/I ?_ ? I I i l l( I I i l i l i l l a s
3 3 Q I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 ! a
p I Cnn? I I I I I I I i l! I l l i l a s
?-p ?3 Qp 1111 Iiillllllllllillll I I i + +aaa
D S n Q O 111111111111111111111 + + + a a a
N <D 1 III I 11111 + + + + aaa
(D p 3 ^-• I I I i + + + + + d a
n? p, { C Q 11 I I I I I + + + + + aa4aa
a a
-D? 3 ?.? Q I l I I I' - I + + + + + adaaa
n ?• .? I + + + + + +aaaaaa
m O p =? + + + + + daaaaaa
Q p + + + + + gagaddda
"? "O I I I + + + + aaaaadad
C aaa4a4tlaa
mCA p I I I + d a a a a
-1 { X i I I I a a a ad4aaaaaa4d
O N p I i t + a a a a a a a a a
a
-+ O I I I I a a a a
p I i i a a a 444 a a a a a a a a
O + p a a a a a a a a a a
a I i l a a a a a a a a a a a
+ a a a a a a a a a a
aaaadaaaaaaaaaaaaadad
N 1.06
W O L0
rn M
0
0

I I I+ a a a a a a a a a a
I I I a a a a a a a a a a
+ aaaaaaaaaaaQaaaaaaa
N I I I a a a a a a a a a
-, N p 1 1 1 1 1 1 + 1 4a4a411 4<Qa4aG.1
.p N c0 I I + aaaaaaaaaaaa a a+
V-P-0,- Ot0 p IIlIiI. + aaaaaaaa + +
L(D I I ! + + + +
.::::+ + + + + + +
t'trt° .::.::::::::::::::::
I 1 1 1 1 + + + + + + +
I i 1 I I I + + + + + + + + +?
IIIII 1 ( + + + + + + + + i
?1 I I 1 I 1 I a . + + + + + + + aaa +1
/? I 1 1 I d + + + + + 4 aada4a4
I l l l i l l l aaaa a + + + aadavadad4db
I I I ! aaaaa a dtldtlaaddatlvad?
1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 4 4 4 4 4 + a 4 4 4 4 a 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
d 4 d 4 :. d 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 d 4 a d
? i I I I I a a a a a a a d a a a a a 4 a a a d a a
Iilliilii a a a a a a::::::::a v d 4 G a a a d d a d 4 d 4 b
d a 4 a a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 a tl 4 4
I I I I I a4avaaaaaaaaa .'4a4tlaa4444ad4a4a4aaada4a4a4®atlaad
! I i l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 a s d d d a v 4 d a d 4 4 a 4 4 a d 4 a 4 a 4 4 a
4 a 4 d a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d
I I i i l l Ida4aaa4d4aaaaaaaaadaaa4tlad4atlaaddaaatlaad4a4daaddadtld
111111111 I i l aa4Qaaaada4a4aaaaaaaaaaa4a4a4a4ada4a4aaa4aaaaadaaaaa
d a d a d a a a a a a d a a a a a a a tl a a a a a a d
I i l a a d a a a a a a a a a a d d a a a a d d a a a a a a
a s a d a a tl 4 4 a a a d 4 a a 4 a a 4 d a a d a 4 a a
4 4 a 4 4 4 4 d a a a a Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 d 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4 a a a 4 a a 4 4 4 a 4 4 d 4 4 d
4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 G d 4 4 4 a 4 d d a
4 4 4 4 4 4 a a 4 d 4 4 4 4 d a 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a d d a 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 d d tl 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 a
aaaadaaadadaaaaa aadtlaaadtlaaaaddaadddaaddtlddatlaaaaaa4daddadaaadaada
d a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 a a 4 4 d 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4
44da4a4tldddd4tl4aQa4d ada4tl4a4d4tlda4a4tl4a4a4a4d4a4d4a4tl4a4d4d4a4daa4dQa4
d a a 4 4 4 4 a d d a G a a d 4 4 4 4 4 4 a d 4 4 a a 4 4 4 4 a d d
4 4 d 4 a 4 4 4 Q 4 4 d 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 d 4
4aaa4a4tldd44444tltlddatld444d4aad4d4a4a4d4aadaa4aQa4a444a4a4d4da44d4d4d4a
d a a d a 4 4 4 d a d a 4 a a 4 d 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a a a 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 4 4 a d a a 4 4 a d 4 4 4 d 4 4 d a 4 4 {-
4 a tl d d a 4 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 v 4 a 4 4 d d d 4 d 4
da4a4a4ada4a4a4a4a444a4a4a4a4 4aaa4a4a4a4a4a4a4a4a4dda4a4a4aaatla4a4 4 +
4 d d 4 d 4 4 4 4 4 a G a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
4 4 d 4 v 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 d 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a d
d 4 4 Q 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 a 4 4 d 4 4 Q 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a a 4 a + + o +
4 d 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d a 4 d 4 4 4 4 4 a
d 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a d d 4 a 4 4 a 4 + + ?y +
7 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 4 a 4 d 4 4 Q a a 4 a 4 4 d 4 d 4 4 4 a 4 4 y
4a4ava4aQaaa4a4a4a4ada4a4aaa4a4aaa4 4a 4a4a4a4a4a4a4a4aaa4a4a4 + +
a d d d d a a a v a Q d a a a d a a a v a d a 4 a d a+ +++ ?
a a a a a a a a a a d a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
a d a a a a a a d 4 4 4 a a a d a a a d a a a a d a a
a a a a a a a a a d a a a a d a a d a v a d a d
4 4 4 a d 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 d a 4 4 a 4 + + I
a a a 4 4 tl tl a a a a a a a a a a d a a d I
4 4 d 4 v a 4 4 d 4 a 4 4 d tl 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 a
Qa4aaada4a4a4 aaa4a4aaaQa4ad44a4a 4a4ad 4 + + + 111 ?
4 4 4 tl 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 tl
d a 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 d 4 4 4 4 a d 4 a a {p
a a a a d a a d a tl d a a a a d i + + + 111
a a a a a 4 4 d d 4 4 a 4 G a a 1 1 1 1 1 1 + + + + 1 1 1
a a a a a d a d a a d d d a a a
a a 4 d 4 4 a d 4 4 4 tl tl 4 4 4 d d
a a a a a d a a a a a d a a a a d I + + + + + + + I I
4 4 4 d 4 Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 d 4 I i t
d d a a a a a a a d a a a d a a a I I + + + + + + + i i
a a a a d d a a a a tl a a a a a a a
a a d d a d a d a a 4 a a a 4 a a i l l i t
d a d a d a d a a a a d a a d d 1 1 1 1 1 1 + + + + + + T i l l
4 4 a 4 4 4 a 4 d tl d a 4 4 4 a 4
d d a d 4 4 4 4 a a 4 4 4 4 a 4 4
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a I I i+ + + + + + + I I
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a I I I I I
a a a 4 d a a a a a a 4 a a 4 tl a i l l
a + + + + + + + i
4 4 4 d 4 a 4 a 4 4 4 4 a a d
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a i i i i i
d a G a 4 4 a v a a a a a a a a a I I 1 1 1 + + + + + + i l l
d 4 a tl d 4 a 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 a a
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
a a a d tl a a a a a a a a a a tl I + + + + + + I i
dada4a4a4a4aaa4a4a4a4a4a4a4av II + + + + + + III
da4tlaadd4a4ad44a4d4d4daaad I
4a4aGa4a4a4a4a4a4a4a4ad + + + + + +
aadaaavaa4a4a4a4a4aa + + + + +
4 4 a 4 4 a 4 4 + + + + .f
4 4 4 d 4 4 4
a 4 a 4 a 4 a 4 as 4 a 4 a + + + + ofi
i
4444444 + + -{-
aaa + +
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Soil Map Units and Hydric/Nonhydric Soil Boundaries
Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Drawn By. PJS Figure: 5
Checked By. AD Project: ER97047
Scale: 1" = 600' Date: Dec 1997
Five soil series were mapped within the mitigation area (Figure 5). Series mapped include the
Croatan (Terric Medisaprists), Lynn Haven (Typic Haplaquods), Johnston (Cumulic
Humaquepts), Leon (Aeric Hap/aquods), and Stallings (Aeric Paleaquults) series. Inclusions of
the Woodington (Typic Paleaquults), Murville (Typic Hap/aquods), and Paxville (Typic
Umbraquults) series were also identified. The Lynn Haven map units also contain intergrades
in crop lands that exhibit characteristics of the Torhunta (Typic Humaquepts) series.
These series maintain upper horizon soil textures ranging from sand to organic muck with
drainage classes ranging from very poorly drained to somewhat poorly drained. Actual surface
horizon textures varied throughout the mitigation area, with specific sites being affected by
fluvial activity, agricultural practices, and grading within the surface (A) horizon. Modified
surface textures were utilized to refine drainage models implemented for wetland
(groundwater) restoration planning (Section 4.1).
Subsurface layers typically include a sand inter-layer (averaging 3 ft below the surface) and
an intermittent crusty silt and/or clay loam horizon below an average depth of approximately
4 ft. This silt/clay loam layer suggests that the Carolina Bay formations on-site are silt/clay
based, a feature considered relatively unique in the region. Clay-based Carolina Bays often
support ponded water and steady state, hardwood/cypress/cedar-dominated swamp forest
communities (Sharitz and Gibbons 1982).
3.3.1 Hydric Soils
Hydric soils are defined as "soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the
growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil layer" (USDA 1987). Hydric
soils comprise 92 percent (approximately 574 ac) of the 623-ac mitigation area. Hydric soil
map units present include the Croatan, Lynn Haven, and Johnston series.
Construction of large canals and feeder ditches has drained most of the hydric soil units to the
extent that hydric conditions in the upper soil horizons are currently limited. In addition, soil
surfaces have been cleared, levelled, and graded to facilitate agricultural production.
Spoil ridges and piles occur systematically throughout the hydric soil area. Much of the
excavated spoil material was used to build and elevate dirt roads adjacent to canals. However,
substantial spoil ridges persist along isolated ditch segments and range from 1 ft to 6 ft in
height above the adjacent soil surface. Some excavated soil material was utilized to develop
crowns (domes) in central portions of some fields.
Organic Matter Content
Levelling of soil surfaces and crop production has assisted in inducing a decrease in organic
matter content in the upper soil layer (top 11 inches) of Croatan and Lynn Haven areas.
Laboratory analyses of soils on-site indicate that the plow layer in Croatan soils supports less
than 10% humic matter while reference wetland sites in the region typically support up to
60% humic matter in the surficial soil layer. The elevated content of organic matter (peat) at
7
the surface in undisturbed wetlands is expected to promote standing water during certain
periods of the year (Section 4.1). Beneath the plow layer (below 11 inches), on-site soils and
reference wetland soils appear to support similar organic matter content (25% to 60%; USDA
1984).
In farmed portions of the Site, the decrease in organic matter content and elimination of
surface microtopography in the top 11 inches has increased soil hydraulic conductivity and
drainage rates relative to reference wetlands. As a result, drainage has most likely been
accelerated towards downslope areas, lateral ditches, and into the major canals. The decrease
in surface water storage potential in the top 11 inches on crop land may provide as much
encouragement to soil drainage as the construction of ditches in certain areas (Schouwenaars
1995). In Croatan soils, preferential migration of perched water laterally through the
permeable plow layer may assist in providing adequate drainage for farming shallow-rooted
crops.
Soil Surface Microtopography
Surface microtopography represents an important component of wetlands as water storage
functions and micro-habitat complexity are provided by hummocks and swales across the
wetland landscape. In reference wetlands, surface wetland hydrology is localized and
influenced by local configurations of soils, vegetation, and drainage patterns. Reintroduction
of microtopographic complexity across soil surfaces represents an important component of
wetland restoration in converted crop land. If ditches are back-filled but the surface layer is
not modified, perched water may continue preferential migration laterally through the surface
soil layer, promoting flood conditions in downslope areas and dryer conditions in upper reaches
of the wetland.
Deep scarification or harrowing (i.e. below 11 inches) and introduction of woody debris will
promote soil surface microtopography and surface water storage. In addition, deep
scarification will assist in increasing organic matter content in the wetland surface by mixing
low permeability organics present below the plow layer. Wetland restoration plans which
require immediate success must address surface water storage (surface microtopography) and
soil hydraulic conductivities (organic matter content) along with the influence of ditching.
Due to the relatively high shrink/swell potential of organic materials in the upper soil layer,
plow pans or artificially compacted soil layers are not expected at the Site. Perching of
groundwater during certain periods of the year is expected as a result of relatively high water
holding capacity, high shrink/swell potential in organic materials, and the subsurface silt/clay
loam layer.
3.3.2 Nonhydric Soils
Non-hydric soil series present include the Leon and Stallings map units. These series comprise
approximately 49 ac of the Site. These soils are primarily non-hydric but may contain hydric
inclusions of the Lynn Haven, Murville, or Woodington series. The non-hydric series generally
8
occupy elevated sandy terraces and exhibit drainage classes ranging from somewhat poorly
drained to moderately well drained. These soils typically lack wetland hydrology but are
included in the mitigation landscape to provide the potential for restoration of upland/wetland
ecotones. These ecotones are among the most diverse and productive environments for
wildlife (Brinson et al. 1981).
3.4 PLANT COMMUNITIES
Plant communities at Barra Farms are influenced primarily by land use practices. Site
preparation, drainage, and logging over the years have substantially altered the natural plant
communities. Five plant communities have been identified for descriptive purposes, including:
1) Crop Land; 2) Early Successional Scrub; 3) Loblolly Pine Plantation; 4) Bay-Maple Forest;
and 5) Upland Pine-Oak Forest (Figure 6).
Crop Land
Approximately 60% (369 ac) of the 623-ac Site consists of active or fallow crop land. These
areas include farm-fields which have been planted during the current season and fallow farm-
fields which have been planted within the last 3 years. Agricultural production for soybean
and corn is concurrent on farmed portions of the Site. In fallow fields, disturbance-adapted
species indicative of moderately well drained conditions are currently recolonizing the area.
Characteristic pioneer species include broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), asters (Aster spp.),
geranium (Geranium carolinianum), goldenrod (Sofidago spp.), horseweed (Erigeron
canadensis), young red maple (Acer rubrum), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), groundsel-tree
(Baccharis halimifolia), and eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides).
Several fields support dense, young sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) and red maple (Acer
rubrum). Scattered loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus), winged sumac (Rhus copalfinum), and
laurel-leaf greenbrier (Smilax laurifolia) are also present.
Numerous inter-field ditches support hydrophytic plants such as soft rush (Juncus effusus),
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), cattail (Typha latifolia), seedbox (Ludwigia alternifolia), yellow-
eyed grass (Xyris sp.), and beak rush (Rhynchospora sp.). Inter-field dirt road berms are
invaded by various upland and invasive species such as blackberry (Rubus spp.), broomsedge,
asters, and numerous annual and perennial grasses and herbs. Characteristic wetland
vegetation is generally absent from crop land portions the site.
Based on historic timber maps (County of Cumberland 1923), a majority of the crop land may
have supported peatland Atlantic white cedar forest, bay forest, streamhead Atlantic white
cedar forest, and nonriverine swamp forest under historic conditions (Schafale and Weakley
1990).
9
ER97047/13ar_alloig

J# 4F
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Existing Plant Communities
Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Drawn By. PJS Figure: 6
Checked By. JWD Project: ER97047
Scale: 1" = 600' Date: Dec 1997
Early Successional Scrub
Early successional scrub communities are currently recolonizing portions of the site that have
been heavily logged or not farmed within 3-5 years or more. These sites, comprising
approximately 135 ac, contain decreasing populations of broomsedge but increased coverage
by greenbrier, loblolly pine, pond pine (Pinus serotina), red maple, and evergreen shrubs such
as bitter gallberry (flex g/abra), sweet gallberry (flex coriacea), and fetter-bush (Lyonia lucida).
Expected historic communities include those listed for crop land areas.
Bay/Maple Forest
Southern reaches of the site maintain bay/maple forest assemblages (102 ac) which have
sustained degradation from past logging, watershed diversion, drainage, and construction of
intermittent road and ditch networks. The disturbed forest canopy consists almost entirely of
loblolly bay and red maple. The shrub layer is variable with characteristic species including
bitter gallberry, sweet gallberry, fetter-bush, sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), highbush
blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), sheepkill (Kalmia angustifolia), and laurel-leaf greenbrier
(Smilax laurifolia).
Included within this bay forest community, remnants of a Coastal Plain small stream swamp
forest persist along a degraded floodplain and relict stream channel. This remnant community,
covering approximately 14 ac, appears to have been affected by reductions in drainage area,
loss of surface hydrodynamics, reductions in hydroperiod, and periodic timber harvest. Like
the surrounding forest, the canopy is dominated by loblolly bay and red maple. However, relict
stems of swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora), overcup oak (Quercus lyrata), and laurel oak (Quercus
laurifol/a) persist within seedling layers. Organic soil subsidence has exposed root collars on
many of the remaining tree stems.
Upland Pine-Oak Forest
Approximately 11 ac of upland pine-oak forest resides on dissected stream-side ridges in
southern reaches of the site. These well drained ridges support plant species characteristic
of mesic mixed hardwood forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990). Canopy cover includes
southern red oak (Quercus falcata), white oak (Quercus alba), water oak (Quercus nigra),
yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and loblolly pine. Subcanopy and shrub layers are
characterized by horse sugar (Symplocus tinctoria), American dogwood (Corpus florida), sour
wood (Oxydendrum arboreum), and blueberries (Vaccinium spp.). This community grades into
the relict small stream swamp at the toe slope to the adjacent floodplain.
Loblolly Pine Plantation
An approximately 6-ac area in southern reaches of the site was cleared and rowed in the last
15 years. Subsequently, loblolly pine was planted as a replacement for the historic mesic and
wet hardwood forests.
10
3.5 HYDROLOGY
The hydrophysiographic region surrounding the Site consists of relatively flat, Inner Coastal
Plain environments characterized by moderate rainfall (USDA 1990). In Fayetteville,
precipitation averaged 47 inches per year for the time period 1950 to 1980. Rainfall data for
the 31-year period is included in Appendix D.
The historic drainage area for the on-site segment of Harrison Creek encompasses
approximate y 8 mil of land (base on SGSmapping). The existing drainage area -een
r uced to approximately "mir -Oand due to a canal network. The diverted watershed
primarily supports agricultural land with forest, hog farms, residential, and small commercial
development distributed throughout the area.
Hydrology at Barra Farms is driven by precipitation inputs and primarily vertical to semi-radial
fluctuations in the groundwater table. However, based on reference drainage areas in the
region, radial to lateral groundwater flow and surface water flow represented a significant
component of wetland hydrodynamics under historic conditions. Topographically, the site is
generally expressed as a broad flat with interior areas generally sloping towards Harrison
Creek.
Under historic conditions, interior wetlands and upland ridges most likely served as an above
headwater storage and groundwater discharge area for Harrison Creek. Conversely, lateral
surface (stream) flow and overbank flooding is expected to have dominated wetland
hydrodynamics in the riverine floodplain. The floodplain appears to have surrounded a number
of intermittent stream channels which coalesced into a primary channel denoting the origin of
Harrison Creek (Figure 4). The Harrison Creek segment evident immediately below farm-field
ditches appears to have represented a first or second order stream (Figure 4) (Strahler 1964).
No relict, first order or second order stream channels were documented within crop lands
under existing conditions, most likely due to ditching, leveling, and plowing of the soil
surfaces.
3.5.1 Groundwater
Currently, semi-radial and lateral groundwater migration has been accelerated in crop lands by
levelling of the soil surface and by reductions in soil organic matter content. The induced
groundwater migration is intercepted by a network of interior canals and interfield ditches
which effectively drains farmed portions of the Site. Approximately 100,800 linear feet of
ditches and canals have been constructed and range from approximately 3 ft deep in interfield
ditches to 7 ft deep at the site out-fall. This drainage network connects site discharge within
the interstream divide to a constructed canal which extends towards tributaries of the Cape
Fear River approximately 1.2 miles below the Site.
Groundwater flow diagrams were prepared weekly for September, October, and November
1997 and correlated to weekly rainfall data collected at the Site. Groundwater elevation and
rainfall data is presented in Table 1. A groundwater flow map for 4 November 1997 is
11
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS AND PRECIPITATION DATA
BARRA FARMS SITE
GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS
Date Date Date Date
9/30/97 10/8/97 10/14/97 10/21 /97
Station GS' GW2 Depth GW Depth GW Depth GW Depth
I.D. Elevation Elevation BGS3 Elevation BGS Elevation BGS Elevation BGS
4PZ-1 117.96 111.34 6.62 111.20 6.76 111.10 6.86 111.16 6.80
PZ-2 117.66 110.76 6.90 110.74 6.92 110.75 6.91 110.88 6.78
PZ-3 115.50 110.94 4.56 110.45 5.05 110.28 5.22 111.13 4.37
PZ-4 119.17 112.88 6.29 112.66 6.51 112.48 6.69 112.42 6.75
PZ-5 115.34 111.08 4.26 110.57 4.77 110.35 4.99 111.42 3.92
PZ-6 116.77 110.20 6.57 109.67 7.10 109.44 7.33 110.08 6.69
PZ-7 116.09 110.96 5.13 110.48 5.61 110.26 5.83 111.15 4.94
PZ-8 113.14 109.87 3.27 109.49 3.65 109.35 3.79 110.32 2.82
PZ-9 116.04 110.18 5.86 110.19 5.85 110.17 5.87 111.75 4.29
PZ-10 117.55
PZ-11 117.12 111.08 6.04 110.72 6.40 110.53 6.59 111.53 5.59
PZ-12 116.14 110.90 5.24 110.44 5.70 110.29 5.85 111.14 5.00
PZ-137 4.70 3.83 2.90
SG-1 112.60 112.60 112.60 112.60 112.60
SG-2 113.40 113.40 113.40 113.40 113.40
SG-3 110.49 110.49 110.49 110.49 110.49
PRECIPITATION DATA
9/23 to 9/30 9/30 to 10/8 10/8 to 10/14 10/14 to 10/21
5RG-1 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.4
RG-2 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.3
RG-3 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.5
'GS = ground surface
IGW = groundwater
3BGS = below ground surface
°PZ = piezometer
5RG = rain guage
6SG = staff guage
Rain data in inches (in)
Elevations are in feet (ft) above mean sea level (msl)
'PZ-13: located within the reference wetland site
TABLE 1 (continued)
GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS AND PRECIPITATION DATA
BARRA FARMS SITE
GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS
Date Date Date Date
10/28/97 11/4/97 11/12/97 11/20/97
Station GS' GWz Depth GW Depth GW Depth GW Depth
I.D. Elevation Elevation BGS3 Elevation BGS Elevation BGS Elevation BGS
4PZ-1 117.96 112.10 5.86 112.95 5.01 114.01 3.95 115.79 2.17
PZ-2 117.66 111.16 6.50 113.04 4.62 113.40 4.26 114.73 2.93
PZ-3 115.50 113.49 2.01 113.95 1.55 -- -- -- --
PZ-4 119.17 113.78 5.39 114.47 4.70 114.85 4.32 116.45 2.72
PZ-5 115.34 114.29 1.05 114.68 0.66 114.33 1.01 -- --
PZ-6 116.77 111.51 5.26 112.66 4.11 113.39 3.38 114.65 2.12
PZ-7 116.09 113.00 3.09 113.46 2.63 113.31 2.78 114.42 1.67
PZ-8 113.14 111.68 1.46 112.04 1.10 111.93 1.21 112.55 0.59
PZ-9 116.04 114.78 1.26 114.79 1.25 114.71 1.33 115.73 0.31
PZ-10 117.55 110.75 6.80 111.22 6.33 112.35 5.20 114.21 3.34
PZ-11 117.12 114.50 2.62 114.86 2.26 114.61 2.51 115.48 1.64
PZ-12 116.14 112.58 3.56 112.91 3.23 112.83 3.31 114.18 1.96
PZ-137 1.80 1.61 1.60 0.69
SSG-1 112.60 113.66 114.64 113.50 113.95
SG-2 113.40 113.40 113.47 113.50 114.00
SG-3 110.49 111.97 112.87 112.87 112.34
PRECIPITATION DATA
10/21 to 10/28 10/28 to 11 /4 1 1 /4 to 11/12 11 /12 to 11/20
6RG-1 2.4 0.9 0.6 --
RG-2 3.1 1.2 0.6 1.4
RG-3 2.6 1.2 0.8 2.2
'GS = ground surface
2GW = groundwater
313GS = below ground surface
°PZ = piezometer
SSG = staff guage
6RG = rain guage
Rain data in inches (in)
Elevations are in feet (ft) above mean sea level (msp
'PZ-13: located within the reference wetland site
presented in Figure 7. Groundwater was encountered in the borings as part of a shallow,
unconfined surficial aquifer within 0.5 ft to 7 ft of the ground surface. The highest
groundwater elevations were measured in central portions of the site within the headwater
slope physiographic area. Water table elevations decrease along drainage gradients extending
from the headwater slope area to approximately 2 m (7 ft) below ground surface in uplands
and adjacent to the central east/west canal.
Groundwater wetland hydrology appears to be influenced by a contiguous groundwater table
in winter months and perched water tables during other periods of the year. The contiguous
water table is defined as a water table which is recorded at equivalent depth in a deep
groundwater piezometer (6 ft depth), a surficial monitoring well (2 ft depth), and/or a surf icial
soil boring (1.5 ft depth). The perched water table is defined as a water table that is recorded
at different depths within the borings or piezometers.
Contiguous water tables at the Site and in reference wetlands have been steadily rising over
the Fall 1997 sample season. However, in reference wetlands, surficial soil borings (to 18
inches) indicate that free water is periodically present while adjacent groundwater piezometers
(at 6 ft depth) do not register the presence of free water. Therefore, perching of water in
reference wetlands has apparently prolonged the period of free water within 1 ft of the soil
surface during late October and the month of November 1997. This perching phenomenon
appears absent from crop lands on the Site as plow layer runoff rates appear higher after
significant rainfall events (10/21-10/28).
As the contiguous water table rises and falls, perched water most likely contributes to wetland
hydroperiods in the rooting zone. Perching is expected due to low hydraulic conductivities,
high shrink/swell potential, and high water holding capacity within the surface organic layer.
In general, this relatively impermeable organic layer typically extends to 30 inches in depth
with a sandy to silty, more permeable inter-layer below the organic material.
Based on field observations in the Spring of 1997, a majority of the wetland hydroperiod is
expected to fall within the period of a contiguous groundwater table. However, extensions
of the wetland hydroperiod due to perching may be critical to suppressing decomposition rates
and the formation of organic soils. These periods of perching within the top foot of soils are
considered dependent upon hydraulic conductivity (organic matter content), available surface
water storage (surface microtopography), and discharge outlets (ditches). The presence of
open ditch segments with no outlet which extend below the impermeable layer may contribute
to draining of perched water, in proximity to the ditch, after the contiguous water table falls
in Spring months.
3.5.2 Surface Water
The ditch network has effectively diverted flows from the upper watershed away from the
historic floodplain of Harrison Creek and into the Central, East-West Canal (Figure 4). The
mitigation stream reach in southern (lower) sections of the Site represented a first or second
12
ER97047/Bar_allB. dwg
1 I
W
CD
N N

I

11 CD DO
TI =
• C7 M

C
0
.

0 i-
o
n•
Q
o _•
-?
0 N
0
_
?•

n

Ln 0

3 CD

:3
_ CD
--?

CD
o

CD m -
r
0

CO
-
Q r
=3
Q
C7
?-
Q 0
C- .?
O tD '':
0
:3
Q_
Q Ui
Q
m o
o 0
- .-
N-/
0
s=

Q
CD
I
M
CD
Q
o•

N k'7
-1
?\
0 0

o

r

i

h 1 l `? ?
t
1
----- --------
r r ? c` -IT
s ! 0)

A

oo,
Ln

D L'7
t
Q
ra

1 r ~.
t
1

t
?
/ •
7T? f ;

' ' t t

rl

Environmental
Services, Inc.

?i
?Q
J?

1 y ??? t L
/ }tt 1 v
t
fl ,tP?. ? t
Inferred Groundwater Flow for 11-4-97
Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Drawn By. PJS Figure: 7
Checked By. JWD Project: ER97047
Scale: 1" = 600' Date: Dec 1997
0
v 4
t
order stream under historic conditions (Figure 4) (Strahler 1964). Intermittent or seasonal, first
order stream channels most likely extended above the identified primary stream; however,
clear evidence of fluvial geomorphology has been eliminated in adjacent crop lands.
Drainage redirection has caused significant reductions in surface water discharge into the
stream reach. Historically, drainage area simulations (9.8 mil) indicate that the 2-year peak
discharge may have provided stream flows approaching 330 cubic feet/second (CFS)
(Appendix H and Section 4.2). Under existing conditions (drainage area: 0.5 mil) simulations
indicate a 2-year discharge of approximately 30 CFS, representing a 90% decrease in riverine
flows.
Based on storage potential, on-site wetlands may have provided 525 acre-feet of discharge
on an annual basis. If so, the on-site discharge into Harrison Creek would have comprised
approximately 1 ft3/second averaged over an entire year. This estimate assumes that 75% of
available water re-enters the atmosphere through evapotranspiration and that the annual,
contiguous water table provides the only discharge entering the channel. In this assessment,
additional rainfall after the contiguous water table falls has not been considered as a water
source for the channel (i.e. vertical groundwater fluctuations are assumed to prevail during
summer months).
Restoration of groundwater wetland hydrology and diversion of ditch flows from the upper
watershed into the Site will redirect riverine wetland functions towards potentially more stable,
historic conditions. Stream and floodplain functions may be restored within the 2400-ft
stream reach on-site and within the approximately 4600-ft downstream segment of Harrison
Creek. Surface water models are described in detail in Section 4.2.
Based on land elevation surveys, the stream valley extends for approximately 2200 ft along
the creek with floodplain slopes averaging less than 0.001 (rise/run). The channel is near
linear (sinuosity =1.1); therefore, the channel bed is expected to mimic valley slope (less than
0.001). The width of the flood prone area (Wfpa) under historic conditions varies from
approximately 50 ft near the exposed upstream terminus to 350 ft at the stream outfall
(Rosgen 1996).
The relict channel has partially filled in with organic material and the cross-sectional area was
estimated by excavating to the probable historic stream bed. The exposed channel appears
to average approximately 6 to 8 ft wide at bankfull, and the cross-sections range in average
depth from 0.5 to 1.2 ft below bankfull. Bankfull channel dimensions vary considerably
throughout the mitigation stream reach as braiding (anastomosization) may have occurred
under historic conditions. Exposed channel sections support a cross-sectional area averaging
approximately 6 ft2.
13
The historic stream bed is comprised of organic (stained) silts and fine sands (D85). A distinct
thalweg was not noted within the channel which may be indicative of relatively low flow
velocities and low shear stress exhibited by the system during peak discharges. In 1997,
stream flows were intermittent through the Winter and early Spring. No stream flow was
noted from April 1997 to 24 November 1997.
Off-Site Drainage
As depicted in Figure 4, one primary surface flow inlet has been identified extending from the
adjacent watershed into the Site. This inlet consists of a ditch which extends from an
adjacent state road and residential area and flows into the central East/West canal. Due to the
size of the Site and expected slope gradients below in-fall, these influent surface flows appear
to maintain base level elevations that are conducive to on-site storage after interior drainage
networks are removed (Appendix H). Discharge from surface flow inlets along the site
periphery will be accommodated within the wetland restoration area through routing of the
drainage into the headwater storage area of Harrison Creek (Figure 4). Restoration of water
quality functions associated with this mitigation project may be significantly enhanced by
incorporating flows from the upper watershed before entry into Harrison Creek and the Cape
Fear River.
3.6 WATER QUALITY
Harrison Creek and tributaries extending into the site have a best usage classification of C.
Class C uses include aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, and secondary
recreation. Secondary recreation refers to activities involving human body contact with water
on an infrequent or incidental basis (DEM 1993).
The Site consists of crop land located adjacent to a network of drainage ditches and canals.
Fertilizers, pesticides, and nutrients associated with farming practices are expected to have
influenced water quality in flows leaving the Site. Vegetated buffers adjacent to drainage
ditches, which may serve as nutrient and chemical filtration strips, do not exist within the
farm-fields. As such, runoff is expected to have entered the drainage network and transported
off-site into Harrison Creek with associated deleterious effects on water quality. These
unprotected drainage networks extend into tributaries of the Cape Fear River.
Drainage structures within the Site service a watershed covering approximately 9.8 mil of land
area. The land area is composed primarily of crop land along with hog farms, roads, residential
areas, and pine plantation. Runoff from this land area effectively bypasses wetland surfaces
as drainage canals transport flow directly through the Site. Restoration of wetland hydrology
and diversion of influent surface flows onto the Site may increase water quality functions
associated with nutrient removal, particulate retention, and chemical transformation performed
by the mitigation area.
14
3.7 WILDLIFE
Although the original forest tracts on this site have been removed for large-scale agricultural
purposes, adjacent natural areas provide food, water, and cover for various species of wetland
dependent wildlife (listed in Appendix E). Forested floodplains along lower segments of the
interstream divide support wildlife species adapted to riparian forest habitat. In addition,
ephemeral drainageways and ponding within contiguous wetland flats and slopes provide
interaction among riparian and non-riparian wildlife guilds in the region. Wetland/upland
ecotones provide additional habitat diversity near the Site. These ecotones are among the
most diverse and productive environments for wildlife (Brinson et ai. 1981).
In spite of area-wide changes to forested habitat (agriculture, timber harvesting, residential
development, etc) within the region, it is still known to support large mammals such as black
bear (Ursus americanus), bobcat (Feiis rufus), and white-tailed deer (Odocodeus virginianus).
In addition, surrounding lands support many smaller mammals in a complex food chain of
predator and prey elements.
Characteristic bird species that can be expected to utilize wetlands in the region include great
blue heron (Ardea herodias), black-crowned night heron (Nycdcorax nycticorax), mallard (Areas
piatyrhynchos), wood duck (Aix sponsa), and barred owl (Strix varia). In addition, a high
number of passerine birds, both permanent and summer resident species, nest in hardwood
swamp forest. Among these are several neotropical migrants such as Swainson's warbler
(Limnothiypis swainsonii) and prothonotary warbler (Protonotaria citrea), and other forest
interior species such as the wood thrush (Hyiocichia musteiina) and Acadian flycatcher
(Empidonax virescens), that require large tracts of contiguous forest for survival (Keller et ai.
1993).
Extensive areas of standing water, seasonal wetlands, and stream channels in the area provide
favorable conditions for many species of reptiles and amphibians. Characteristic species
include red-bellied water snake (Nerodia erythrogaster), cottonmouth (Agkistrodon piscivorus),
yellow-bellied turtle (Trachemys scripta), spotted turtle (Ciemmys guttata), southern leopard
frog (Rana utricu/aria) and marbled salamander (Ambystoma opacum). These and numerous
other reptiles and amphibians are integral components of the wetland food chain.
Extensive agricultural land on the Site, considered prevalent in the region, provides limited
habitat opportunities for these wetland dependant species.
3.8 PROTECTED SPECIES, REGIONAL CORRIDORS, AND ADJACENT NATURAL AREAS
3.8.1 Protected Species
Federal listed species with Endangered (E) or Threatened (T) status receive protection under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) lists the following animal or plant species as federal-Threatened or Endangered
within Cumberland County.
15
Endangered or Threatened (E or T)
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (E)
Rough-leaved loosestrife (L ysimachia asperulaefolia) (E)
Pondberry (Lindera melissifolia) (E)
American chaffseed (Schwalbea americana) (E)
American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) (TS/A [similarity of appearance])
Small-whorled pogonia (lsotria medeoloides) (T*)
*: Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
The N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) maintains no documented recordings of
threatened or endangered species at the Site as of 3 December 1997. However, red-cockaded
woodpecker (RCW) and rough-leaved loosestrife populations occur approximately 2 miles south
of the Site, within the Bushy Lake State Natural Area (Figure 8 and Appendix F). Habitat for
these federal endangered species at Bushy Lake consists primarily of Carolina Bay sand rims
and pine forest interiors which have been lost at the Site due to farming activity. Wetland
mitigation activities would potentially restore and expand habitat for RCW and/or rough-leaved
loose-strife populations documented in the region.
3.8.2 Regional Corridors and Adjacent Natural Areas
The Site is located in proximity to a number of regional wildlife corridors and managed natural
areas including: 1) Bushy Lake State Natural Area; 2) Horse Shoe Lake/Suggs Mill Pond
Gamelands; 3) Broadwell Conservancy Area; 4) Bladen Lakes State Forest; and 5) the Cape
Fear River and South River regional corridors. Each of these systems is managed as
bioreserves by various state agencies or private enterprises. Sensitive plants, animals and
communities documented in the bioreserves by NCNHP are listed in Appendix F.
The Site is located approximately 2 mi north of the Bushy Lake State Natural Area (Figure 8).
This natural area currently encompasses approximately 2570 ac with an estimated additional
800 ac to be added in 1997 through acquisition by The Nature Conservancy (TNC). The
Bushy Lake State Natural Area is managed by the North Carolina Park and Recreation Service
out of the Jones Lake State Park Office.
Immediately south of the State Natural Area, several NCNHP designated Priority Areas occur,
including Horseshoe Lake, Marshy Bay, Suggs Mill Pond, Big Gallberry Bay and Little Singletary
Lake. These sites have been listed by NCNHP as Priority Areas because they exhibit a unique
array of ecosystems in the State and Nation which may warrant future protection from
disturbance. In addition, these systems contain a significant assemblage of threatened and
endangered plant and animal species. NCWRC is in the process of acquiring approximately
10,000 ac within these Priority Areas for incorporation into the State Gamelands program
(managed by NCWRC).
16
_ v , Pd0 res 1 t • $any o 'V' ? : r w t
a '? rw\ L. ^-?? ? , S Heft a'_, c'`'° S t
33 ? {I 14 .? ?l• _ ?q'?} 5 1' 1 ?.. \P? k+ a Cf?lge°"- .b _ ? i,'?\' ? .:A '? _) t `:f I
210 / f? _"?t. ? o _ y '' ?.- @ ? '• ?v ?° N ? ? ? ? , s y; .' , ..? «L ,. ?'<'`
/ "oU ? ' ? _ - Is, e° •` c ? r ?;6 1° ?. G ?3 ? •?"" g $ $?6, fi4. '`a}\,•' +S ' r
_ ? - _^ 9?, _-? ?` a?y°! \ ? O °° O _ ••6 ash.. e i ti a?' $ ~ .` 6° , x tz' ?, re a?',?,. ' Hdls ea'af `
P-d
/ "s`.?1 r ? •" `__ 1 +Jp .??.,\ ? ffi,. 1 IY ?. i. -DIagD4 ? 'svAfe. o b L°Tre1 _,.'f. "0?' ?4!; ? ?? ? ll 24 1 ?! ? ??cs 1 /. L ;, $ ? ?,F .,'! J ,a x s¢xunn? "° ?. , 'ip'•:
o .4 `F`pae? b. tl ? •' i' /s-_'? ,( B. eP ,•? ' 242 0 ° 3 $1• l
:I P $v? aD ' '?_ C?s°v.•W??' $ '. t i . _-_` " ?s . ,a ?°s Q?^. ? '?' _ ? r
g 2 Barra Farms Cape Fear ???a? `~? $ ryne .b ee _ fyD 3 c4 } ?i
Regional Mitigation Bank
11 ,dE'!eansu 8 o ..y``' ..
G,v f `?' } ? cr a r„ m .A`a ? F. ?"` - _'? vr+Y.. ^ - '4 Yvrrem. / ? begr
e li ? ?? f \ :C' xx 9 Irani cl. -?
V.,°yYfr f° 'g' 4 a S ? cfi s? ? ,r ? `? r '? 1 ,. \ .S nr • 1 i 1• ? A?:. ?:. S --
s1 ll ,11 '? 1 .? i <, Roaedora •IY'ca,./fpep e
/ f
• ' . J ' . eln n,,ttln•` 5 " -'f ??rZ 411•\ RFfr ¢aovie •? 'ioe _ua n L7
210 °o `, +''-_ -rgq •o ¢? - ?.
*;.,,". of C Oakey Island - / ?"° I s f , bn' " - r
g..' Game Lands
-
.f
s ? ? ?
Q'I
j .s/dy ? li, - •? rtAi.. Y Ems„'` •. ? 5 ao - ? 3 - • '?° • ? • \i,-J'?.t? ?? 'b ? McDaniel l e ? \``
-? .-- /! t AT A ?f4y 141e ..' 4'? '}'r ree l `? P• \,
- -? a
Bushy Lake
'?I , ly we::1. ?..+ ' ?• State Natural Area = - <_ \
?DfaFLL '^AIIrtJata`- Pap ?, _ _, ?. _ i?y '
?I p a Ekaas ?' - - !JY?+?{s. _ ?-+''?.:a?? ,e ? (\ .. ?. ...- - _ ?"'?" ?J'p ~ ?G ?-^ -? ' f ? A
?. ;y I ,'.•? `?' ? _ - .'?.:_ .."' \ ..\T l rtYv''gf- ? '?:...T -?'. _ " '?? •.?Jn `a ?°"5, `. - --1' I/
?4 - r ?.._. ``K ?_ _ _ F?.e •Ys _},?r f,6,<E ? M v- au' - _ ?. _ \ ? -
Horsehoe Lake , .:?.? rah.f:t: f?
Suggs Mill Pond
State Game Lands ----- i
.\ saYfu-xn. V
r +` rf ? r_? cases- ,;? ^?
Conservancy Area \`\ a
? ' \ _'_%B" ?' '``••, '? - Bladen Lakes a,. t; - ?
State Forest ;
U _ of ,? ;, I `\
` t ?-"- - ?•,c way -- ? `?. t1Y??. j/? 1? em^ .•Qy .'. :?." _ t a°. rtc \ ,` -{, .\\
y a is a ? `I _ .. .. 1?,? (NsY+m S •4Fe^d,. °" ?Y pdrn H.mck _- ? 'T t.
Sessom's Bay/McCall
,r, 1` .? aft Swamp Priority Area
,_`. '}; `,?\ : as o`?' , " r'a,z_\ ``? -?- o9c g-L-•_ " y K
- ?%7''v .?+. •.. "? T.It..?}? ?`? ?, ? ' ~ Ir 'ri ??" / _ ? ? ? _ - _ _ ? ?1 ?•ao au P ° , ? ,
-JT
? --7 4 _X,\ 1? fi.. /, ....? .. _ _'y'•.? f '1'. _ ,?"0- •v. ?-- 1.? _ •azssfa. e:e elal
.lee„s sau ?,,. °
i t6 ? ? ? rt t - \ oaa a .' I ? 5 \
^ r \ _ m ?c fl A L 24z BL D f N__ ATk'° ORES = _ - i
Z.f l N tRr? e *° o E y a? B_ w t_ -F 0, T
Bay Tree Lake
_ ?, '*tr C? ._ `1 • } "\\ State f f'? ,. ?` " ?~t\ 'e
tb t x
g ?`'-, - c • \ - .. .? , a 5 ??---a.%,4 - _ w State Natural Area
cti,,:?,
Labe/?
.dft
_ y - 8?' ! ? _ ? , C `. ? "' y ? - ' ;Dtla _ '\ ? Y??, ._ . TATE R
S .zr f \ ` ? ? ?: ?•i. \c,wk _ \`' + ' ? '? ,' 701 • _ , ? ,? .
\ '? c+A:tf N ,`• a9? :- FOW jphy 1 t ' 1 l \ 1'y.?
(4:
?•M ?r
r
1741 rnq". _ 1
* F ?;=' ` iq A = \ C at gl :. at S? ` T f , m? . _ c° 1
-
ly _ - 410 cone" irmMn-? WtaY 1 y2 y '
i- - .'
White Lake
t ,3, Fe a State Lake ,
/' e° `t' b +wjc DeLOrllt a / r e \ N1. _
-ate 131 l 4,0 ^?` "bra EIW t11vo A n 16x` d pc ?Haad - i .
*3- : w? ' ?' 1 Q!? BtADE
\ L•/d
?,• _+= ,yF° I S`a?._? }_ } 'S lot .1 ..
g?nq? oLSrsi
.r J ^e$•1 '?? ' faun vy '} `' - - Cyr .. SE^?b? 'e@ FFleld \ - T-Frna?"L i ?4 oaw
` • "leafue eaM _ _ _ - - - L °°.Y'?e° + to
Bladen Lakes ELAND
a 242 - State Forest - -
Boundaries Are Approximations
J Natural Area
Regional Wildlife Corridor r ?`' .° alas _ Singletary Lake
State Forest / -
< b Rare species populations and
". • _5 unique natural communities 9 ar
identified in the regional corridors ??- eY=-?! °"""
peha YCRaT, p; a ?` 1 A Y. N I
are listed in the appendices,
0 1 2 3 Miles Ig r `?
240 1 2 3 4 Kilometers f 2,t . \? .Wi z F°e0 ao ' ?, \ e - \ 53 - _ se
Reproduced with permission from the North Carolina \? "0 RmhE ' e a
Ache, and Gazetteer, DeLorme Mapping, 1993
• ? x ,.- - ion „ _ \ J Y ? .a - I _?-.
SJ` e7 - ?" = Clerktm
70,
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Figure: 8
Project: ER97047
Date: Dec 1997
South of the State Gamelands, TNC is in the process of establishing the Broadwell
Conservancy Area. TNC will provide management within this system as a bioreserve
contiguous to the adjacent gamelands (pers. comm. Merrill Lynch, TNC, 11/25/97).
TNC has indicated interest in evaluating the potential for conservation, management, and/or
acquisition of the Sessoms Bay/McCall Swamp priority area. This system, comprising
approximately 2,700 ac, consists of a complex of Carolina Bays and swamps that lie between
the State Gamelands, the Broadwell Conservancy Area, and the Bladen Lakes State Forest.
Potential management groups for this system have not been determined.
The Site and adjacent natural areas comprise a relatively contiguous refuge that is connected
to regional systems via the Cape Fear River Corridor, the South River Corridor, and the Bladen
Lakes State Forest. Bladen Lakes State Forest, comprising approximately 13,000 ha (32,000
ac), is the largest state-managed forest in North Carolina. The Forest is managed by N.C.
Division of Forest Resources through coordination with NCWRC. The Forest maintains several
designated natural areas including the Carolina Bay Natural Area and Turkey Oak Natural Area.
The Cape Fear River, South River, and adjacent floodplains provide regional connectivity
between the Site, natural areas, and outlying ecosystems within the river basin.
17
4.0 WETLAND RESTORATION STUDIES
4.1 GROUNDWATER MODELING
Groundwater modeling was performed to characterize the water table under historic and
current drainage conditions. Subsequently, the model was applied to evaluate restoration
alternatives and to predict groundwater gradients under post-restoration condition. The
groundwater modeling software selected as most appropriate for simulating shallow subsurface
conditions and groundwater behavior at the site is DRAINMOD. This model was developed
by R.W. Skaggs, Ph.D., P.E., of North Carolina State University (NCSU) to simulate the
performance of water table management systems.
4.1.1 Model Description
DRAINMOD was originally developed to simulate the performance of agricultural drainage and
water table control systems on sites with shallow water table conditions. DRAINMOD predicts
water balances in the soil-water regime at the midpoint between two drains of equal elevation.
The model is capable of calculating hourly values for water table depth, surface runoff,
subsurface drainage, infiltration, and actual evapotranspiration over long periods referenced
to climatological data. The reliability of DRAINMOD has been tested for a wide range of soil,
crop, and climatological conditions. Results of tests in North Carolina (Skaggs, 1982), Ohio
(Skaggs et aL 1981), Louisiana (Gayle et aL 1985; Fouss et a/. 1987), Florida (Rogers 1985),
Michigan (Belcher and Merva 1987), and Belgium (Susanto et a/. 1987) indicate that the model
can be used to reliably predict water table elevations and drain flow rates. DRAINMOD has
also been used to evaluate wetland hydrology by Skaggs etaL (1993). Methods for evaluating
water balance equations and equation variables are discussed in detail in Skaggs (1980).
DRAINMOD was modified for application to wetland studies by adding a counter that
accumulates the number of events wherein the water table rises above a specified depth and
remains above that threshold depth for a given duration during the growing season. Important
inputs into the DRAINMOD model include rainfall data, soil and surface storage parameters,
evapotranspiration rates, ditch depth and spacing, and hydraulic conductivity values. The
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil texture classification and number of days
in the growing season were obtained from the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)
soil survey for Cumberland County (USDA 1984). Inputs for soil parameters such as the water
table depth/volume drained/upflux relationship, Green-ampt parameters, and the water
content/matric suction relationship were obtained utilizing the MUUF computer program
developed by the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS).
Wetland hydrology is defined in the model as groundwater within 30 cm (12 inches) of the
surface for 30 consecutive days during the growing season (12.5 percent of the growing
season). For the purpose of this study, the growing season is defined as the period between
17 March and 12 November (USDA 1990). Wetland hydrology is achieved in the model if
target hydroperiods are met for one half of the years modeled (i.e. 16 out of 31 years).
18
DRAINMOD simulations were conducted for the time periods from 1950 to 1980, using the
climatological record (Appendix D).
4.1.2 Model Applications and Results
DRAINMOD simulations were used to model 1) the historic, reference wetland conditions
(relatively undisturbed); 2) the zone of wetland degradation relative to reference; and 3) the
zone of wetland loss. The models for reference and degradation relative to reference are
theoretical applications of DRAINMOD that will require field testing to substantiate predictions.
The model utilized Croatan soils because these soils dominate the Site, provide a conservative
estimate of drainage effects, and are expected to provide a depiction of maximum sustainable
hydroperiod at the Site. Model parameters and outputs are provided in Appendix G. Model
applications and results are summarized below.
Reference Wetland Model
For development of reference wetland standards, modeling was performed to predict historic
wetland hydroperiods (as percent of the growing season) in relatively undisturbed conditions.
The reference model was developed by effectively eliminating the influence of ditching and
forecasting the average hydroperiod over the number of years modeled. Model variables were
modified to mimic gradual changes in evapotranspiration and surface microtopography (surface
storage) during early and mid-successional stages of wetland forest development. The model
provides an approximation of the potential hydroperiod exhibited during successional phases
within the wetland restoration area (Table 2).
The reference wetland model predicts that, in Croatan soils, early successional (post farmland)
stages of wetland development exhibit an average wetland hydroperiod encompassing 22%
of the growing season over the years modeled. This average hydroperiod translates to free
water within 1 ft of the soil surface for a 53 day period extending from 17 March to 8 May.
During the 31-year modeling period, reference wetland hydroperiods exhibited a range
extending from less than 12% (4 out of 31 years) to more 42% (2 out of 31 years) of the
growing season, dependent upon rainfall patterns (Table 2).
As surface topography, roughness, and storage variables increase during successional phases
(and evapotranspiration rates decrease), the model predicts that hydroperiods will increase to
steady state forest conditions averaging a 40% wetland hydroperiod over the 31 years
modeled. The average hydroperiod translates to free water within 1 ft of the soil surface for
a 96 day period extending from 17 March to 19 June. Again, the hydroperiod ranges from
less than 12% (3 years) to more than 44% (14 years) during the 31 year period dependent
upon rainfall patterns. Therefore, the reference model suggests that groundwater fluctuations
must be tracked within a reference wetland site to accurately assess a target hydroperiod for
any given year.
19
TABLE 2
REFERENCE WETLAND HYDROPERIODS
FOR CROATAN SOIL
BARRA FARMS SITE
Percent M)
of Growing Season Number of Years Wetland Hydrology
Achieved
Cropland and
early successional
stages
(post farmland) Steady State
Forest and late
successional
stages
12% (29 days) 27/31 28/31
14% (34 days) 27/31 28/31
16% (38 days) 24/31 28/31
18% (43 days) 20/31 27/31
20% (48 days) 17/31 24/31
22% (53 days) 16/31 24/31
24% (58 days) 13/31 23/31
26% (62 days) 11 /31 21/31
28% (67 days) 10/31 20/31
30% (72 days) 7/31 20/31
32% (77 days) 7/31 20/31
34% (82 days) 6/31 18/31
36% (86 days) 5/31 18/31
38% (91 days) 3/31 17/31
40% (96 days) 3/31 16/31
42% (101 days) 2/31 14/31
44% (106 days) 0/31 14/31
As described above, the average wetland hydroperiod over 31 years in Croatan reference is
forecast to increase from 22% of the growing season during early successional stages (post
farm land) to as much as 40% under steady state forest conditions. A gradual increase in
hydroperiods during succession may suggest that rooting patterns, woody debris, surface
microtopography, and surface water storage exhibits a greater effect on wetland hydrology
than evapotranspiration in Croatan soils (which could reduce wetland hydroperiods).
Wetland Degradation Model
The reference wetland model was utilized to forecast the maximum zone of ditch influence on
reference wetland hydroperiods. Ditch depths and spacing were varied until wetland
hydroperiods were reduced relative to the reference hydroperiod (22% to 40%, Table 3).
In Croatan soils, the model predicts that 7-ft deep ditches spaced at a minimum of 750 ft
intervals suppresses the early successional reference wetland hydroperiod (22%) from 16 out
of 31 years modeled to 12 out of 31 years. Therefore, the potential maximum zone of
influence for an individual 7-ft deep ditch is approximated as 375 ft adjacent to the ditch
(Table 3).
As the site succeeds towards steady state forest conditions, the zone of potential wetland
degradation due to nearby ditches expands. The potential zone of degradation in steady state
conditions is forecast to extend 695 ft into the wetland interior for a 7-ft deep ditch (Table 3
and Figure 9). Specifically, the projected 40% hydroperiod is suppressed from occurring 18
out of 31 years modeled to occurring 12 out of 31 years at a 1390-ft parallel ditch spacing.
In effect, the modeled ditch exhibits a dampening effect on increases in hydroperiod forecast
to occur during wetland forest development.
Wetland Loss Model
The wetland loss model was applied to determine which areas may not achieve wetland
hydrology criteria (12.5% of the growing season) under existing conditions (Table 3). After
restoration plans were developed, DRAINMOD was then applied to determine the influences
from remaining drainage networks on the Site or in the Site vicinity. Remaining drained sites
are subsequently excluded from areas which provide wetland restoration potential.
The DRAINMOD simulations for existing conditions indicate that portions of the prior converted
(PC) crop land area are forecast to meet wetland hydrology criteria (12.5 % of the growing
season) for 16 to 18 out of 31 years simulated at distances of 60 ft to 100 ft from the
existing drainage ditches (Figure 9). Table 3 summarizes the zone of wetland loss for existing
ditches in Croatan soils. The model suggests that, in Croatan soils, removal of jurisdictional
wetland hydrology (12.5%) by ditching is localized (50 to 100 ft from the ditch) while
degradation of historic wetland hydroperiods (22% to 40%) is widespread (375 to 695 ft from
the ditch).
20
TABLE 3
ZONE OF WETLAND LOSS AND
ZONE OF WETLAND DEGRADATION
FOR CROATAN SOIL
BARRA FARMS MITIGATION SITE
Modeled Zone' of Number of Years Zone of Wetland Number of Years
Ditch Depth Wetland Loss Criteria Achieved Degradation Criteria Achieved
(<12.5%) (<22% or 40%)
Agricultural and Early Successional Conditions
(relatively low surface water storage and rooting functions)
(average hydroperiod = 22% (53 days) of the growing season)
3 ft 60 ft 17/31 255 ft 12/31
4 ft 75 ft 17/31 295 ft 12/31
5 ft 85 ft 18/31 330 ft 12/31
6 ft 90 ft 16/31 355 ft 12/31
7 ft 95 ft 16/31 375 ft 12/31
8 ft 100 ft 16/31 385 ft 12/31
Steady State Forested Conditions
(relatively high surface water storage and rooting functions)
(average hydroperiod = 40% (96 days) of the growing season)
3 ft 50 ft 16/31 445 ft 12/31
4 ft 65 ft 16/31 545 ft 12/31
5 ft 80 ft 19/31 605 ft 12/31
6 ft 85 ft 16/31 655 ft 12/31
7 ft 95 ft 18/31 695 ft 12/31
8 ft 100 ft 18/31 720 ft 12/31
Zone= modeled ditch spacing/2
ER97047/6ar_a11B. dwg
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Drainmod Estimates: Pre-Restoration Conditions
Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Drawn By. PJS Figure: 9
Checked By. AD Project: ER97047
Scale: 1" = 600' Date: Dec 1997
Site alterations required to restore wetland hydrology consist of effectively eliminating drainage
systems and re-introduction of surface microtopography (Section 5.1). However, canals and
ditches along the site periphery will remain open to prevent impacts to adjacent properties.
Post-restoration groundwater modeling was applied to forecast wetland hydrology within the
site interior and near these perimeter canals. Primary drainage features consist of a relatively
large east/west canal along the northern site periphery and small effluent ditches in eastern
portions of the Site. The presence of these open ditch segments may contribute to drainage
of perched water tables, in proximity to the ditch, after the contiguous water table falls in
Spring months.
Post-restoration DRAINMOD simulations were conducted for remaining open ditch segments.
These simulations include increases in projected surface storage ratings due to increased
surface microtopography resulting from scarification (disking, harrowing) and restoration of
forest vegetation in buffer areas. Based on these simulations, wetland hydrology (12.5%) is
forecast at distances ranging from 95 ft along the east/west canal to 50 ft along the small
effluent ditches (3-ft depth with no outlet). As depicted in Figure 10, approximately 26 ac
within hydric soil areas are forecast not to meet wetland hydrology criteria after restoration
is completed.
4.2 SURFACE WATER ANALYSES
Surface drainage on the Site and surrounding area was analyzed to predict feasibility of
diverting existing surface drainage into the riverine floodplain without adverse effects to the
Site or adjacent properties. The following presents a summary of hydrologic and hydraulic
analyses along with provisions designed to promote surface water restoration while reducing
potential for impacts to adjacent properties. The detailed hydraulic analysis is contained in
Appendix H.
Wetland and stream restoration effects caused by mitigation activities were evaluated by
simulating peak flood flows for watersheds in and around the site using US Army Corps of
Engineers, Flood Frequency Analysis (HEC-FFA) computer program. Water surface profiles for
existing and post-restoration conditions were estimated for selected return periods using the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers River Analysis System computer program HEC-RAS.
Two synthetic hydrologic and storage distributed element models were developed using the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Hydrograph Package computer program HEC-1. These
models are graphically depicted in Figures 10A (existing conditions) and 10B (post-restoration
conditions). The location of drainage area junctions (channel cross-sections) are identified in
Figure 10C. A hydrologic analysis of the Harrison Creek watershed was conducted, including
delineation of the watershed from USGS maps, soil type mapping from NRCS soil survey data,
land use estimation, stream channel and cross-section sizing and evaluation, rainfall depth
duration frequency estimation, stage-storage approximation and stage-discharge
approximation, to develop computer models of the watershed in the HEC-1 computer program.
21
L66 L Dap :a;Da 009 = L :91DOS
Lt,OL683 :439foad OMf :48 POMOOLIO
o t :ain613 sr d X8 uMDJQ
gUIIO.A O y}aoN `Xlunoo puDljagwno
?up3 uo.lDblliw Jqu0169?j Mai adpo suaaod paap8
suoi}!puo:D uOIIDJo}sad }sod :sa}nuai}s3 pouau'oa4
•oui -sool"as
foluoumo juua

+ I?I?I
+::
1
+ 1
1
I
I
I
I I
+ 1 I
I
I
I
11111 I
t
i
I 1 1
I
+
+

+

+

+
+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +

+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +
+
U
+ O c0u) It rn
+ N d to d'

+ I
I ?
+
+
+ _:: I
I
I I
Q ?
+ +
+ ::::
I I I
II IIII
Ililll N

+
+ + :::: IIIIIIII 6
+ I I I C
++
+ ::::::
`? I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I I I I O?
'?
+ + :::::::::::; l 1 11111111 wo
+ f l
l
l
l U
++ l l
l
l
l
I 1
1
1
1
1
1 to N
+ I
+
+ :::::: IIIIII IIIIIII ? ?
I
I
+ +
+
IIIII
I
11
1111111 N
? 6 0 0
O

I
I
I
I L LU LL-
+ + ::::::: I
I
I
+ IIII I I I T
f
1111 1 1 IIII . O O
+
+ +
111111 I
III S
O
+ I U O -v
+
+ ^ m v v
+ v)
+ +
+
III
I I I I
O
0
J O
+++ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S O "

I I I I I - O
+ +
+

I I I I I I I I I I I I

(/?

u

I
I
I
I
I
I O O O

+ I
I
I
I
I
I
1 1 1 11 1 11 11 `
(?
W O
} t t t
N N N
+++ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ?
L
+
+ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I
I
1
1
1
1 ` O S
}
} ?+-
O O 0-0
+ I
I
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I ` N
+
+ :::::: I
I
I
I
I
I 2 N N N
+ 1
1
1
1
1
1 C -
+ + : 1
1
1
1
1
1
I
i
l
i
l
l

+ l
l
l
f
l
l
I I? i l l N N N

+ +
I DOI
R
R
D(X
O
n.+

0
f
d'
N
O
O
H
f?i
W

•811 -Jo8/L-VOL6a=
Drainage Area 11
0.18 sq. mi.
Oroinago Area /2
1.29 Z. mi.
Drainage Area /3
0.49 sq. mi.
Junction
O X2
1 I Channel 2
6500 ft.
Channel 1
1300 ft.
Cross-Section
Drainage Area /78

3.14 sq. mi. X 5
Junction
O X5

Drainage Area /4
0.50 sq. mi.
Channel 3A Channel 38
10200 ft. 10200 ft.
Drainage Area /5
0.79 sq. mi.
Drainage Area /7A
4.16 s
4.16 sq. mi.
T

T

'?
n
`
O X23
Junction
O X13
Channel 7
9500 ft.
Junction
O X24
Agricultural
Road
Channel 5
5400 ft.
Drainage Area /6
0.17 sq. mi.
S. R.
,600 It.
Channel 6 #1002
I Environmental Services, Inc. Barra Farms Flood Study EXISTING CONDITION
Raleigh, North Carolina Cumberland County FLOW DIAGRAM
North Carolina
EDDY ENGINEERING, P.C.
is PA em nor eu= le 21en (ne) Sle-w ru (no w1w Project No. 97056 December 1997 Figure 10A
I`
Drainage Area /1
0.18 sq. mi.
Cross-Section
X5
Channel 1
13M ft.
Junction l >? f 1'29 o; mi. /2
O ? \ 1 1.29 sq. mi.
Channel 2
6500 ft. Drainage Area 14
0.50 sq. mi.
Drainage Area 13
0.49 sq. mi.
Drainage
4.16 sq.
Junction
e XS
Channel 4
4500 ft.
anal 3A /
10 ft.
unction
ii X13
Channel 7
9500 ft.
Agriculture
Road
Drainage Area 15
0.79 sq. mi.
Junction
O X23
Channel 5
5400 ft.
Drainage Area /6
0.17 sq. mi.
Junction /(D
O X24
Channel 6 S. R.
1600 ft.
#1002
P
6
Environmental Services, Inc. Barra Forms Flood Study
m REVISED CONDITION
Raleigh, North Carolina Cumberland County
North Carolina FLOW DIAGRAM
EDDY ENGINEERING, P.C.
__7
P.M lu aw euMIc 2i'!!1 Imp 96-1w ra (mp UO-10 Project No. 97056 December 1997 Figure 10B
Drainage Area /78
3.14 sq. mi.
Cross-Section X23
(Agricultural Road)
Cross-Section X25
(near S.R. #1002)
Cross-Section
X4
Channel
Cross-Section
XX
Cross-Section X1
(near S.R. #2041)
Environmental Services, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina
a
WHY FN ARPRiNCT P C
I P.& BOX Sw YA= NC Zlbil (so so-to ra (no) 5w-Im
-Cross-Section
X3
ST. JOHN'S
CHURCH
Barra Forms Flood Study
Cumberland County
North Carolina
Project No. 97056
1000 0 ,000
MODELING
CROSS-SECTIONS
December 1997 Figure 10C
Cross-Section
X104
Cross-Section
X102
Cross-Section
X5
Sub-watersheds ranged in size from 0.1 square miles to almost 11 square miles. Individual
sections of stream channel ranged from 1,300 to 10,200 feet in length.
Two HEC-1 input files were constructed to model the watershed. The first model was
developed for existing conditions; the second model was developed for post-restoration
conditions. These models required input of entrance location and flow direction, channel
length, slope and cross-section data, culvert and roadway elevation data as well as sub-basin
drainage areas and NRCS curve numbers. Rainfall data for the 2-, 10- and 100-year design
rainfall events were used in the form of Depth Duration and Frequency (DDF) values, derived
from NOAA HYDRO-35 and NWS TP-40 to approximate results of precipitation on the
watershed.
Due to riverine wetland restoration efforts, off-site effects were evaluated for two specific
areas of concern. The first area of concern comprises the off-site property located adjacent
to the southeast end of the site, including Secondary Road 2041, St. John's Church, and
adjacent residences. The second area of concern comprises the agricultural road crossing over
the historic upper reach of Harrison Creek immediately below the Site.
4.2.1 Drainage Area Alterations
Stream flow and watershed area data were obtained for nine hydrologically similar streams and
watersheds in southeastern North Carolina (Figure 10D). The watersheds range in size from
2.62 to 60.10 square miles with a mean of 19.38 square miles. Watersheds on the Site range
from 0.18 to 10.72 square miles in area. The selected gaged watersheds are considered
reasonable for use in predicting flood flows because the gaged watersheds are similar in terms
of location, size, slope, land use, and geology to the Site watersheds.
Proposed ditch filling will redirect surface water runoff from a ditch and canal system that
originates near the southeast corner of the Site, runs through the central portion of the Site,
then along the central east/west canal. The canal discharges at the northwestern Site
periphery into a larger canal system that leads to Harrison Creek just upstream of Secondary
Road 1002. After wetland restoration, surface flow from the Site will enter the historic upper
reaches of Harrison Creek. Figures 10A and 10B present a graphical depiction of watershed
alterations due to the proposed diversion.
The historic drainage area for the on-site segment of Harrison Creek is estimated as
encompassing approximately 9.8 mil (above the Agricultural Road at X23 in Figure 10A).
Under existing conditions, the drainage area for the mitigation stream reach is estimated as
encompassing approximately 0.5 mil at the Site boundary. The remaining 9.3 mil drainage
area has been diverted into the canal network and away from upper reaches of Harrison Creek
under existing conditions.
22
S
a
N
s
a

n
0
0
on
G
3 W.
M.ncry?r. 1071 .S , r • Caowr/ • f: NUw.Y _.. ' ` •? Mo
41%- + \ 077.21 ?-
i !s ` . G •f1 G'-•• •. K••n•r 1 1077.72 \
1o4:.s:1' 1 sya J?N 167£4 ?yettev le ui r1 ' <t.
Reese Cr. ( 'M4
d Big Swamp
Buckhead Cr.
•? Frye °le --
,• . n 500 ?' StW1n.a 1k1q•!wL a"'-- 'Gin Wants
Ri•1or. fish ) ... =
616 .-.C• S,• ?.. .?! 71
Ellblt
95 A •n •1• 1.4111• r0olu•• O4i "Is i f
! t rr? 0 Cod.r Cr4•k ll Ilo '' ro0
41 rrlje 1743.21 ,
:i• I
c•o!•..•ot? 1Wxn . `° 46 ; ,. SITE 1h. •'1 r 1
t342.N dsritLn +\ /' ''1 \ / 5,,•"'s . IA.tnelu
? s" • •"4 43.27' ? 6 •I. •: '• ? 1031.2 `' •,(
>SS9.4 .1343.76 •, ? . ?'; ```tew \ t / (d•
, - : SMwno71 / i OlNbw ? ` • ?•». ,p ?•VarM•n?dF to0f." y. o••bl ~
•;p'"n' ,`tai .742.f7?j• P. Tob•r y - .• • h, \1
Y \• R•nn•rt , 1. st. 1- S.f M1O /NnrjOn` ) s .'
gky144 IR1•I? p 161?' : _ J l i •I IMI J? G•n. - 10
f o -.•.Mlft '•tJ 1065 ) 10I1?dT •ehp
.•?•. _) 1
o•.
t. 2 .. aW. ? ? ':, ml e)er. Cr N.
Tenmile Swamp .... 16651
:•:'=7.7..9 o ?.M e,6. ITumbull Cr. " s11n11y.1°.
`• •• r4•ek • 741.= - 1
Iv 1 Sinlfk«' DubOn UkS. • - L•/r
y{
._' ?• l??O? •, L , en naa.q , ? .•?,` -- V". cni _ - io71.71 ?
•
-\ Y IttUmbe '?' •:E hl;ewn - 6.7
Elreo - E L•.nb•rton \ • .
1.3
?\ . A
Browns Cr. W
.?2j L1 oTUe '•='42?s •F ?'' ?".?ti to ? s t .• ?/.
A
?. / .'1716.46 i .1. g17.17 sA ;?
•.??,_ ; 211 ?• /- t ?_ wbbetnb•rt•
1347.N )?dr
R • «?
O -010 6,' G,Ikten •- 0 075,, Pt
e1 Yn1 1JI `` / O _ IM7` . ?at•n11U ???_? •.`• `?. ?1 ,1 M
11 !` - _ r? •e?• I0S7.D4 . \ 1 'won L
.61
1744,2Tlf
w+, • I i
1716.!1` •1143 ••?
17+3.0??•' .'! `uk• ? . 16x.4 - ?- b..• .
?? • '• 1744.21 1077.24 ,\Mtil4vilN pn.._Won I4h ~ 67.9
s.V ip Go•do n:b•u•n .. 1e n M. ..2-? loll.o
1 1?3.Yi l ) °•
?,, '•\ M4 42x4 d • .
Lown
s'O O Hood Cr.
L
Mill Br.
,? >, - ?? ,. f'?'- •. 1047.4 ?UMt
\ ? ObOecr.: • ?-- - •106 .t! \
?•„ Cr•.Y
???10f4.l1 _
??T.00.? GIIY ? ? .-'Melth - . - -?? ? • -. •
nn b• O C
1. ;. , .? lEruln -
Stream Guaae Stations
.. `?,. tet'Ftli /095 L?•(
1. Browns Creek `\•Oolh.n; Wet Ash Swamp ' ,;•' *? .
`? Y ._
2. Big Swamp L4?wob° : ..:: _= - - - •_.
3. Buckhead Creek 4. Hood Creek 5. Mill Branch 1•
6. Reese Creek L"•'"" ?"'
7. Tenmile Swamp ?• -
8. Turnbull Creek
9. Wet Ash Swamp
Environmental Services, Inc. Barra Farms Flood Study FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
Raleigh, North Carolina Cumberland County
EDDY ENGINEERING, P.C North Carolina STREAM GAGES
P.C.
Plasm mmtK 00 "Win w(ngal-tai, Project No. 97056 December 1997 Figure 10
D
After restoration activities, the drainage area redirected towards the headwater slope and
riverine floodplain is estimated to increase from 0.5 mil to 2.5 mil. The remaining 7.3 mil
within the historic watershed represents the remaining portions of Barra Farms that will be
restored during future phases of this mitigation bank project (Drainage Area #7A and #713).
For this project phase, reference stream pattern, dimension, and profile for stream restoration
design has been targeted towards streams supporting 2.5 mil watersheds in the region
(Section 4.3).
4.2.2 Stream Flow Alterations
From the peak discharges estimated for each gaged watershed by the HEC-FFA program, the
specific discharge was determined in cubic feet per second (CFS) per square mile (CFS/mil)
for each return period of interest. These were plotted against watershed area on a log-log
scale, with a separate plot for each return period. An upper bound envelope was established
and used to interpolate and extrapolate the specific discharge of watersheds within and around
the project site. Extrapolation of peak discharge was limited to watersheds of about 1/10 of
a square mile or more.
In summary, increases in drainage area into the mitigation stream reach will increase stream
flows. Table 4 depict changes in discharge by drainage area for 2, 10, 50, and 100-year
return intervals at the Site. The simulations indicate that the 2-year peak discharge will
increase from approximately 26 CFS (CFS) under existing conditions (drainage area: 0.5 mil)
to approximately 130 CFS after wetland restoration (drainage areas: 2.5 mi2). This five-fold
increase in the bankfull stream dynamics will promote permanent stream flows, in-stream
aquatic habitat, overbank flooding, and riverine wetland functions at the Site.
4.2.3 Flood Storage
Watersheds similar to those found on-site exhibit significant flood storage potential along
channels, floodplains, and in depressions. The effect of storage on runoff is offset by the
increased runoff potential from the large inundated areas. During certain periods of the year
(primarily Winter months), depressions may be filled with water before the onset of a rainfall
event, thereby reducing flood storage potential during large storms.
4.2.4 Impacts to Adjacent Properties
The analysis indicates that completely filling the southeast to northwest trending ditch (labeled
as surface flow inlet on Figure 4) up to the southeastern boundary of Harrison Creek Bay could
increase flood levels adjacent to the southeast end of the site, including Secondary Road
2041, St. Johns Church, and adjacent residences. However, diversion of these flows into the
headwater slope physiographic area and partial filling of the southeast to northwest trending
ditch is expected to reduce potential for off-site impacts. The ditch should be backfilled to
approximately 114.5 ft above MSL while constructing a shallow channel towards the historic
upper reaches of Harrison Creek. These modifications probably will not significantly increase
flood elevations adjacent to the southeast end of the site, including Secondary Road 2041, St.
23
TABLE 4
ESTIMATED PEAK FLOWS
BARRA FARMS SITE
ESTIMATED PEAK FLOWS PER SQUARE MILE
Cross-Section Contributing Contributing 2-Year 10-Year 50-Year 100-Year
Number Drainage Drainage Expected Expected Expected Expected
(X) (ac) (sq mi) (cfs/sq mi) (cfs/sq mi) (cfs/sq mi) (cfs/sq mi)
X1 115 0.18 67 220 580 850
X3 276 0.43 63 200 520 720
X4 643 1.01 55 180 460 600
X5 827 1.29 53 170 430 560
X23 1,653 2.58 47 150 370 500
X25 6,841 10.72 26 83 210 340
Average ----- ----- 52 167 428 595
ESTIMATED PEAK FLOWS

Cross-Section
Number
(X) 2-Year
Calculated
Discharge
(cfs) 10-Year
Calculated
Discharge
(cfs) 50-Year
Calculated
Discharge
(cfs) 100-Year
Calculated
Discharge
(cfs)
X1 12 40 104 153
X3 27 86 224 310
X4 56 182 465 606
X5 68 219 555 722
X23 121 387 955 1,290
X25 279 890 2,251 3,645
Johns Church, and adjacent residences. The drainage will be accommodated on-site within
the headwater slope physiographic area and in proximity to the historic stream origin.
After ditch filling, the agricultural road crossing over the historic upper reach of Harrison Creek
will experience increased flooding over current conditions, but not over historic conditions
(before ditch and canal construction). Because a significant portion of the watershed once
draining to this site is still diverted into the western canal system, water surface levels at this
road crossing are likely to remain lower than historical levels. Modifications to the roadway
section are expected to permit use of this road by agricultural equipment under most
conditions (Appendix H). Modifications include installation of replacement culverts and
elevation of the road bed above existing conditions. The channel will be regraded in proximity
to the road to accommodate bankfull stream flows in the center culvert. The adjacent culverts
will be placed at the floodplain elevation to accommodate overbank flood waters.
4.3 REFERENCE ECOSYSTEMS
4.3.1 Reference Plant Communities
In order to establish a forested wetland system for mitigation purposes, a reference community
needs to be established. According to Mitigation Site Classification (MiST) guidelines (EPA
1990), the area of proposed restoration should attempt to emulate a Reference Forest
Ecosystem (RFE) in terms of soils, hydrology,, and vegetation. In this case, the target RFEs
were composed of relatively undisturbed woodlands in the region which support soil, landform,
and hydrological characteristics that restoration will attempt to emulate. All of the RFE sites
were impacted by selective cutting or highgrading, therefore the species composition of these
plots should be considered of minimal value. Reference forest data used in restoration was
modified to emulate steady state, climax community structure as described in the
Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990).
Fourteen RFE plots, within four distinct landscape positions, were identified in Bladen and
Cumberland Counties that characterize the relatively undisturbed communities near the Site.
Circular plot sampling was utilized in data collection. Sites were chosen that best characterize
expected steady-state forest composition. Species were recorded along with individual tree
diameters, canopy class, and dominance. From collected field data, importance values (Brower
et a/. 1990) of dominant trees were calculated. The composition of shrub/sapling and herb
strata were recorded and identified to species. Hydrology, surface topography, and habitat
features were evaluated. The vegetative communities targeted were Nonriverine Wet
Hardwood Forest, Streamhead Atlantic White Cedar Forest, Peatland Atlantic White Cedar
Forest, and Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Schafale and Weakley 1990). Soils targeted
for each community included Torhunta, Croatan, Lynn Haven, Johnston, and related soil series
(USDA 1990).
24
1. Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest: Three plots located near White Oak in Bladen
County were sampled. The plots were located primarily on the Roanoke and Woodington soil
series. The vegetation is dominated by willow oak (Quercus phe/%s) (importance value [IV]
25%), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) (IV 21 %), red maple (Acer rubrum) (IV 16%), and
water oak (Quercus nigra) (IV 12%) (Table 5). Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) (IV
9%), American holly Vlex opaca) (IV 7%), and red bay (Persea pa/ustris) (IV 5%) were also
represented. Other tree species include swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora), overcup oak (Quercus
lyrata), cherry-bark oak (Q. pagoda), laurel oak (Q. laurifolia), bald cypress (Taxodium
distichum), and loblolly pine (Pious taeda). Shrub/sapling layers are characterized by red bay
(Persea palustris), greenbrier (Smilax spp.), and switch cane (Arundinaria gigantea). The sites
exhibit evidence of past silvicultural practices such as selective cutting, highgrading, and ditch
construction which has resulted in a less diverse, intra-specific tree assemblage. Degradation
of nonriverine wet hardwood forests is common throughout the region. Therefore, community
restoration procedures have been modified to facilitate a reduction in dominance by
disturbance adapted species such as red maple and sweet gum.
2. Streamhead Atlantic White Cedar Forest: The site chosen comprises the Nature
Conservancy's Cedar Swamp Seep located approximately 6.8 km (4.2 mi) north of White Oak,
east of NC 53 and adjacent to Cedar Swamp Bay. Three plots were located primarily on the
Torhunta and Lynn Haven soil series. The canopy in all plots is dominated by Atlantic white
cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) (IV 43%), with sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana)(IV 14%), pond
pine (Pinus serotina) (IV 11 %), and red maple (IV 10%) filling the canopy gaps (Table 6). Other
canopy trees include yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), longleaf pine (Pinus palustris),
swamp tupelo, red bay, and loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus). The shrub/sapling layer is nearly
impenetrable in certain areas and is composed primarily of sweet gallberry (Ilex coriacea),
fetter-bush (Lyonia lucida), highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), and greenbrier.
Evidence of a past harvesting event (selective cut) is apparent within and surrounding the site.
The streamhead Atlantic white cedar RFEs contain complex microtopography and scattered
surface water channels caused by groundwater discharge into ephemeral drainageways. These
hummocks, swales, and seeps provide habitat complexity and will be emulated within the
headwater slope physiographic area of the Site. Scarification of soils and planting of tree
species is expected to facilitate development of ephemeral stream channels within the above
headwater storage area.
3. Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp Forest: Two plots were located northwest of the
intersection of SR 1335 and 1322, and east of Ellis Creek in Bladen County. The Johnston
soil series was the targeted soil series. Bald cypress dominated the canopy (IV 33%), followed
by red maple (IV 26%), sweet gum (IV 13%), and American holly (flex opaca)(IV 12%) (Table
7). Other components of the canopy strata included laurel oak, and white oak (Quercus alba).
Tree species identified outside of the plot samples include tulip poplar, overcup oak, swamp
chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), and American elm (Ulmus americana). Atlantic white cedar
appears to have been logged from the system. The shrub/sapling layer was characterized by
sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), red bay (Persea palustris), and American holly.
25
Lf)
W
J
m
H
V1
d
d
Q
N
M
O
C
U
0
H O
O N
0 N
W •+
O
ua
i ar
O H
U.
y O
v U.
C -a
O O
y O
cM
M L
d
d
C
•L
C
O
Z
O
a) 0
O O O O O 0
R Y o o
O cc ?. Lr) c0 N 6 r,: LL) c7 N 0
N N r r

W

m O n O O M O N M O
i - O O O
>
;:, Q O O O O O O O
O
d
m
to
d
L

Q
CD
CN
CV)
00
0)
N

.. rn oo , "If
LO
O
t0
r
O
C'9
W 0 LO OD CO O - O co
C
7
cc
m

c > Ln O O LO LO LO LO ch Cl)
:, d O 0 - O O O O LO LO O
to 3 ?- .- N r- ? V O O
O O O O O O O O O

LL

v
O LO 0 ? O
3 L
O r LO LO L
O N N
I-
C; O O O O 4

Li
m
T
? .??
' I? OD ? C9 I? O LO ? r
_ N O O O O O
-
Q O O O O O O O O O `

O
L
? m N n O LO r r co
E ' N 0)
7 'O
Z =
Y
R
O

to 4

C
•
d

co
E
-r- Lo
CD
>
O a f6 fl LOc m

o

a Lc .

E
i
m T

V

m
a) CD
41 cc (D
_ O a
w C
O cn Q OOC m c
n o
ai
U
C
w
O.O
a?
Q.
E
cc
CA
O
U
y
3
O
.O
O Y
v= O O
Z
O Y Y 0 7
co m LL
co O mi a
0 t 0
O
d O 0-0
CL w C
LoJUJm
CL
O
C
Lc
U
O
O
M_
a?
Q
L6
y
Lc
m
O
Lc
a?
a
v
C
O
O
m
U
O
L6
O
y
c
O)
O
d
Lr
a?
co
d
U
C
O
O
CL

tU
CU
tZ
y
O
C
cc
E V
(C•
? N
N i
O O
0 U-
W i
J *+ Cc
H ?
m O V
H U. 4)
d t
a
C
d
? V
a?
Q
lc
d
s
cc
i
t+
CA
m
d ?
4)0
'-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
?
,
- p m
\
M

6

O

M

M .

4

M

M 0

0-
>
cr. C
R
i
Q
M
d
M
CA
N
N
O
M Cfl V7 O O O O O
z O O O O O O O

m
<c lc •. O
r M N N C10 f? O O 00
i 0 d ?- N M 0 N CO CO
pp Q- N d •- M O O M O O O 0
v
d
> = I, Cfl r W 0 r CO O

m CS O O O O O O O O O O `-
cc
i
t

U
=
Cq O M O r, m M O r, m M m

O O M O 0 M M O O M M m
1 r- O r- o o O O O O CO

U.
-' M m O N N CO N ^ r
d N O O O O O O O
an d O O O O O O O O O O

O H
W

O
.0

O

M

r

N

N

M

M

- LD
E
O C
Z.
m

U
U
+O+ 0

>.
CO C
CL (D
C L
a

d
CO
co
4--
^
Q
-
0
.? U
41 >
= N ? O CL co T a.
Cu
N 0 co -a -0 -a O
CL
t0

N O o
Q fn J x w F 0_ -j H H
O
O
M
is
d
Q
R
N
co
00
a?
m
U
C
CT
N
LL
d
co
N
Cr
y
C
U
U
N
C:
a?
is
a?
U
C
t6
O
Q
C
r
n
W
J
m
Q
d
CL
y
i
O
V! ?
N m
O Q
W E
N
i
O
U.
d
V
C
d
d
O
y
E
R
d
N
R
E
y
C
a
is
N
O
O
V
cc
a?
m ?
>(a d o
0
0
0
0
0
?
c6 t 0 ?
M
CO
M
N

O
O
; M N .-
0
0.
> i
r a O ct O
C _

O LO N
O
O
O
N O O O O O O
co
m
to
m
Q N O
N M N O O
t N co O LO M C6
t0
y M 00 ?- r cY CO
O
m
V
m
> C

c 0 0 0 0 0 0
M?
Y? L
LL
V

m O O m O O LO O

m
LL
m
w m qt Lo Cr)
O O
? a? O O O O O O

O W
eo
i
:C
I-
LO
O
0)
CO
N
O
?- N ?- co
z

' y O
=
) O N E Y Y
d a O.
co 7
0) O
v O O
N U ? y 'L O N
Q1 L
m OC fn Q J F-
0
0
M_
co
N
a`
76
N
co
m
O
a=co
a?
m
+
U
C
O
7
a'
O
LL
O
c
ca
a>
cc
y
C
N
O
>
fo
N
Ir
N
a
co
N
U
C
C6
O
CL
E
r
4. Nonriverine Swamp Forest: Within the northwestern periphery of the Barra Farms
mitigation Bank, an inclusion of relatively undisturbed, steady state nonriverine swamp/cedar
forest persists. This community, comprising approximately 19 ac, is a remnant of what was
probably a more extensive system before logging in the present bay took place. Five plots
were established within areas supporting Croatan soils and within Lynn Haven or Torhunta
intergrades along the toe slope to adjacent sand rims. The canopy is dominated by swamp
tupelo (IV 36%), bald cypress (IV 25%), red maple (IV 15%), and Atlantic white cedar (IV 8%)
(Table 8). Scattered red bay, loblolly bay, pond pine, and sweet bay are found in the
understory, and sweet pepperbush, titi, and fetterbush are found in the shrub layer. This
community represents a steady state, reference forest ecosystem utilized to orient wetland
restoration planning on groundwater flats. After restoration activities are implemented in crop
lands, this reference wetland will be used to establish monitoring plan parameters and to
evaluate achievement of wetland mitigation success criteria.
RFE sampling has established a baseline data set that will be integrated into a planting plan for
the mitigation site.
4.3.2 Reference Stream Reaches
Reference streams in the region were evaluated to characterize stream characteristics within
the 2400-ft mitigation stream reach. This assessment consisted primarily of visual evaluations
of undisturbed stream dynamics, measurement of channel cross-sections relative to drainage
area, and stream substrate sampling. Reference reaches include small streams at the following
locations: 1) Cowhorn Swamp and Crooked Run in the Hoffman State Forest of Jones County;
2) West Prong Brice Creek in the Croatan National Forest of Craven County; 3) Dover Bay and
the origin of Mill Branch in western Craven County; and 4) a tributary of Chock Creek above
Gibsons Pond in Richmond County. These reference reaches maintain similar drainage areas
(2 to 3 mil) and support similar soil types within the watershed.
These systems support permanent streams with the flood prone area varying from
approximately 50 ft to 250 in width across the valley. Adjacent lands represent low-lying
terraces that may extend less than one ft above the interior floodplain. During significant flood
events, these adjacent terraces appear to sustain flooding from stream flows and sustain
extended periods of standing water over 2 ft in depth (based on water marks and moss
patterns).
The stream channels support cross-sectional areas ranging from approximately 2 ft2 to 10 ft2
which is similar to relict channel conditions at the Site. Because valley slopes are low in the
upper reaches of these reference streams, these channels exhibit low sinuosities (1.1 to 1.2
stream length/valley length). Numerous ephemeral, braided channels are apparent adjacent to
the main stem which most likely transport water during peak flows. The substrate in these
reference channels is dominated by organic material and fine sands (D85) with coarse sands
present at intermittent channel bends. The presence of organic material and fine sands in the
26
y
d
d
O.
N
O >.
C.
U) 0
co)
0U
00 LU +-'
J y i
m 0 LL
Q O
F- LL Q-
d E
v ?
a 3
N N
O
O
O
Z
d
m ?
> m

?p L W\ CD
m LO
N
CO LO
LO
00
I 0
O
W m > ..

W
m i
> Q N r- C') N 1, C'7 O
" ch O r- O O O O ?-
?
y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
m
y o m LLI r, O?
W •• (4, ^ Q C7 LO O
m Q v LO 04
?
m
> C I? n d I- O It r- M
a ?- O O
m C5 o C; o 0 o C5 C5
?
LL
T
v
C
O
41 O O w O w w It N 00
O ui

LL

> =' C? O eF N d

= d N O - O O O
? O O O O O O O O '

v. y
O to
7
.0.-
O
LLf
CO
M
LO
O
N
2 r
E
z5
cc
.a
W
U
O W
CL ai > r ?
CD >
y ~ a a m CL W
m
W
. a >, cc W >. U >.
U
d E U m p C O d
co -p W O W
Cn m CC 0 Q 0 O 0
O
O
r
C')
io
a>
Q
Ta
y
W
00
a?
a
CD
0:
U
C
W
d
Li
a?
W
y
C
d
0
d
d
cc
d
<CS
N
U
C
W
O
a

r
channel suggest that low flow velocities and minimal shear stresses prevail during peak
storms.
The mitigation stream segment on-site has been altered by drainage redirection at the Site.
n 1997, stream flows were intermittent through the Winter and early Spring. In April 1997, F '
the channel dried and stream flows have not been noted in the stem throughout the .
monitoring period to 24 November 1997. Conversely, permanent flows were noted within
re erence reaches during the period.
The relict channel has partially filled in with organic debris, logging material, fallen trees, and
dense shrub thickets, suggesting that drainage redirection has significantly limited flow rates.
In addition, old road beds and logging trails cross the relict channel at several locations.
Modifications to the channel should include systematic clearing of logging debris, tree jams,
and other significant impediments to stream flow. However, no modifications to the relict
channel requiring mechanized land clearing or excavation should be performed at the current
time. Re-introduced peak flows are expected to passively clean out organic debris and to re-
establish in-stream aquatic habitats. However, the stream should be monitored periodically
to evaluate hydraulic changes and stream improvements should be performed as needed.
27
5.0 WETLAND RESTORATION PLAN
The proposed Phase 1 wetland restoration area encompasses . approximately 623 ac
surrounding the historic origin of Harrison Creek (Figure 4). This restoration plan for the Phase
1 area has been developed according to specifications outlined in the COE/EPA mitigation
banking guidelines (60 FR 12286-12293, 1995) and N.C. Division of Water Quality's wetland
mitigation policy (Administrative Code for 401 Water Quality Certification; Section: 15A
NCAC 2H.0500). Specifically, this mitigation proposal will provide for the replacement of
wetland acres lost due to a proposed activity at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio up to a maximum
2:1 ratio, through restoration, prior to utilizing enhancement or preservation to satisfy the
mitigation requirements. In addition, mitigation shall replace impacts to nonriverine wetland
types occurring within the same river basin (Cape Fear) and physiographic province (Coastal
Plain) when practical (DWQ 1996).
5.1 WETLAND HYDROLOGY RESTORATION
Site alterations to restore groundwater, surface flow dynamics, and wetland hydrology include:
1) backfilling of all crop land ditches and canals; 2) placement of compacted plugs; 3)
redirection of off-site drainage; 4) construction of seasonal pools; 5) stream monitoring and
improvements; 6) roadway improvements; and 7) wetland surface harrowing/scarification
(Figure 11).
5.1.1 Ditch Backfilling
Backfill ditches identified in Figure 11 will be back-filled along the entire lengths using on-site
earthen material from spoil piles, dirt road fill, and spoil ridges adjacent to canals. Where
vegetation has colonized the spoil ridges, trees and rooting debris will be removed, to the
maximum extent feasible, before re-insertion of earthen fill into the canal. The ditches/canals
will be filled, compacted, and graded to the approximate elevation of the adjacent wetland
surf ace.
5.1.2 Compacted Ditch Plugs
Compacted ditch plugs will be installed at the outfall location within backfilled ditches or open
lateral ditches in forested areas to further prevent preferential flow migration in the former
channel. Ditches will be plugged at locations shown in Figure 11. A total of 34 plugs will be
installed.
The plugs will consist of available, low permeability (silt or organic silt) materials designed to
be of sufficient strength to withstand the erosive energy of surface flow events across the
site. Each plug will backfilled in 2-ft lifts of vegetation free organic or silt dominated material
and compacted into the bottom of the ditch. The terminal plug at the site outf all will represent
a relatively large structure spanning an excavated canal. The plugs will serve to prevent the
former ditches and canals from acting as french drains. Continued drainage in back-filled
ditches would be expected to effectively short-circuit or delay hydrology restoration success
in the absence of compacted plugs.
28
ER97047/Bar_al1B. dwg
?x

C7 I
,
p ? O p
O
• C13
0 n p p
- 0 ?
O
N
n
O'
L
(D
(D
D-
O
(D
V)
r
MI M
N ?
N
O
0
CD
p Q
3
n
s 0
p ?
(D
Cn
CD

O
CO
CD
N
n
O
O
1`
I
CD
O_
L?
0
n
:3-
CD
O
CO
O
3
p
n
(D
0
n
cp
100
Q
m
a
---•-----I
---------------------
11W
n •r T r?^? r OW F9
T PYltiT ?-!7/' _w.--•/ rim------
I At
;i At
?? ??_......_-__.._....li I At
i At ! ! _--
It I if I
i -
- - - -r-----J ----------------- --- O
i -----•-------•-----------•---?j
---------------------•---
°_. I------------ •-----------&I
---------------------------? it
I I----_ ---_-------•----------
-----•---- ?.
-• -----------------
Q
I X11
-+ I-----_-----------------------
o• I
1---------------------------..?j?l
o 1
:3 Y
D -------------------------
i
0 o I fill:
-------------------_ ------------
-------
- I.
--------------
----------
--------------------
---
___-.-____
\ \ i ,
\ --------•-----------•------•--
\ '
*0'
\ ?'
\ i
\ \ ..-------- ---------------
*41P - \ \ ?i.0 Ate' ,,:
01 40
,A
00
\ \ `` 401%; A ,AA A? I I
.40
00 00 AA ,.• ,i
.0 .1 A,I .10 A,A A,A •i
\ \ V A °0. A' A , A 0.0 A'
\ ??', *- .0 4. AA A 01 .0 Ali 00 .01 AAA AAA
A AA AA A?•' • 10 i
o '
\ \ \ ,AAAA 'AAA A A ''AA AA AAA ? A A,?
\ \ ,I ' OF AA 40 •I , ,?
\ \'AA 00 ,AA ,AA , AA , .00 '0 40 AA` i
\ AAA ,?' AA,• A40 A,,AA A,A Op .01
\ A
.,AA AAA
'1... AA'0.0
A
40
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Hydrology and Soil Restoration
Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Drawn By. PJS Figure: 11
Checked By. JWD Project: ER97047
Scale: 1" = 600' Date: Dec 1997
5.1.3 Off-Site Drainage Redirection
The surface flow inlet in eastern reaches of the Site will be accommodated by constructing
a channel at 114.5 ft above MSL which extends from the ditch outf all to a small lateral ditch
within the wetland interior (Figure 11). The constructed channel will support a cross-sectional
area of less than 2 ft' and extend to a depth of approximately 1 ft below the adjacent soil
surface. The existing lateral ditch will convey the water northward towards the headwater
slope physiographic area. A small meandering channel will be constructed for approximately
150 ft at 114.5 ft above MSL from the lateral ditch into low-lying portions of the headwater
slope physiographic area. The channel will support a cross-sectional area of approximately 2
ft' with the channel bed extending approximately 0.9 ft below the adjacent soil surface. Based
on topographic mapping, the channel discharge point and the headwater storage area maintain
elevations ranging from 112 ft to 114 ft above MSL and will serve as a flood storage and
infiltration zone for the off-site discharge.
5.1.4 Seasonal Pool Construction
The redirected off-site drainage will enter the headwater storage area in proximity to former
lateral ditches which extend away from the origin of Harrison Creek and towards the central
east/west canal. These backfilled ditches may continue to serve as french drains due to the
hydraulic pressure introduced by influent surface waters. Therefore, the influent drainage
should be redirected away from the former ditches and into three constructed seasonal pools
in inter-field areas. The pools will be constructed by excavating shallow depressions to one
ft below the existing surface elevation in the center of the depression. The depressional area
will extend over a radius of 20 to 50 ft. A portion of the excavated material may be used to
construct small berms along the backfilled ditch corridor if surface flow continues towards the
central east/west canal. Otherwise, the excavated material will be transported from the Site
or spread as a thin veneer of organic material on top of the existing crop land surface. The
surface flow corridor and oval depressions will be monitored regularly to ensure that surface
water does not continue to migrate into backfilled ditches and towards the central east/west
canal.
5.1.5 Stream Restoration, Monitoring, and Improvements
The redirected off-site and on-site drainages are expected to restece,permanent stream flows 0
into the origin of Harrison CreekjW The relict channel has partially filled in with organic debris,
logging material, fallen trees, and dense shrub thickets. In addition, old road beds and logging
trails cross the relict channel at several locations. Modifications to the channel should include
systematic kind clearingtof logging debris, tree jams, and other significant impediments to
stream flow. No mechanized land clearing or excavation should be performed at the current
time e-"roduced peak flows are expected to passively, clean out organic, debris; and,,to re-#
?tream aquatic habitats.,b However, the stream should be monitored periodically
to evaluate hydraulic changes and stream improvements should be performed as needed.
These improvements will occur if stream hydrodynamics are superseded by impounded pools
of standing water that threaten to eliminate the floodplain forest canopy (cypress/cedar
swamp). If needed, future alterations to promote stream flows will include: 1) removal of
29
incidental fill associated with former road beds; 2) grading along relict skid trails; and/or 3)
removal of soil ridges or mounds associated with antecedent land uses. If beaver activity
ensues, loss of the forest canopy will be allowed as part of natural wetland processes at the
Site.
5.1.6 Off-Site Roadway Improvements
The downstream segment of Harrison Creek supports a low-lying dirt road and one culvert.
The road crossing will be elevated above existing conditions (Appendix H). Replacement
culverts will be added and the channel will be regraded in proximity to the road to
accommodate bankfull stream flows in the center culvert. The adjacent culverts will be placed
at the floodplain elevation to accommodate overbank flood waters. The road crossing will be
monitored regularly and additional modifications performed as needed.
5.1.7 Wetland Surface Modifications
Before wetland community restoration is implemented, agricultural fields and graded back-fill
material will be scarified in a randomized cross-hatch pattern. After scarification, the soil
surface should exhibit complex microtopography ranging to 1 ft in vertical asymmetry across
local reaches of the landscape. Restored microtopographic relief is considered critical to
hydrology restoration efforts. Therefore, a harrow plow or deep disking plow is recommended,
including multiple passes, to ensure adequate surface roughing and surface water storage
potential across the site. Subsequently, community restoration will be initiated on scarified
wetland surfaces.
5.2 WETLAND COMMUNITY RESTORATION
Restoration of wetland forested communities provides habitat for area wildlife and allows for
development and expansion of characteristic wetland dependent species across the landscape.
Ecotonal changes between community types contribute to diversity and provide secondary
benefits, such as enhanced feeding and nesting opportunities for mammals, birds, amphibians,
and other wildlife.
RFE data, on-site observations, and ecosystem classification has been used to develop the
species associations promoted during community restoration activities. Preliminary community
associations include: 1) small stream swamp forest; 2) headwater slope swamp forest; 3)
nonriverine wet hardwood forest; 4) nonriverine swamp forest; and 5) upland pine
savannah/hardwood forest. Figure 12 provides a conceptual depiction of potential forest
communities to be restored across the landscape. Figure 13 identifies the location of each
target community on the Site.
Emphasis has been focused on developing a diverse plant assemblage. This is particularly vital
due to the limited distribution of mast-producing hardwood tree species presently existing in
the vicinity, as evidenced during the RFE search. Planting a variety of mast-producing species
will provide a food source for wildlife and will facilitate habitat diversity in a region dominated
by monotypic pine plantations.
30
' i
i
M ? 0
cn Z M ' ME
O 0 -? Z
?? r 'rl DO ' ?C
y ZC? ! Q?
5 M
r
i
- I
C/) D D
z'
CD 0
o O p N 0 W CD r
o ! Q n °- 0 CD -0 r
0 (n
o CD
o o -0 C/) ?OD?mp?? 0--l
CD ! CD = ?- 3 m O cn I m
00 O 0 D
i Q CD I
i
I
i i
I '
i
- ---- - - ---- - - ------ - --- - - ------ - ------ - -- - - - - ----- - ------ - ------ - ----- - - ------ - ----- - ------ - ------ - -- - ------ - - - - ------ - ------ - ---- - - ---- - - ------
' t T
=3
Cn ! D
o o (Q -n
w Q m o CD C) ' --?
C7 CD W TI - `< 70 -n m
C < C/) U) CDC ??p>CAD ! O
-0 Z3 2) Zr CD 57
C) =3 CD 0 W -, , -U CD CD
1? 77 co CD M
_0 CD 0-
3 5@1 0-
CD -n
m ' Q m
w
r i
Q- :X)
I
o cQ a --- --?---- ------ --------- ---- --- ';--- --- -- --- - -- - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- ------
0 ! 'xF
SD (D t
ZKI m o ?<r j (n
°o CZ3 ' D C C)
C D
C7 D CO O =3 3 Cn G CD < ! = Z
jw CD
m OI<L) i C) Co
0 0 0- C7 3 I zu D 17
-n -••
CD
07-0 0*
° co ?N v ! O' + O CAD W 2) p N
1 =3 =3 0 77 --l
0
m o
CD w can c O CA
0 -0 CD D 77
o m p ?z
CD Q -.?- -? ?
. p? U) 0m
5 rF O D CCCn z
m ! N _ O=-:3_ DOCn j <p
?t C r CD (D a N Z
o -t CD CD 0 C-) 3
o W CD 3 p c ?-o C M
U) CD N -1 p
U) o O C7 cCDn CAD :10
CD 0 ?' N CD to O m z
cn U) i (n m
D
d b CD z Cl)
° oo ; l = oo co o m
CD o ? O oo ? --,) , ? 7-3 C
C: 0 +? 0 C? O CD
CCU O D -v
oooa ??p0m'rt?0a? O<?
CA C/) 0 CCD o ¢, C° -, CD U) a' 77 0- p m m z 0
o N av ct)
Z
(D :3 i O CD O
v V C, _•,
' I
ER97047/Bar_aft iwg
HDONnE71
ZZ Z=WCC I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t_
0 Q QQ ( I I I I I II Iflfiflfiflfl
?-? =3
I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
<' < _ I I I i l l l l l l l l l l l
(D (D (< D 0 IZ o- 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I
-s D _,. N I I I i l I I I I I
-? I I I l i t l l l l l l l l l l
:3' I l l l l t l l l
(D Q CD Q ` I'II11 illl'IIIIIII IIIIfIflfllitlll
(D (D
1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1
tnN ::E-?\\ ` I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i l i
** CD O __ \\ I I I I I I I I I i l l l l l l l
-?-'? V 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I
33 2 12-
-0-0 Iilllllllllllll I I I I I lit
C) * fill 111111 Iilll I I I I I
'I ::E 300 I I l l l l t l l l l l l 1
0 0 0 0-0 O O II IIIIIIIII (IIII 1 1 1 1 I I
c- a I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I
O I I I I I I I 1 1 I i
ai voi 0-0 ?1?1 Ifill I i l llilll i t
?-±Q moo
vi + III lilltl
Titer 00 4- N +
i
C C ° { p + { I I I I I
-0 "1 (D 0
C -M N
N-0 C C Z- Q tQ I I I t
3 0 --0 CD (n
O 1 1 1 1 1 1
o C -0 (D -0 ?
3 o m O + I I I I Illil
O Q
-03 ?.N + + 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l f l l lli 1 1 1
-?- -• +
_0 :-(Q Q + I I I Ilflflflflfillllfl I
+ + I l l l l l l l i t i i l l
I l l l l l l l t l l l l
a 2 CD + ( I I I I I I I I I I I I
-0 :S Q CO + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
O { O + Ililfiflflflflflfl I
Q + + IIII
+
1
W D Q i a
Q \ + +
O) N
N p NV- W- + +
W (,0 O -POD-0,Ln Q +
(D ' + +
Illlillllilll
+ +
W + + + flflflll I I 1 I
+ + + + + I I I I I I I I I I I I
+ + + + + + + + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
+ + + + + + + + Illllillllilllllllllllltllllil
+ + + + + I I I I I I I I I I I I
I l l l t l l l l l i l l l l
+ + + t l l l i l l l i l l l l l l i l l i l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
+ + + IIIIIIIIilllllilllllllllllilltllilllillliliiilililllllllliiiilill
I I i l l l l l l l l l l l i l l l l i l l l l l l l l l
+ + + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
I i l l l l l l l l t i l l l I?
+ + + + Ill lllllllilllililllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllilllliilllilllll?
+ + + + + Ifllillfiflfiflflflflflflftflllflliilflllllllflfififlfiflil I I I `
+ + + + + + I I I i l l l l l l
I I I? I I I I I I I I I I I
+ + + + + + + I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
+ + + + + + + itllililillllllllllllllllllil I i l l l l l l l l l t l l
+ + + + + + I l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l i t l l l l l l l l
I I t i t l l l l l l t
+ + + + + + + I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
+ + + + + + + + + Ililililllllllllililllllll 1 I I I I I
I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
+ + + + + + + + + + I I I I I I
+ + + + + + + + + + + I i l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l l i s?
+ + + + + + + + + + + Ililllllllilillllllllllllll C
+ + + + + + + + + + Iflfl I I I I I I I I f
1
+ + + + + + + + + + ( I I I I I I I t
y + + + + + + + + + III I I I
0 0 + + + + + + + + + + I I I I
+ + + + + + + + + IIII I I
+ + + + + + + + + + I I If
+ + + + + + + + + + 111111 Illi
+ + + + + + + + + + III I Ii
+ + + + + + + + + + I I I I
o + + + + + + + + + + III I i
o ° + + + + + + + + + I 1 I
+ + + + + + + + I i
o + + + + + +
° + + + + +
U" + + +
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Community Restoration Map Units
Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Drawn By. PJS Figure: 13
Checked By. JWD Project: ER97047
Scale: 1" = 600' Date: Dec 1997
The subdivision of swamp forest restoration areas into several planting regimes (Atlantic white
cedar dominated and hardwood dominated) serves primarily to provide additional habitat
diversity in the wetland. Stems of Atlantic white cedar will be targeted to landscape areas
which contain soils of relatively high organic content and exhibit the potential for relatively
long term soil saturation (Schafale and Weakley 1990; pers. comm. Brownlie, USFWS Dismal
Swamp National Refuge Office). Mineral soil and shallow organic soil areas of the swamp
forest complex will also include intermittent stems of Atlantic white cedar. However, species
such as bald cypress, laurel oak, swamp tupelo, willow oak, and cherrybark oak may exhibit
higher affinity for these areas.
The restoration of upland forest communities within the wetland complex has also been
proposed. Upland forest restoration plans would be designed to enhance wetland functions
and to restore a wetland/upland forest ecotone that is considered rare in the region. The target
forest community is composed primarily of longleaf pine and pond pine among intermittent
stems of blackjack oak, southern red oak, post oak, water oak, and black gum. For upland
restoration areas, the forest restoration can be modified to allow for maintenance of food plots
or other wildlife management features. Upland restoration efforts will be coordinated with the
N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or other management
groups.
5.2.1 Planting Plan
The planting plan has been modified by availability of tree species for planting. All seedlings
denoted in the following section have been acquired from available contractors. Appropriate
species names and the primary soil types by community are listed below.
Small Stream Swamp Forest
Primary Soil Map Unit: Johnston (Cumulic Humaquepts)
1. Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)
2. 'Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
3. Water Tupelo (Nyssa aquatica)
4. Overcup Oak (Quercus lyrata)
5. Swamp Tupelo (Nyssa bif/ora)
6. Carolina Ash (Fraxinus caroliniana)
7. American Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
Headwater Slope Swamp Forest
Primary Soil Map Units: Croatan (Terric Medisaprists) and Torhunta (Typic Humaquept)
1. Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
2. Water Tupelo (Nyssa aquatica)
3. Swamp Tupelo (Nyssa biflora)
4. Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)
5. Overcup Oak (Quercus lyrata)
6. Carolina Ash (Fraxinus caroliniana)
31
Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest
Primary Soil Map Units: Lynn Haven Fine Sand (Typic Haplaquods) and Woodington inclusions
(Typic Pa/eaquults)
1. Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)
2. Willow Oak (Quercus phe/%s)
3. Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii)
4. Swamp Tupelo (Nyssa biflora)
5. Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
6. Laurel Oak (Quercus laurifolia)
7. Water Oak (Quercus nigra)
8. Overcup Oak (Quercus lyrata)
9. Yellow Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
10. Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)
Nonriverine Swamp Forest
Primary Soil Map Unit: Croatan (Terric Medisaprists) and Lynn Haven Mucky Sand (Typic
Haplaquods)
1. Swamp Tupelo (Nyssa biflora)
2. Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
3. Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)
4. Water Tupelo (Nyssa aquatica)
5. Overcup Oak (Quercus lyrata)
6. Red Bay (Persea Palustris)
7. Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)
8. Laurel Oak (Quercus /aurifolia)
9. Willow Oak (Quercus phellos)
Upland Pine/Hardwood Forest
Primary Soil Map Units: Stallings (Aeric Paleaquults) and Leon (Aeric Hap/aquods)
1. Longleaf Pine (Pious palustris)
2. Pond Pine (Pious serotina)
3. Southern Red Oak (Quercus falcata)
4. Water Oak (Quercus nigra)
5. Willow Oak (Quercus phellos)
6. Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii)
7. Post Oak (Quercus marilandica)
8. Blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica)
9. Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa)
10. Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
The purpose of a planting plan is designed to reestablish wetland community patterns across
the landscape. The plan consists of: 1) acquisition of available wetland species (task
completed); 2) implementation of proposed surface topography improvements (task
32
completed); 3) prescribed burning in fallow crop lands (task completed); 4) limited clearing in
supplemental planting areas (task completed); and 5) planting of selected species on-site. The
COE bottomland hardwood forest mitigation guidelines (DOA 1993) were utilized in developing
this plan.
Bare-root seedlings of tree species will be planted within specified map areas at a density of
435 stems per ac (10-ft centers). Planting will be performed from 12 January through 24
January 1998 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant period and set root during the
spring season. A total of approximately 192,330 tree seedlings will be planted during
restoration activities (Table 9).
Evidence indicates that a major cause of mortality in planted seedlings is over-browsing by
deer. Methods to control deer browsing, such as tree shelters, will be considered. The
presence of dense successional thickets around planted seedlings may also limit deer
browsing. However, in some instances, the substantial decrease in growth rates and the
potential for over-topping by weedy species may reduce the benefits of this option. Regular
shrub and herb maintenance coupled with selective use of tree shelters will be considered to
encourage higher survival rates and more rapid growth.
Opportunistic species, which typically dominate disturbed swamp forests, have been excluded
from initial wetland community restoration efforts. Opportunistic species such as loblolly bay,
sweet bay, pond pine, sweet gum, and red maple may become established within Site. Efforts
to inhibit early site domination by opportunistic species may be required during the first several
years of tree growth to encourage diversity. However, these species should also be
considered important components of steady-state swamp forest communities where species
diversity has not been jeopardized.
The planting plan is the blueprint for community restoration. The anticipated results stated in
the Success Criteria (Section 7.0) are expected to reflect potential vegetative conditions
achieved after steady-state conditions prevail over time.
5.3 WETLAND SOIL RESTORATION
Land use practices have impacted soil characteristics on the Site. Impacts include the
minimization of hydric conditions in upper soil horizons, the reduction in organic matter content
through accelerated decomposition, the placement of spoil ridges and waste debris, and the
elimination of surface microtopography by farming activities. The filling of canals and ditches
as proposed during hydrological restoration should reintroduce hydric soil conditions and halt
the long-term reductions in organic matter content. Additional soil remediation tasks consist
of removal of spoil ridges and reestablishment of surface microtopography.
During wetland hydrology restoration efforts, fill for ditches will be obtained, wherever
feasible, from elevated roadbeds and spoil ridges adjacent to canals ANM6spd_P which rem8iins 0
a :ar - . 'tland°ff drology restoration is complete will be removed from the Site* Spoil areas will
33
TABLE 9
Planting Regime
Barra Farms Site
Vegetation
Association
(Planting area) Small
Stream
Swamp
Forest Headwater
Slope
Swamp
Forest Nonriverine
Wet
Hardwood
Forest Nonriverine
Swamp
Forest Nonriv.
Swamp
Forest Upland
Pine /
Hardwood
Forest Upland
Pine /
Hardwood
Forest TOTAL
STEMS
PLANTED
Stem Target
Area (acres [ac]) 70/ace
14 ac 701ac
47 ac 435/ac
124 ac 435/ac
249 ac 70/ac
140 ac 435/ac
34 ac 70/ac
15 ac
623 ac
SPECIES # planted
(% total) # planted
(% total) # planted
(% total) # planted
(% total) # planted
(% total) # planted
(% total) # planted
M total) # planted
(% total)
Bald Cypress 200(20) 660(20) 5400 (10) 21670(20) 1470(15) 29400
Water Tupelo 150(15) 660(20) 10840(10) 490(5) 12140
Atlantic White Cedar 300(30) 660(20) 2700(5) 16250(15) 1470(15) 21380
Swamp Tupelo 10000) 660(20) 5400 (10) 27080(25) 2450(25) 35690
Overcup Oak 150 0 5) 500 0 5) 2700(5) 10840(10) 980(10) 15170
American Sycamore 50(5) 50
Red Bay 10840(10) 98000) 11820
Carolina Ash 50(5) 170(5) 220
Cherrybark Oak 13490(25) 10840(10) 24330
ElLaurel Oak 2700(5) 980(10) 3680
Willow Oak 10790(20) 98000) 11000) 11880
Swamp Chestnut Oak 540000) 11000) 5510
Water Oak 2700(5) 1480 0 0) 210(20) 4390
Yellow Poplar 2700(5) 2700
Longleaf Pine 3700 (25) 110 0 0) 3810
Pond Pine 3700 (25) 3700
Post Oak 148000) 110(10) 1590
Southern Red Oak 2960 (20) 270(25) 3230
Blackgum 148000) 16005) 1640
TOTAL 1000 3310 53980 108360 9800 14800 1080 192330
1: All listed species and stem counts have been acquired from available nurseries. These stem counts include compensation for species
which are unavailable or available in limited quantities. Specifically, the density of laurel oak stems has been significantly reduced to
lack of availability.
Vegetation associations targeted for 70 stems/acre are supplemental planting areas. Vegetation associations targeted for 435
stems/acre are full planting areas.
be graded to the elevation of the historic surface and landscaped to produce a smooth
transition across the former spoil ridge and adjacent canal.
Reference wetlands in the region exhibit complex surface microtopography. Small concavities,
swales, exposed root systems, and hummocks associated with vegetative growth and
hydrological patterns are scattered throughout the system. Large woody debris and partially
decomposed litter provide additional complexity across the wetland soil surface. As discussed
in the hydrology restoration section, efforts to advance the development of characteristic
surface roughness will be implemented on the mitigation site , g, and harxowmg to be
implemented during planting activities will promote the formation of hummocks and concavities
that act to increase surface storage and provide micro-habitat for invertebrates, reptiles, and
amphibians t$.$ rific„ation$of surface soils between planted trees will further promote surface
microtopography on the mitigation site. Woody debris generated during site preparation will
be distributed across the wetland mitigation surface before planting.
During spoil removal and backfilling, the culverts under dirt roads on the Site will be removed
from the earthen fill before excavation and ditch-filling activities, where feasible.
34
6.0 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
The implementation schedule includes completion of all restoration activities in the Winter of
1997/1998. As of 14 December 1997, all on-site earth work has been completed including
ditch back-filling, compacted plugs, drainage redirection, seasonal pool construction, and
surface scarification. Planting of tree elements will ensue from 12 January through 24
January 1998. Monitoring wells and vegetation monitoring plots have also been placed within
the Site and within the reference wetlands (Section 7.0). Monitoring of wetland hydrology will
be initiated on 7 January 1998 with expected documentation of wetland hydrology restoration
success in the Spring of 1998.
35
7.0 MONITORING PLAN
The Monitoring Plan will consist of a comparison between hydrology model predictions,
reference wetlands, and wetland restoration areas on the Site. Monitoring of wetland
restoration and enhancement efforts will be performed until success criteria are fulfilled.
Monitoring is proposed for two wetland components, vegetation and hydrology. Wetland soils
currently exist within restoration areas and monitoring is not considered necessary to verify
hydric soil requirements for a jurisdictional determination.
7.1 HYDROLOGY MONITORING
After hydrological modifications are being performed on the site, surficial monitoring wells will
be designed and placed in accordance with specifications in U.S. Corps of Engineers', Installing
Monitoring Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands (WRP Technical Note HY-IA-3.1, August 1993).
Monitoring wells will be set to a depth of approximately 24 inches below the soil surface.
Twenty three surficial monitoring wells (manual recording) will be installed at the Site to
provide representative coverage and flow gradients extending through each of the three
physiographic landscape areas (Figure 14). Four monitoring wells will also be placed within
the reference wetland site in similar landscape positions, where available. Three continuous
recording (RDS24) wells will also be installed on-site to provide continuous data that can be
extrapolated to manual recording devices.
Hydrological sampling will be performed on-site and within reference during the growing
season (17 March to 12 November) at intervals necessary to satisfy the hydrology success
criteria within the designated physiographic area (EPA 1990). In general, the wells will be
sampled weekly through the Spring and early Summer and intermittently through the remainder
of the growing season, if needed to verify success.
7.2 HYDROLOGY SUCCESS CRITERIA
Target hydrological characteristics have been evaluated using a potential combination of three
different methods: 1) regulatory wetland hydrology criteria; 2) reference groundwater
modeling; and 3) reference wetland sites.
Regulatory Wetland Hydrology Criteria
The regulatory wetland hydrology criterion requires saturation (free water) within one foot of
the soil surface for 12.5 percent of the growing season under normal climatic conditions. In
some instances, the regulatory wetland hydroperiod may extend for between 5 and 12.5% of
the growing season.
Reference Groundwater Model
The reference groundwater model forecasts that the wetland hydroperiod in interior areas of
the Site will average 22% of the growing season in early successional phases. As steady
state forest conditions develop, the average wetland hydroperiod is forecast to encompass
36
40% of the growing season. Over the 31 year modeling period, the annual hydroperiod
fluctuated from less than 12.5% to over 44% dependent upon rainfall patterns and
successional phase. In addition, the on-site landscape includes diverse wetland
geomorphology, especially near uplands and the stream channel, which are not characterized
by the model.
Due to wide fluctuations in modeled annual hydroperiod (< 12-44+ %), the groundwater model
cannot provide a specific hydrology success criteria above the regulatory criterion (12.5%) on
an annual basis. A specific success criteria such as a 22% target hydroperiod will fail in 50%
of the years sampled. A success criteria of 12.5% (the regulatory criteria) will also fail in 10%
of the years sampled in reference wetlands.
Reference Wetland Sites
Four monitoring wells will be placed in the groundwater flats reference wetland located in the
northwestern periphery of Barra Farms. Wells will be also be placed in a riverine reference
wetland in the Bushy Lake/Horse shoe Lake natural area dependent upon contact with the
North Carolina Park and Recreation Service. These wells will provide annual hydroperiods on
the organic soil flat, and riverine floodplain physiographic areas of the Site. The headwater
slope physiographic area may be interpolated between the two systems. Transition zones from
,,"_up ands towards the wetland interior will not be represented. Therefore, these wells will
provide comparative information on interior wetlands only.
The hydrology success criteria for this Site will require saturation (free water) within one foot
of the soil surface for at least 50% of the hydroperiod exhibited by the reference wetland.
LBased on groundwater models, average wetland hydroperiods in groundwater flats will exhibit
eady, non-linear increase from 22% to 40% of the growing season during forest (post-
land) development. This trend includes a hypothetical reduction in hydraulic conductivities
a 50% increase in surface water storage through the first 15 years of wetland
elopment. Therefore, a goal of 50 +/-% hydroperiods relative to reference wetlands is
ranted for the five year monitoring period. This 50% goal may not apply in non-organic
s as evapotranspiration may play a greater role in early successional hydroperiods than
ace water storage.
7.3 VEGETATION
Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation are designed in accordance with EPA
guidelines presented in Mitigation Site Type (MIST) documentation (EPA 1990) and COE
Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation Guidelines (DOA 1993). The following presents a general
discussion of the monitoring program.
After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be
performed to verify planting methods and to determine initial species composition and density.
Supplemental planting and additional site modifications will be implemented, if necessary.
37
During the first year, vegetation will receive cursory, visual evaluation on a periodic basis to
ascertain the degree of overtopping of planted elements by weeds. Subsequently, quantitative
sampling of vegetation will be performed between September 1 and October 31 after each
growing season until the vegetation success criteria is achieved.
After planting plan implementation, 0.1 acre plots will be within each restored ecosystem type.
Twenty three plots will be correlated with hydrological monitoring locations to provide point-
related data on hydrological and vegetation parameters.
7.4 VEGETATION SUCCESS CRITERIA
Success criteria have been established to verify that the wetland vegetation component
supports a species composition sufficient for a jurisdictional determination. Additional success
criteria are dependent upon the density and growth of characteristic forest species.
Specifically,?a minimum mean density of 320 characteristic trees/ac must be present for the
five year monitoring period. Characteristic tree species are those, wi e
ec-esystem"Section__5.3), elements--enumerated--in_the- planting-plan, along with natural
recruitment of sweet gum, red maple, loblolly bay, loblolly pine, and pond pine. Loblolly or
pond pine (softwood species) cannot comprise more than 10 percent of the 320 stem/acre
requirement. In addition, at least five character tree species must be present, and no species
can comprise more than 20 percent of the 320 stem/acre tota Supplemental plantings will
be performed as needed to achieve the vegetation success criteria.
No quantitative sampling requirements are proposed for herb and shrub assemblages as part
of the vegetation success criteria. Development of a forest canopy over several decades and
restoration of wetland hydrology will dictate the success in migration and establishment of
desired wetland understory and groundcover populations. Visual estimates of the percent
cover/composition of shrub and herbaceous species and photographic evidence will be reported
for information purposes.
7.5 REPORT SUBMITTAL
Documentation will be submitted to the MBRT certifying completion of implementation
activities. Any changes to this mitigation plan will be described in this documentation. The
document will be provided within 60 days of completion of all work at the Site.
Subsequently, reports will be submitted yearly to the MBRT following each assessment.
Reports will document the sample transect locations, along with photographs which illustrate
site conditions.
Surficial well data will be presented in tabular/graphic format. The duration of wetland
hydrology during the growing season will be calculated at each well, within each on-site
physiographic area, and within the reference wetland site.
38
The survival and density of planted tree stock will be reported. In addition, characteristic tree
species mean density and average height as formatted in the Vegetation Success Criteria will
be calculated. Estimates and photographic evidence of the relative percent cover of understory
and groundcover species will be generated.
7.6 CONTINGENCY
In the event that vegetation or hydrology success criteria are not fulfilled, a mechanism for
contingency will be implemented. For vegetation contingency, replanting and extended
monitoring periods will be implemented if community restoration does not fulfill minimum
species density and distribution requirements.
Hydrological contingency will require consultation with hydrologists and regulatory agencies
if wetland hydrology restoration is not achieved during the monitoring period.
Recommendations for contingency to establish wetland hydrology will be implemented and
monitored until the Hydrology Success Criteria are achieved. Performance bonds have been
established to guarantee fiscal resources for remediation.
39
8.0 DISPENSATION OF PROPERTY
ECOBANK will remain responsible for the mitigation site. Restoration activities on the site will
be bonded until completed and a trust fund established for future management and monitoring.
After success criteria are fulfilled, ECOBANK will continue to manage the mitigation area in
perpetuity, or entrust the properties to an appropriate management entity. The N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC), The Nature Conservancy, the North Carolina Park and
Recreation Service (Jones Lake State Park Office), and other conservation groups maintain
potential management capabilities in the region (Section 3.7). The Site and trust funds may
be held by the Division of Water Quality-Wetland Restoration Program (DWQ-WRP) during the
interim monitoring period. Perpetual management programs supported by trust funds
appropriated to the Site may include (but not limited to) the following activities:
1) Wildlife harvesting activities in mitigation areas will be allowed to continue under local
tradition, dependent upon site constraints, and based on recommendations from the
WRC.
2) A long-term fire management program will be implemented, as necessary, to facilitate
steady state community development, promote hunting opportunities, and promote
endangered species habitat. Local residents should become involved in long term
management. Several residents have indicated an interest in following the development
of protected wetlands at the Site and serving to act as land stewards. Stewardship
opportunities with nearby landowners could be coordinated with the State Gamelands
(Figure 8), through consultation with WRC.
3) Garbage dumping, forest clearing, or other disturbances in mitigation areas will be
regulated, monitored, and eliminated. Road access to the mitigation area, if maintained
after restoration for management use, will be appropriately gated to prevent dumping
activity.
4) Protective covenants on the mitigation land will specify that the land be allowed to
succeed to specified tree densities, composition, and sizes before timber harvest is
considered. After the successional phase, covenants will stipulate that there is to be
no forest clear-cutting and no selective timbering that lowers per-acre stem counts
below a target density of 6 non-pine trees per ac greater than 20 in. in diameter (within
each acre of mitigation area). Managing for the presence of large hardwood trees,
cypress, or AWC this size is required to provide potential habitat for species typical of
mature growth wetland forests. In addition, densities of non-pines greater than 10
inches in diameter will be maintained at or greater than 30 ft2 of basal area per ac (for
each ac of land) to provide adequate foraging potential for mast-consuming wildlife
(Yoakum et al. 1980).
6) Dead and dying trees, snags, and logs will be left on-site to provide foraging habitat as
well as to provide cavity formation potential for species such as wood duck, pileated
woodpecker, and barred owl (Yoakum et al. 1980).
40
9.0 WETLAND FUNCTIONAL EVALUATIONS
Mitigation activities at the Barra Farms / Harrison Creek site should be determined based on
wetland functions generated by restoration and enhancement and comparison of restored
functions to potentially impacted wetland resources. Therefore, a preliminary evaluation of
mitigation wetlands at the Site, by physiographic area, is provided to evaluate site utility for
mitigation in the region.
Hydrodynamic functions have been degraded or effectively eliminated due to construction of
drainage networks, soil levelling/compaction, and removal of characteristic vegetation.
Features which depict performance of hydrodynamic wetland functions, such as surface
microtopography, seasonal ponding, stream channels, forest vegetation, and characteristic
wetland soil properties have been reduced or eliminated by alternative land uses. Reduction
or elimination of wetland hydrology has also negated biogeochemical cycling and biological
functions within the complex. These former wetlands do not support natural communities
adapted to wetlands or the wetland dependent wildlife characteristic in the region.
9.1 RIVERINE FLOODPLAINS AND STREAMS
The riverine floodplain physiographic area encompasses approximately 14 ac of floodplain and
approximately 2400 ft of historic main-stem stream channel within Bank property limits.
Channel flows and overbank flooding have been effectively eliminated from the system due
to watershed diversion. Therefore, the stream channel and floodplain provide negligible
riverine wetland functions under existing conditions.
Restoration plans will redirect drainage within an approximately 2.5 mil watershed towards
the historic floodplain. Permanent stream flows and periodic overbank flooding will be re-
established. Therefore, riverine hydrodynamic and biogeochemical functions will be restored,
including pollutant removal, organic carbon export, sediment retention, nutrient cycling, flood
storage, and energy dissipation. Physical wetland functions typically associated with water
quality will be potentially replaced within the Cape Fear River basin.
Biological functions associated with the stream system will also be restored including in-stream
aquatic habitats, structural floodplain habitat, and interspersion and connectivity between the
restored stream, floodplain, adjacent uplands and nonriverine wetlands on-site. Wetland
restoration credit is warranted for establishment of small stream swamp forests along the
2400-ft stream segment and within the adjacent, approximately 14-ac riverine floodplain.
9.2 HEADWATER SLOPES
The headwater slope physiographic area encompasses approximately 98 ac of which 38 ac
resides within crop lands and 60 ac resides within remnant forests. Headwater slopes
typically serve as groundwater discharge slopes located immediately adjacent to riverine
floodplains. These systems often represent "second terraces" which are no longer exposed
to periodic overbank flooding from the stream. Under existing conditions, the crop land portion
41
of the slope wetland supports negligible riparian functions (restoration potential) with
groundwater discharge redirected towards the central east/west canal via lateral ditches.
Remaining forested areas appear to maintain some groundwater storage and discharge
capacity towards the riverine floodplain (enhancement potential).
Restoration and enhancement within the headwater slope area will assist in successful
restoration of the adjacent riverine floodplain and will re-establish characteristic wetland
functions in the slope wetland. Important hydrodynamic and biogeochemical functions
restored include moderation of groundwater flow and discharge towards the floodplain,
dynamic surface water storage, long term surface water storage, and subsurface water
storage. Biological functions to be restored include isolated aquatic habitat (seasonal pools
of standing water), establishment of cypress-tupelo-cedar swamp, and maintenance of
interspersion and connectivity between riverine and nonriverine habitat types. Ephemeral and
intermittent streams characteristic of reference wetlands would be expected to re-establish
within the headwater slope wetland area.
Wetland restoration credit is warranted within crop land portions of the slope wetland (38 ac).
Enhancement credit is warranted within remaining forested areas (60 ac) as discharge
characteristics and community structure persist in a degraded condition.
9.3 GROUNDWATER FLATS
The groundwater flat physiographic area encompasses approximately 436 ac of precipitation
driven wetlands that represent a portion of the watershed for Harrison Creek. These sites are
likely to provide groundwater recharge capacity that is critical to functioning of the adjacent
slope wetland and floodplain. Under existing conditions, approximately 324 ac of the
groundwater flat has been converted to crop land with the remaining 112 ac supporting
degraded, early successional pines. These wetland flats have been ditched with groundwater
discharging north, via lateral ditches, into the central east/west canal. Wetland functions on
the flat have been lost with subsequent impacts on downslope systems described above.
Restoration and enhancement within groundwater flats will promote wetland functions within
the adjacent wetland types. Groundwater recharge functions and habitat interspersion in the
surrounding landscape are considered critical for slope and riverine wetland systems. Within
the nonriverine flats, hydrodynamic and biogeochemical functions restored include moderation
of groundwater flow and discharge, long term surface water storage, and subsurface water
storage. Biological functions to be restored include isolated aquatic habitat (ephemeral pools)
swamp-wet hardwood forests, and forest interior habitat.
Wetland restoration credit is warranted within forested nonriverine flats immediately adjacent
to ditches and within crop land (324 ac). Enhancement credit is warranted within remaining
early successional areas (112 ac).
42
9.4 UPLAND/WETLAND ECOTONES
Approximately 49 ac of upland/wetland ecotones and 26 ac of wetland drainage buffers
(adjacent to remaining ditches) will also be restored within the wetland complex. Integration
of wetland and upland interfaces represents an important component of wetland restoration
plans. Restored wetland buffers provide an ecological gradient from uplands to wetlands and
would establish streamside management zones (SMZs) along the riverine floodplain. Without
upland restoration/enhancement and wetland buffer establishment, intrinsic functions in
adjacent, restored wetlands may be diminished or lost in the future. In addition, a number of
biological and physical wetland parameters are also enhanced by the presence of
wetland/upland ecotones on the mitigation site (ESI 1994a; Brinson et a/. 1981). Mitigation
credit ratios in adjacent wetlands will be modified to depict the functional benefit derived from
upland forest restoration; no direct credit ratios are proposed for uplands and wetland buffers.
Biotic functions potentially restored within the wetland/upland complex include re-introduction
of habitat for certain terrestrial and semi-aquatic wildlife guilds. Species populations promoted
include those dependent upon interspersion and connectivity with bottomland areas along with
the need for forest interior habitat. These riparian and non-riparian wetland interactions are
considered degraded throughout a majority of the project region as agricultural lands dominate
intermediate landscape positions (between interstream and riverine wetland habitat). Habitat
value and community maintenance functions will also be improved by creation and
interconnection of five plant community types along the restored environmental gradient.
Cover will be expanded and species diversity may be promoted in proximity to the Bushy Lake
State Natural Area and NCNHP Priority Areas.
43
10.0 MITIGATION CREDIT AND CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
Mitigation credit has been established based upon Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
guidelines (Page and Wilcher 1990) and discussions with the MBRT. Mitigation includes 376
ac of wetland restoration in crop lands, abandoned riverine floodplains, and in forested areas
immediately adjacent to ditches (within 60 to 100 ft of ditches). Wetland enhancement is
proposed in the remaining 172 ac of degraded wetland areas that can be restored to steady
state conditions. Stream restoration (3rd order or less) is proposed along 2400 linear ft of
channel subject to re-introduction of permanent flow.
Wetland mitigation credit has been subdivided into three physiographic wetland types based
on hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classifications (Brinson 1993b): groundwater (precipitation) flats,
headwater slopes, and riverine floodplains. Table 10 depicts mitigation credit allotted within
each wetland type. In summary, approximately 240 replacement credits are proposed to
become available for compensatory mitigation use.
The release schedule for replacement credits generated by the Bank will be based upon
successful completion of the following tasks:
Task 1: Task 1 entails acquisition and protection of the Bank site, cessation of all agricultural
activities, completion of detailed mitigation planning, review of plan parameters by the MBRT,
and signing of the MBI. Protective covenants, easements, and bonds on the property will also
be obtained. Task 1 is projected for completion in January 1998. Upon completion of Task
I, 15% of the total Bank credits will be released.
Task 2: Task 2 includes completion of all mitigation implementation activities at the Bank.
Stream repair and seasonal pool construction will be completed and ditch flows diverted into
the restored floodplain where planned. Ditches will be backfilled and spoil/roadway fill will be
recontoured within the ditch corridors. Subsequently, soil preparation and planting of
characteristic wetland trees will be completed. Documentation will be submitted to the MBRT
certifying completion of Task 2. Task 2 is projected for completion in January 1998. Upon
completion of Task 2, 15% of the total Bank credits will be released (30% cumulative).
Task 3: Task 3 involves implementation of the monitoring plan and submittal of annual reports
to the MBRT for a five year monitoring period. The vegetation and hydrology data will be
compiled and success/failure documented within each physiographic landscape area (as
depicted in Figure 14). Hydrology data is expected to be compiled in the early Summer of
each year and the vegetation data compiled towards the end of each growing season (between
September 1 and October 31). The data will be submitted to the MBRT as Wetland Monitoring
Reports (WMRs). Upon submittal of the WMR, credits will be released as outlined below and
graphically depicted in Table 11.
3.1 Year 1 WMR: Wetland Hydrology Success (June 1998): 20% (50% cumulative)
3.2 Year 1 WMR: Wetland Vegetation Success (November 1998): 20% (70% cumulative)
44
O
r
W
J
m
Y
Z
Q
co
z
O
H
a
H
L
W
cr. J
V
zz
OO
a W
CD oC
? Q
W
r U.
W W
ya
QQ
= V
U.
cc
ac
Q
co

L
?
N
N
C 0
N LO
r- O aM
N 1 1 O
O
O
O N

C V o
N

O

cc

O
L N N r
r
6
rn r
a7 r
i
i
CO

CV
O

R N
O v
?
00
0
N
04
M
CO
M

i
Q CO

d

N

N
= M T- O

O C
O "O

C N 'a

C

C
ca
++ 'a 0 ca
a-+
O
L
co cc
L >(1) Q) ,N CD fo
t+ N > O
O O C Q) ?' L co
O O C LL O LL ? Cr co
p L _a 'f' L co CD
N
y
O + +?
c) +N
N N m O
3 O co O
?: y O
o .?
O a
i-

o ° -0 (D a?
o =3 a O o w H
•+-. C a 0-4- 0 0 + O ?- a co
t0 L fC O O L Cj p L C C

01
O +,
M
(n C - c0 C7
C
a
•
O
L
L Q)
(D C O
Q) Q) +
,
O ca
L
3:
+J "O
Q)
+
C O -C

C E

to
C C f6 U j j U a C
m
(D L
O a Q
cc O a co
c0 L O>
C "a L C
C L C
fo fC
?-
aL >
aC (D L
2 Q) C
Mw O O C
Zx0 O C
Zw C N
X co
4)

Q O
y
c
U -a co
O c (D
U a
?-
O 7a5 Q)
C a
(6 O
E Q
C
- Q) L
D
O 3? L
Q)
c6 U ? y
E O
_O m
0 c
C;)
4?
r
co

?
c
0
L
c
N E
a O U)
LU Q)
0
c
co co O
++ .. N
N 0? N c
?
?- -a o
•
n
L VJ
O O --
Y N U fA
M Q) fo
cn
N a d d
(D
L m CLp
O O C
U
N I- C

co
CC a a
c
c a? (o
c cOn Q>
L) L Q)
U
Co L
ca
co fo - O
U C O N +O+
7 co E
a E n c
L
+1
c CL =
W N a y

Q)
++ a? y
C
U ca co co O fo
co 0
a W r-
, Co
U

co Q) co

00
a
0 C.)
O
'- m
Q ++
i y C ++ N
Q) C L
E a)
D O

y
M (D
7 O Co U
i a
L
0 y O L
co 0
co co U
m C 0 C
O a? C (6 Q)
i
L
f6 L
m CD a O ++
Q) C.) 0
+a C V- CB
to O O
(D d a Q) v-
O O M a
a
Co
0
' 0 0 C.
. ` 0 y
a N 7
U O fo
L
y
fn E
-0
(6 (6 y 0 m L co
` a-? rn tea=
:3 E cc (C6
.I-. ac +, c ?, ,?
U C y cc
L
C O
O Cc O? 0 C O
Co
O
a) +O N M O
L

Q7 co (D
m m C
d L
r N M
TABLE 11
PHASE 1 MITIGATION CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
BARRA FARMS CAPE FEAR REGIONAL MITIGATION BANK
Projected Percent of Mitigation Cumulative
Task Completion Credit Allotted Credit Credit
Date M cumulative) Allotted Allotted
1.0 Approval of the MBI 1/1998 15 (15) 36 36
2.0 Completion of all 1/1998 15(30) 36 72
Restoration Activities .?
3.0 Monitoring Plan
3.1 Year 1: Fulfill Hydrology 6/1998 20(50) 48 120
Success Criteria
3.2 Year 1: Fulfill Vegetation 11/1998 20(70)
, 48 168
Success Criteria' I ?- n1 5 ?, S)
Q1-
3.3 Year 2: Fulfill Hydrology 6/1999 5 (75) 12 180
Success Criteria
3.4 Year 2: Fulfill Vegetation 11/1999 5(80) 12 192
Success Criteria ( -? R
3.5 Year 3: Fulfill Hydrology 6/2000 5 (85) 12 204
Success Criteria
3.6 Year 3: Fulfill Vegetation 11/2000 5(90) 12 216
Success Criteria p icy
3.7 Year 4: Fulfill Hydrology 6/2001 3(93) 7 223
Success Criteria
3.8 Year 4: Fulfill Vegetation 11/2001 2(95) 5 228
Success Criteria <

3.9 Year 5: Fulfill Hydrology 6/2002 3(98) 7 235
Success Criteria
3.10 Year 5: Fulfill Vegetation 11/2002 2 0 00) 5 240
Success Criteria rr\
2400 linear ft of stream restoration credit (3rd order or less) will be released upon
fulfillment of success criteria in Year 1 (Task 3.2).
/S
co
?(v
ZS
)
J
J J
J
n
?
Z7
?

J\
v^ t
J

3.3 Year 2 WMR: Wetland Hydrology Success (June 1999): 5% (75% cumulative)
3.4 Year 2 WMR: Wetland Vegetation Success (November 1999): 5% (80% cumulative)
3.5 Year 3 WMR: Wetland Hydrology Success (June 2000): 5% (85% cumulative)
3.6 Year 3 WMR: Wetland Vegetation Success (November 2000): 5% (90% cumulative)
3.7 Year 4 WMR: Wetland Hydrology Success (June 2001): 3% (93% cumulative)
3.8 Year 4 WMR: Wetland Vegetation Success (November 2001): 2% (95% cumulative)
3.9 Year 5 WMR: Wetland Hydrology Success (June 2002): 3% (98% cumulative)
3.10 Year 5 WMR: Wetland Vegetation Success (November 2002): 2% (100% cumulative)
Credit releases for Task 3 will only occur if success criteria are fulfilled as stipulated in the
Mitigation Plan. If wetland recovery is delayed (i.e. lacking wetland plants or hydrology), the
credit will be reserved for release upon submittal of a subsequent WMR which verifies
restoration success.
The final credit allotment will be released upon completion of the Year 5-WMRs, fulfillment of
success criteria, and provisions for dispensation/long term management of the property. The
final credit allotment(s) may be released by the MBRT in advance of the Year 5-WMRs if
success criteria have been clearly achieved earlier in the monitoring program. ECOBANK
reserves the right to request an expedited release of credits if wetland restoration success is
apparent over a period of time, and success criteria are met and exceeded.
45
11.0 MITIGATION BANK SERVICE AREA
A mitigation bank service area has been established by the MBRT for this mitigation bank. The
service area, depicted in Figure 15, represents the region in which the bank will generally be
considered for compensatory mitigation use. Use of the bank for compensatory mitigation may
also be considered outside of the designated service area if this option is preferable to other
mitigation alternatives. It is understood that Bank Service Area expansion will be considered
if: 1) the area of the Bank is expanded; or 2) project specific needs are justified and approved
by the MBRT.
The service area is based primarily upon physiographic limits and political boundaries.
Physiographic limits include the Coastal Plain portion of the Cape Fear River Basin. The
eastern and western limits of the service area are defined by the outer boundaries of the Cape
Fear basin. These boundaries are based upon 8 digit watersheds provided by the North
Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA). These boundaries encompass
Cape Fear River sub-basins #0303004, #0303005, and 0303006 (Figure 15).
The southern and northern boundaries of these river sub-basins have been modified based
primarily upon 11 digit watersheds in the region. To the south, watersheds in the Wilmington
Area have been excluded due to Karst geomorphology and regional aquifer issues identified by
the MBRT. The MBRT has further restricted the service area north of Wilmington due to
expected development patterns in the region and the potential for wetland compensatory
mitigation in proximity to these developments. To the north, the service area has reduced
along 11 digit watershed boundaries to exclude Raleigh Belt portions of the Cape Fear basin.
Excluded watersheds include those in vicinity of the town of Lillington and Sanford (Figure 15).
46
12.0 FUTURE MITIGATION BANK PHASES
The Barra Farms Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Bank comprises approximately 2247 ac of lost
or degraded wetlands. Restoration activities within the complex have been subdivided into
implementation phases with mitigation credit generated by each phase. Phase 1, as described
in this plan, encompasses approximately 623 ac of the Bank site. Phase 1 mitigation has been
planned and implemented primarily to compensate for transportation projects planned in the
region. Although other private or governmental projects may also receive consideration for
Phase 1 Bank use.
Subsequent mitigation phases within the remaining 1624 ac at Barra Farms will be
implemented as potential wetland impacts are quantified in the region. If acceptable, wetland
restoration activities will be completed and mitigation credit generated in advance of wetland
functional losses in the Cape Fear River basin. Because up-front mitigation is a focal point of
this project, no net loss of the wetland base can be realized within this region by restoration
of the Barra Farms/ Harrison Creek wetland complex.
47
13.0 REFERENCES
Baumer, 0. and J. Rice. 1988. Methods to predict soil input data for DRAINMOD ASAE
Paper No. 88-2564. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI 49085.
Beets, C.P. 1992. The relation between the area of open water in bog remnants and storage
capacity with resulting guidelines for bog restoration. (in) Peatland Ecosystems and
Man: An Impact Assessment. (ed.) O. M. Bragg, P. D. Hulme, H. A. P. Ingram, and
R.A. Robertson. International Peat Society. University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland.
Belcher, H.W. and G.E. Merva. 1987. Results of DRAINMOD verification study for Zeigenfuss
soil and Michigan climate. ASAE Paper No. 87-2554. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI 49085.
Brinson M.M., F.R. Hauer, L.C. Lee, W.L. Nutter, R.D. Smith, D. Whigham. 1995. Guidebook
for Application of Hydrogeomorphic Assessments to Riverine Wetlands. U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS.
Brinson, M.M. 1993a. Changes in the functioning of wetlands along environmental gradients.
Wetlands 13(2): 65-74, Special Issue, June 1993. The Society of Wetland Scientists.
Brinson M.M. 1993b. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. Wetlands Research
Program Technical Report WRP-DE-4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways
Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS.
Brinson M., B. Swift, R. Plantico, J. Barclay. 1981. Riparian Ecosystems: Their ecology and
status. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS 81/17
Brower, J.E., J.H. Zar, C.N. von Ende. 1990. Field and Laboratory Methods for General
Ecology. William C. Brown Publishers, Debuque, IA.
Brown, Philip M., et al. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina, North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development, 1-.500,000 scale.
Department of the Army (DOA). 1993 (unpublished). Corps of Engineers Wilmington District.
Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation Guidelines (12/8/93).
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1993. Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Cape Fear River Basin, N.C. Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh, N.C.
Division of Water Quality (DWQ). 1996. Water Quality Certification Administrative Code
Section: 15A NCAC 21-1.0500 as amended October 1, 1996. State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
48
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1992. Mitigation Banking Guidance. EPA Region
IV, Atlanta, GA.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1990. Mitigation Site Classification (MIST) A
Methodology to Classify Pre-Project Mitigation Sites and Develop Performance
Standards for Construction and Restoration of Forested Wetlands. USEPA Workshop,
August 13-15, 1989. USEPA Region IV and Hardwood Research Cooperative, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI). 1994a; unpublished. Determination of applicable
mitigation credit For restoration of wetland buffers and wetland/upland ecotones: US
64 wetland restoration and conservation management plan, US 64 relocation, Martin
and Edgecombe Counties, North Carolina. Provided to the N.C. Department of
Transportation. Raleigh, N.C.
Fouss, J.L., R.L. Bengtson and C.E. Carter. 1987. Simulating subsurface drainage in the
lower Mississippi Valley with DRAINMOD. Transactions of the ASAE 30 (6).(1679 -
1688).
Gayle, G., R.W. Skaggs and C.E. Carter. 1985. Evaluation of a water management model
for a Louisiana sugar cane field. J. of Am. Soc. of Sugar Cane Technologists, 4: 18 -
28. Graham County Historical Society, 1992. Graham County Heritage. Robbinsville,
NC.
Hvorslev, M.J. 1951. Time lag and soil permeability in groundwater observations. U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experimental Station Bulletin 36, Vicksburg, MS.
Keller, M.E., C.S. Chandler, J.S. Hatfield. 1993. Avian Communities in Riparian Forests of
Different Widths in Maryland and Delaware. Wetlands 13(2):137-144, Special Issue,
June 1993. The Society of Wetland Scientists.
Page, R.W. and L.S. Wilcher. 1990. Memorandum of Agreement Between the EPA and the
DOE Concerning the Determination of Mitigation Under the Clean Water Act, Section
404(b)(1) Guidelines. Washington, DC.
Rogers, J.S. 1985. Water management model evaluation for shallow sandy soils.
Transactions of the ASAE 28 (3): 785-790.
Rosgen D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs,
Colorado.
Schafale, M. P., A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation, NC Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, NC DEM, Raleigh NC.
49
Schouwenaars, J.M. 1995. The selection of internal and external water management
options for bog restoration. (in) Restoration of Temperate Wetlands. (ed.) B. D.
Wheeler, S. C. Shaw, W. J. Fojt, and R. A. Robertson. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. West
Sussex, England.
Sharitz, R.R. and J.W. Gibbons. 1982. The Ecology of Southeastern Shrub Bogs (Pocosins)
and Carolina Bays: A Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-
82/04.
Skaggs, R.W. 1982. Field Evaluation of a Water Management Simulation Model.
Transactions of the ASAE 25 (3), pp 666-674.
Skaggs, R.W., N.R. Fausey, B.H. Nolte. 1981. Water Management Evaluation for North
Central Ohio. Transactions of the ASAE 24 (4), pp 922-928.
Skaggs, R.W., J.W. Gilliam, R.O. Evans. 1991. A Computer Simulation Study of Pocosin
Hydrology. Wetlands (11), pp 399-416.
Skaggs, R.W., et al. 1993. Methods for Evaluating Wetland Hydrology. ASAE Meeting
Presentation Paper No. 921590. 21 p.
Smith, R.D., A. Ammann, C. Bartoldus, M.M. Brinson. 1995 (unpublished). An Approach for
Assessing Wetland Functions Using Hydrogeomorphic Classification, Reference
Wetlands, and Functional Indices. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP
DE- . US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS
Strahler, A.N. 1964. Geology. Part II. Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and
channel networks. (in) Handbook of Applied Hydrology. (ed. V.T. Chow), pp. 4-39 to
4-76, McGraw Hill, New York.
Susanto, R.H., J. Feyen, W. Dierickx, G. Wyseure. 1987. The Use of Simulation Models to
Evaluate the Performance of Subsurface Drainage Systems. Proc. of the Third
International Drainage Workshop, Ohio State University, OH. pp. A67 - A76.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In
cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, USDA Natural
Resource Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1990. Soil Survey of Bladen County, North Carolina.
Natural Resource Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1984. Soil Survey of Cumberland and Hoke
Counties, North Carolina. Natural Resource Conservation Service.
50
U.S. Geological Survey. 1974. Hydrologic Cataloging Unit Map for the State of North
Carolina.
Yoakum, J., W.P. Dasmann, H.R. Sanderson, C.M. Nixon, and H.S. Crawford. 1980. Habitat
Improvement Techniques. Pp 329-403 in S.D. Schemnitz (Editor). Wildlife
Management Techniques Manual, 4th ed., rev. The Wildlife Society, Washington, DC
686 pp.
51
14.0 APPENDICES
Appendix A: Mitigation Banking Review Team Comments on the Conceptual Mitigation Plan
(April 1997)
Appendix B: NCDOT Correspondence
Appendix C: Piezometer Profile Logs
Appendix D: Rainfall Data: 1950-1980
Appendix E: Wildlife Species Observed at Barra Farms
Appendix F: Sensitive Plants, Animals, and Communities Documented by NCNHP in the Barra
Farms Region
Appendix G: DRAINMOD Parameters and Outputs
Appendix H: Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis
Appendix A
Mitigation Banking Review Team Comments on the
Conceptual Mitigation Plan (April 1997)
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
July 22, 1997
Jerry McCrain, Vice President
Environmental Services, Incorporated
1100 Wake Forest Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Dear Mr. McCrain:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed the Conceptual
Wetlands Mitigation Plan: Barra Farms/Harrison Creek Wetlands
Cape Fear Regional Mitigation Site, Cumberland County, North
Carolina (Conceptual Plan) which you submitted for our review on
April 10, 1997. Environmental Services, Inc. and ECOBANK are
exploring the potential for developing the Barra Farms site into
a private mitigation bank. Due to prior commitments, we were
unable to attend the scheduled site visit on April 18, 1997.
We support your efforts, and are in general agreement with the
Conceptual Plan. We offer the following thoughts and
suggestions. Generally:
In terms of landscape scale, the Barra Farm site is strategically
located in proximity to other protected areas. It is also in an
area which is under development pressure. We recommend
developing a map of the 25 square miles in Fayetteville's
southwest quadrant to illustrate the mosaic of protected habitats
of which the Barra Farm will become a part (e.g., the Bladen
Lakes State Forest and Game Lands, the Bushy Lake State Natural
Area, the Dowd Dairy Farm Mitigation Site, the Salters Lake State
Natural'Area, etc.). It is important that resource agencies
understand both the independent value of the Barra Farms site and
the cumulative value of the mosaic (or network) of protected
habitat types in the vicinity. Graphic spatial presentations
(i.e., maps) of protected terrestrial and aquatic habitats are
probably the most efficient information transfer techniques for
such data.
The Service is concerned about the long term integrity of wetland
mitigation sites. Based on informal conversations with legal
experts, we believe that no mechanism exists in North Carolina
with which to protect the atmospheric, surface, and groundwaters
of mitigation sites. Future diversions of surface waters, or
offsite wellfield withdrawals of groundwater, may adversely
affect the ecological integrity of aquatic systems and wetland
mitigation banks such as the Barra Farms site. Based on
development trends near Fayetteville and several current water
supply projects in various parts of the State, we conclude that
water supply problems are likely, and that unprotected sources
(e.g., those used for the public trust, such as the integrity of
fish and wildlife resources) will be subject to development for
municipal use (e.g., to foster development, including golf course
maintenance and other water-intensive forms). Conservation, re-
use and/or careful regulation of existing supplies are unlikely
to be adopted if current policies and incentives to externalize
environmental costs remain unchanged. Our concerns may not be
alleviated under existing legal mechanisms in this State,
however, the degree to which the drainage basin is protected,
and water requirements and rights are established for the
hydrobiogeochemical integrity of the Barra Farms site is an
important consideration. The Barra Farms Plan and legal
implementation mechanisms should include information and claims
which anticipate water rights law in North Carolina. To that
end, we will assist you in identifying and incorporating Common
Law precepts to Riparian and Prior Usurpation Rights into the
plan as you proceed.
It appears that the Barra Farms site is a source and bank for
seeds of bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) and Atlantic white
cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides). These seeds have the advantage,
from a population genetics perspective, of being locally adapted
and derived. In addition, the Phase II and III drained areas
appear to be suitable for nursery areas, so that multi-aged
rootstock can be raised from the local seed sources and
transplanted as needed. We recommend you study the feasibility
and desirability of using onsite seed banks for at least these
two tree species. We believe the use of local genetic material
for restoration is scientifically sound, biologically reasonable,
and economically feasible.
Prior obligations at the Barra Farms site, such as ditch
maintenance and dredging, should be identified as soon as
possible. It is unreasonable to continue developing this
mitigation bank if other property owners or agencies have claims
which can supersede the restoration of this system.
The Service has the following specific comments:
Page 8, first (and only) full paragraph and Table 3: We
recommend leaving the discussion of debits and mitigation ratios
for later in the plan development process. We generally utilize
ratios of mitigation to impact acres which begin at 2:1 or 3:1,
and can exceed 10:1 depending on a variety of site specific
factors. Further, it is likely that the economic viability of
the Barra Farms site will be enhanced by the availability of
pre-sale credits. It is our experience that all such issues are
most effectively resolved when discussed and negotiated
concurrently.
Page 12, second paragraph, and Page 28, partial (carry-over)
paragraph-: We concur with ESI'.s and Brinson's assessment that
"edge" or mixed habitat ecotones are among the most ecologically
diverse and productive. Ecotones are very important for the
long-term survival and adaptation of species (Smith, et al.,
1997. A role for ecotones in generating rainforest biodiversity.
Science 276:1855-1857).
Page 12, third paragraph, last sentence: We concur with, and
wish to emphasize, the concept that microtopographic complexity
is an important component of these types of wetlands. In our
opinion, successful restoration is impossible without providing
for microtopographic relief.
Page 15, first sentence in the partial (carry-over) paragraph,
and page 21, last sentence, first partial (carry-over) paragraph:
We are pleased with the decision to utilize real data for
comparison with the restoration site in the plan's success
criteria. The relatively undisturbed nonriverine forested
wetland swamp is the scientifically defensible and biologically
relevant choice as a reference system when determining
restoration success.
Table 2: The difference in values (both trends and magnitude) in
the column "number of years..." between the "forested" and "prior
converted" agricultural fields sections bear some explanation.
Some descriptive analysis in the text would be helpful and would
facilitate quick comprehension of the table and the Drainmod
results.
Page 21, Section 4.5 (Water Quality), first sentence: We
recommend striking the two words "best usage." Each class of
waters has a designated use, which generally includes "the
protection and propagation of shellfish, fish, and wildlife" and
some degree of human contact. These are narratively described as
"best uses" in the North Carolina Water Quality Standards. While
the subject waters are class C, and have defined designated uses,
it is legally and ecologically more relevant that the proposed
mitigation will not degrade those waters, and should improve
water quality significantly. We recommend de-emphasizing the
best, or designated, use of the existing water quality
classification and emphasizing the attainable classification and
designated uses (e.g., it is reasonable to assume that the
restored site will be suitable for, and support, indigenous
aquatic and terrestrial communities).
Page 23, (particularly the Pesticide Storage Building, Air Strip
Area, and Cursory Regulatory Database Review paragraphs): Every
effort should be made to determine what, if any, contaminants
remain onsite (contained or not). We are concerned that changes
in groundwater elevations, reduction-oxidation (redox)
potentials, and cation/anion exchange capacities may mobilize
contaminants into surface waters or other potentially harmful
locations. We recommend following up on the issues described in
these passages within a practicable time frame. If available,
the September 1993 Level I Environmental Assessment report should
be retrieved and incorporated into the mitigation bank planning
documents.
Page 24, last paragraph: We encourage the proposed survey for
rough-leaved loosestrife (Lysimachia asperulaefolia), a
federally-listed endangered species. This plant apparently
thrives on relict pocosin sand rims. It is possible that some
plants are extant onsite where plant-soil relationships resemble
the plant's habitat.
Page 27, fourth paragraph: We concur with the prioritization of
areas to be restored (the three Phase areas). The Phase 1 area
is hydrologically the best suited for restoration, is the most
likely to be independently successful, and is the logical
precursor for restoring the remainder of the Barra Farm site.
Page 29 through 35 (Section 6.1 through 6.3, Wetland Hydrology,
Community, and Soil Restoration): We support the conceptual plan
as described here. While we support the use of impermeable ditch
plugs, we question whether or not such structures have any
influence on net productivity or nutrient fluctuations. We are
pleased that, where feasible, ditches will be back-filled with
original material. Such back-filling is beneficial from a
nutrient cycling perspective. As stated above, we strongly
support the restoration of microtopographical complexity,
including the construction of ephemeral pools.
We also continue to advocate the use of local seed and rootstock,
as applicable in planting schemes.
Page 39, item 5: Some land uses in mitigation sites, such as
timber harvest, are controversial. A land use plan which
incorporates long-term self-sustaining ecological integrity is
appropriate for mitigation sites. Logging operations, or any
such extractive activity, should be carefully planned and
integrated into these plans. If timber harvest in mitigation
sites is acceptable to the regulatory agencies, it would be
prudent to define what timber may be harvested when and where
depending on what criteria. We suggest starting with a "straw
man" plan for initial agency review.
Conclusion:
The Service appreciates this opportunity to comment on the
proposed mitigation bank. If you have any questions or comments,
please call Kevin Moody of my staff at (919) 856-452.0 extension
19.
Sincerely,
Y n M. lner
Field Supervisor
cc:
NCWRC, Raleigh, NC (Frank McBride)
NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC (Eric Galamb, Cindy Bell)
EPA, Wetlands Regulatory Branch, Atlanta, GA (Thomas Welborn)
COE, Wilmington, NC (Scott McClendon)
FWS/R4:KMoody:KM:07/21/97:919/856-4520 ext. 19:\barra.wpd
ZtM tr;wiimingzon uiszricz ; !D- y;j9 ; USAQt-Keg. uranch-+ 919 833 0078;#i 2
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
PO. Box Ism
W!LMINOTgN, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-189p
WREPLY REPERTO April 30, 1997
Regulatory Branch
Action ID No. 199704890, Proposed Barra Farm Mitigation Bank
Mr. Alan Fickett
ECOBANK
1555 Howell Branch Road
Pinter Park, Florida 32789
Dear Mr. Pickett:
Reference the April 18, 1997, interagency meeting regarding the proposed
Barra Farms mitigation bank (Bank) located in Harrison Creek Day, near the
town of Cedar Creek, Cumberland County, North Carolina. The Bank would be
situated on approximately 2,250 acres of remnant bay forest wetlands that
include a portion of the headwaters of Harrison Creek. Approximately 1,100
acres of the property is under active cultivation, approximately 400 acres is
abandoned agricultural fields, and the remainder composed of pond pine
woodland/bay forest with varying degrees of ditching and drainage. An
extensive network of ditches and water control structures have been installed
on the property and water leaves the site through a canal ditch located
northeast of the remnant tributary to Harrison Creek, According to the
Cumberland County Soil Survey, moat of the tract is underlain with Croatan
Muck, however, other hydric soils that may be found on the site include Cape
Fear Loam, Torhunta, Johnston loam, Woodington Loamy Band, and Rains Sandy
Loam. From a hydrogeomorphic standpoint, most of the proposed bank would be
considered a flat or slightly depresaional bystem, and precipitation would be
the primary hydrologic input.
Overall, we feel that the conceptual. mitigation plan, adequately describes
the type of wetland (and upland) habitat that is amenable to restoration
within the site and we are encouraged that the potential exists for
compensatory mitigation to be completed prior to project impacts.
Although the entire 2,250 acre Site may eventually be targeted for
restoration activities and developed as a regional mitigation bank, ECOBANK
proposes to develop a detailed plan to restore 623 acres of the site as phase
I. This initial phase will be developed without a formal banking instrument
but would nonetheless be utilized as a multi-project mitigation "site". This
phase would eventually be integrated into the overall Dank, if it is
developed. This is an acceptable approach towards development of the site.

save or•wiimingzon uiszricz ; b- 1-V ; 8.40 ; USACE-Reg. Branch-+ 919 833 00784 3
-2-
It is our understanding that RCOBANx desires to utilize phase I he
Rank, as indicated in the conceptual mitigation plan, to compensate fof
or nton-
riverine wetland impacts associated with the following transportation
projects:
-TIP R-2303
-TIP R-4002 Cumberland, Sampson, Duplin Counties

-TIP R-2561 Cumberland
Cumberland County
Bladen
C
'

-TIP R-2562 ,
Cumberland, ,
c
umbus Counties
Bladen
Col
,
umbus Counties
Although Phase I does contain a minor stream restoration eemponent,
area amenable
provide the
it this type of restoration is somewhat. limited and would not
for suitable, in-kird, bottomland or riparian wetland restoration for
the four TIP projects identified above. As discussed, the proposed
improvements to XC 24 (TIP R-2303) may have si a
non-riverine wetland impacts. Based on our eliminry reviewlof your well as
proposal, we feel that Phase I of the site hasmeritato review of your
compensatory mitigation for non-riverine wetland impactspassociatedtwith these suile
projects, As mentioned above, however, the site has limited potential for
providing riparian wetland compensatory mitigation. As we discussed, the
final decision regarding mitigation needs for these projects, including the
location, amounts and types must be determined during our public interest
review after considering the comments of the general public as well as
interested state and Federal resource agencies. In most cases, if suitable
mitigation opportunities exist on-site, we would request that these options be
explored prior to the use of an off-site mitigation bank.
Finally we offer the following comments and recommendations that should
be addressed in the "detailed plan" for Phase Cne of the project; should you
proceed with your proposal
1. Without a banking agreement, you will need to identify which physical
portion of phase I will be mitigation for each individual project.
2. The detailed plan must contain measurable and clearly stated goals
and objectives and corresponding success criteria.
3. We Thust have assurances that th natural state, an altered by any mitigation i activities in
preserved in it?$
perpetuity.
4. The final disposition of the property must be described.
5. Suitable reference site(s) should be identified and associated
wetland functions discussed.
6. 140 Strongly encourage the complete backfiiling of all ditches.
St NI by;wiimington uistrict ; b- 1-V ; 5;40 ;
-3-
U5AQL-K2g. tsrancr.-+ Vly UJ UU'fd;;; 4
7• Clearly identify the stream reconstruction techniques, including any
excavation or clearing that may be necessary.
8, Affects on hydrology from the canal that will remain open after
restoration should be addressed.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment
stage of on this project during this
planning. Questions or comments may be addressed to me or mr. Jeff
Richtex, Wilmington Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone]
or 251-4636, respectively.
Sincer y,
Scott McLendon
Regulatory Project Manager
Copies furnished:
Mr, Joln Hefner, Field Supervisor
u, s. Fish and Wildlife Service
Post Office Sox 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
4401 Rsedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. David Cox, Highway Projects Coordinator
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Habitat Conservation Program
Post Office Box 118
Northside, North Carolina 27564
blr, Bennett Wynns, Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
901 Laroque Avenue
Kinston, North Carolina 28501
Mr. Jerry Mccrain Ph.D
Environmental Services, inc.
1100 Wake Forest Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
From :
PHONE No. : Apr.29 1997 2:30PM P02

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A * * * * * * * * * * *
F A X„r T R N 9 M I T T A L M E M n
r
T0: Z' SY?L Lam. -•- 40, V
De?T:._.?'LFAN a: Pnaes
FROM:
??MONk:-?1Z
CV /A) G rAx r.
Pest•ft`brand fax tranemittai memo 7871
0 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commissions
.
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27(304-1188,919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwcx.xi, Executive Director
MIRMORANDUM
TO: Jerry MaCrain
Environmental Services, Inc.
FROM: Bennett Wynne !AJ
Habitat Conservation Section
DATJI-,: April 29, 1997
SUIUK,1'; Post 4-18-97 site meeting request for comments regarding Barra Farmsillarrison
Creek Mitigation Rank Plans (in conjunction with EeoBank and 1?nvironnnental
Services, Inc.), off NC 214 southeast of Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North
Carolina.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission provides the following comments in
response to the April 18, 1997 onaite meeting you coordinated. Our comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U. S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and
the Dish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 161 J. S. C. 661-667d).
Ilic Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Barra Farnts/Harrison Creek Bark site,
including up-front and in-kind restoration of approximately 1,018 acres of prior converted
cropland and 18 acres ofheadwater riverine wetlands iv;th follow-up monitoring and a trust fiend
providing adequate monetary resources, appears to be sound. We recommend, however, that the
tbIlowing be included in the forthcoming Detailed Wetland Mitigation Plan.
1. Detailed description of monitoring plan including hydrology, density of surviving
plantings, sampling frequency, length of monitoring period, and success criteria.
2. Limitation of bank's service area to the Cape Pear. River basin.
From : PHONE No. : Apr.29 1997 2:29PM P01

Barra Farina mitigation bank 2 April 79, 1997
3. No mitigation credits should be sought for site areas that ctu•rently are jurisdictional
wetlands.
4. Detailed description of the mitigation banking instrument itu:luding administration,
ovomight, Credits;, funding, etc.
At this time, we are viable to address the applicability of the proposed mitigation bank to
the, snxsific NCDCT construction projects described (NC 24 improvements Cumberland (lo.; NC
87 improvements Cumberland, Rladcn, and Columbus Cos.; and NC 24 improvements
Cumberland, Sampson, Duplin Cos.). Cuvironmcattal reviews for these projects are in varying
stages of completion. Please contact David Cox (919 528-9886), our NCYX)'1' review
coordinator, regarding the potential acceptability ofthe mitigation bank fbr these projccts. I am
sending David my copy of the Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan.
Thank you for the opportmity to comment. Please call tnc if you have questions at (919)
522-9736.
W; sAboatfish\habcon\coa.st\d4 (ecobank.doc)
David Cox (WRC)
Frank McBride (WRC)
Kevin Moody (FWS)
Steve Kroeger (DWQ)
Scott McLendon (COB)
NU LtM WU tW51-1 Fax:[phone]
State of ofth Carolina
Departm-Oi nt of Environment,
Health: aid Natural Resources
Diviston of Water Quality
James4 H4-nt, Jr., Govemor
ionathsn &-Howe s, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 1, 1997
Mr. Jerry McCrain
EnvironmenW Services, Inc.
1100 Wake )sorest Rd. Suite 200
Raleigh, NC. 27604
Dear W. MctiCrain:
May 1 '97 13:06 P. 02/03
A?
C?EHNR
Thank you fors onsoring the site visit to the proposed compensatory wetland
mitigatiotf siie at Barra Farms, Cumberland Co. We believe that the site has mostly
noriRparian areas capable of being restored and that successfully restored areas could
provide compensatory:wetland mitigation for projects in the region.
It:is our understanding that the site will be restored in phases. Restoration resulting
from tk first ghase is.:planned to be used for Department of Transportation impacts.
Restoration from subsequent phases is planned to be marketed by establishing a
compensatory wetland mitigation bank. In order to establish this site as a bank you should
follow tt feIderai.mitigation banking guidance published in the federal register. This
process can take some time to complete so we encourage you to initiate this process as soon
as possible.
The inherits of this site have been discussed among Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) staff' We believe the wetlands that may be restored represent wetland types typical
ds from agriculture will
in this i?egior of North Carolina. Returning the site to wetlan
remove-Souipes of pollutants. Streams adjacent to the site appear to share the site as a
source of :headwaters. Thus, once restored the site may have little value for removing
nutrients`ftoir1 contiguous agricultural land.
Givens the landscape position of the site, and soil types, we believe that the
majority; of compensatory wetland mitigation that could be offered would be nonriparian.
The portions of the site that convey headwaters may have some riparian functions, however
these areas will need to be visited by DWQ staff to determine whether riparian areas are
present.
We have some concerns about the effects of drainage resulting from the large
drainage carial. Various scenarios for restoring hydrology were discussed briefly during
our site vis*t. 'Wherefore, we desire a detailed description of hydrological restoration in the
next plan. Within North Carolina there are examples of ineffective ditch plugs. Your
section on hydrological restoration for this site (and other sites) would be greatly improved
by providing a summary of how ditch plugs at other sites have failed and'how you plan to
provide.:suc4essful hydrologic restoration. Our major concern is the potential for the canal
to continue 0 act as a. drain with plugs. Sealing the bottom of canal and backfilling its
entire length`°may be necessary.
Eavironnwtd4ci ces Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh. North Carolina 27607
Tele hone 9.11-733=9960 FAA # 733-9959
An Sq al.Oppamgfty Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycle&10% post consumer paper
Nt- UtM WW LWDL1 F' d.Y ; Jly- (JJ- `? may 1 " y i 16:w F'. U5/US
Ikejtechnical details of the Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan are still being
reviewer{. Your plan covers all the salient points of restoration and monitoring well,
however we may need further explanation of some details.
lba?k you for sponsoring the site visit. I look forward to working with you to
ensure that this project is successful. If you have any questions please contact me. My
telephone number is [phone].
Cordially,
A41
Steven Kroer?
Copies furnished
John Dorney, DWQ-.Raleigh
Ron Ferrell;! DWQ-Raleigh
Eric Galamb, DWQ-Raleigh
Ken Averitte, DWQ-Fayetteville
Bennett-,Wynne
NC WRC `
804 W. Flighdand Ave.
Kinston: NC 28501
Scott McE;eom
US Army,COE
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmit;gtoni, NC 28401-1890
Appendix B
NCDOT Correspondence
JRN 14 '97 12s46PM ECOBAK
er
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
J,kMES B. HUNT jR
GOVERNOR
Mr. Alan G. Pickett, Ph.D.
ECOBANK
1555 Howell Bratich Road
Winter Park, Florida 32789
Dear Mr. Fickett:
DIVISION Of HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 2S20L RALEIGH, N.C 27611.5201
December 30, 1996
P.4
;; IS !a (` Imo:,"!tl
GARIAND B. GARnn JR.
SECMARY
Thank you for your letter dated December 18, 1996, summarizing the meeting on mitigation
issues in general, and the Barra Farm property in Cumberland County.
The future highway improvement projects in the coastal region of the Cape Fear River Basin
that could possibly be mitigated from agency approved mitigation bank the Barra Farms
property include:
• X-2 (NC 24 between existing NC 24 and I-95 in Cumberland County)
• R-2561 and R-2562 (NC 87 in Cumberland, Bladen and Columbus Counties)
• R-2303 (INC 24 in Cumberland, Sampson and Duplin Counties)
Although the precise wetland impacts of these three projects have not been detemiined in
both magnitude and habitat type at this time, combined wetland impacts are currently
estimated to exceed 500 acres. Construction let dates for sections of these projects vary from
May 1998 through October 2003.
Based upon current guidance from the permit review agencies, on-site mitigation
opportunities will have to be explored before we would be allowed to consider offering
credits purchased from an off-site mitigation bank, such as Barra Farms. Based upon past
experience, however, the amount of on-site mitigation is unlikely to provide a significant
portion of the total mitigation needs, so the need for about 500 mitigation credits from the
Barra Farms property ever a five-year period is not an unreasonable projection.
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
JAN 14 '97 12:47PM ECOBAW
Mr. Alan G. Fickett, Ph.D.
December 30, 1996
Page 2
P.5
Of course, all this is contingent upon the Barra Farms being approved as a mitigation bank by
the permit review agencies and the bank service area being defined to include all of the
wetland impact areas of these projects. Until that happens, we must continue to explore other
mitigation opportunities, both on- and off-site, for these and other projects in the same river
basin.
Sincerely,
I'C-• i?db??
Larry R. de, Ph.D., P.E.
we Highway Administrator
LRQdhfv
ce: Garland B. Garrett, Secretary, Department of Transportation
Calvin W. Leggett, P.E., Director of Planning and Programming
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager of Planning and Environmental
Appendix C
Piezometer Profile Logs
COORDINATES:
TOC ELEVATION:
G.S. ELEVATION:
ELEVATION DATUM:
PVC Slipcap
3.14' Stickup
Sch. 40 PVC Riser SAMPLE
WELL DESCRIPTION TYPE REC RES
Bentonite Seal
Filter Sand
2 _-
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010 - -
Slotted Screen 4-
6___J Endcap

8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
LOGGED BY: JLr1
DRILLED BY- PAJ
DRILL RIG. PAJ
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9-22-97
U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION
0-8" - organic mat
PID
(PPM)
8"-5'- black, sandy SILT
5'-6'- hard, gray, sl. sandy SILT
6'+ - wet, qrav, sl. clavev fine SAND
Log of PZ 1
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY: JLH
CHECKED BY. JLH
COORDINATES: LOGGED BY: JLH
TOC ELEVATION: DRILLED BY, PAJ
G.S. ELEVATION: DRILL RIG: PAJ
ELEVATION DATUM: DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED* 9-22-97
PVC Slipcap
3.35' Stickup
Sch.40 PVC Riser SAMPLE U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
WELL DESCRIPTION TYPE REC RESIST (PPM)
Bentonite Seal
0-6" - organic mat
Filter Sand
2
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010
Slotted Screen
6
Endcap
8-
10-
12-
14-
16-
18-
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Log of PZ-2
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY: JLH
CHECKED BY. JLH
6" - 4'- black, silty fine SAND; wet at 3'
4
4'-5'- wet, gray cse SAND
5'-6'- hard, white sl. sandy SILT
6'-6.5'- wet. gray sl. sand SILT
6.5'-7'- wet, gray, clayey SAND
COORDINATES:
TOC ELEVATION,
G.S. ELEVATION:
ELEVATION DATUM:
PVC Slipcap
2.31' Stickup !I. I
LOGGED BY. JLH
DRILLED BY• PAJ
DRILL RIG. PAJ
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9-22-97
S AMPLE

WELL DESCRIPTION
TYPE
REC
RESIST U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION
Cuttings 0-2'- tan, med. SAND (plow)
Sch. 40 PVC Riser
2
2'-2.5' - moist, white, med. SAND
Bentonite Seal
Filter Sand

4 2.5'-4' - moist, black, fine-med. SAND

Sch. 40 PVC 0.010
Slotted Screen

6 41-5
5' - wet
brown
fine-med
SAND
.
,
,
.

1

8
Endcap
5.5'-7.5'+ - wet, tan, fine-med. SAND
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
PID
(PPM)
FILE NAME: ER97047
Environmental Log of PZ-4 MADE BY:
Services, Inc, Barra Farms CHECKED BY: JLH
JLH
COORDINATES:
TOC ELEVATION:
G.S. ELEVATION:
ELEVATION DATUM:

PVC Slipcap

4.30' Stickup
Sch.40 PVC Riser
WELL DESCRIPTION LOGGED BY. JLH
DRILLED BY- PAJ
DRILL RIG: PAJ
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9"23-97

LT?

SAMPLE U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
TYPE REC RESIST (PPM)
Bentonite Seal ---- '
- moist, black SILT
0-1.5

Filter Sand 1.6-2.6- dark brown
sandy SILT
2 ,
Sch
40 PVC 0
010 - -
.
.
Slotted Screen - -

4 ---- 2.5'-4.5' - hard, light gray, sl. sandy SILT

Endcap - 4.&-&- moist, gray, sandy CLAY
6'-7'- wet, tan, fine-medium SAND
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
FILE NAME: ER97047
Environmental Log of PZ 5 MADE BY:
Services Inc. Barra Farms JI-"
? CHECKED BY: JLH
COORDINATES: LOGGED BY. JLH
TOC ELEVATION: DRILLED SY• PAJ
G.S. ELEVATION: DRILL RIG: PAJ
ELEVATION DATUM: DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9-23-97
PVC Slipcap
1.33' Stickup
Sch. 40 PVC Riser SAMPLE U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
WELL DESCRIPTION TYPE REC RESIST (PPM)
Cuttings -- 0-3" - organic mat
2
Bentonite Seal
Filter Sand
4 =
6 =
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010 -
Slotted Screen
8 =
Endcap
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
3"-2'- moist, black, sl. sandy SILT
- - 2'-2.5' - moist, black, sandy SILT
2.5-3'- moist, black, sand CLAY
3'-3.5' - moist, gray, sandy CLAY
3.5'- 6'- moist, gray, fine-med. SAND; hard at 4'
6-6.5' - gray, clayey, fine-med. SAND
6.51-7' - white, hard, sand SILT
7'-8'- grayish brown, clayey, fine-med SAND
(wet at 7')
81-9'+ -wet, dk. brown, SILT
Log of PZ-6
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY' JLH
CHECKED BY: JLH
COORDINATES: LOGGED BY: JLH
TOC ELEVATION: DRILLED BY- PAJ
G.S. ELEVATION: DRILL RIG: PAJ
ELEVATION DATUM: DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9-2397
PVC Slipcap
3.52' Stickup
Sch.40 PVC Riser SAMPLE U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
WELL DESCRIPTION n TYPE REC RESIST F(PPM)
Bentonite Seal
-= 0-2'- organic mat
Filter Sand -- 2"-2'- black, sandy SILT; moist
2'-2.5' - gray, sl. clayey, fine SAND
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010 - -
Slotted Screen
6
2.5'-6.5' - very hard, It. gray, sandy SILT;
Endcap becoming; moist at 6'
6.5'- 7'+ - brownish gray, fine-med. SAND;
g trace silt; wet at 7'
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
FILE NAME: ER97047
Environmental Log of PZ-7 MADE BY. Barra Farms JLH
Services, Inc- CHECKED BY:
JLH
COORDINATES:
TOC ELEVATION-
G.S. ELEVATION:
ELEVATION DATUM:
PVC Slipcap
3.00' Stickup
Sch. 40 PVC Riser SAMPLE
WELL DESCRIPTION n TYPE REC RESI
Bentonite Seal
Filter Sand
2
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010
Slotted Screen 4
Endcap
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
LOGGED BY: JLH
DRILLED BY PAJ
DRILL RIG: PAJ
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9-24-97
U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
(PPM)
boring not logged by well installer
Log of PZ-8
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY. JLH
CHECKED BY: JLH
COORDINATES: LOGGED BY: JLH
TOC ELEVATION: DRILLED BY, PAJ
G.S. ELEVATION: DRILL RIG: PAJ
ELEVATION DATUM: DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED* 9-22-97
PVC Slipcap
1.97' Stickup
Sch. 40 PVC Riser SAMPLE PID
I Cuttings
Bentonite Seal -
Filter Sand
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010
Slotted Screen
2
4
6
I Endcap
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
TYPE REC RESIST U.S.. SOIL DESCRIPTION (PPM)
----- 0-l'- black, sl. sandy SILT (plow)
l'-2.5'- moist, black, silty CLAY; wet at 2'
25-3'- tan, coarse SAND
3'-4.5'- hard, white SILT (dry)
4.5'-5'- gray, sl. clayey, fine SAND
5.5'-8'+ - wet, gray CLAY
Log of PZ-9
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY: .JLH
CHECKED BY: JLH
COORDINATES: LOGGED BY. JLH
TOC ELEVATION: DRILLED BY• PAJ
G.S. ELEVATION: DRILL RIG: PAJ
ELEVATION DATUM: DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED' 9-22-97
PVC Siipcap
3.33' Stickup
Sch.40 PVC Riser SAMPLE
U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
WELL DESCRIPTION TYPE REC RESIST (PPM)
Bentonite Seal == '
0-l
- gray SILT (plow)
Filter Sand -
2
I Sch. 40 PVC 0.010
Slotted Screen
6
Endcap
8-
10-
12-
14
16
18
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
Log of PZ-10
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY' JLH
CHECKED BY: JLH
l'-4'- gray, sl. clayey SAND; moist at 3.5'
4'-5'- gray, mott. orange, clayey SAND
5'-6'- wet, gray, coarse SAND; trace clay
6"-7'- wet, rust, coarse SAND
4
TOC ELEVATION:
G.S. ELEVATION:
ELEVATION DATUM:
PVC Slipcap
2.96' Stickup
Sch. 40 PVC Riser SAMPLE
WELL DESCRIPTION TYPE REC RES
Bentonite Seal
Filter Sand
2
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010 -
Slotted Screen 4 _-
6 -
Endcap
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
LOGGED BY: JLH
DRILLED BY PAJ
DRILL RIG: PAJ
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9-23-97
U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION
0-l'- black, sandy SILT (plow)
V-2.5' - brown, fine-med. SAND; trace silt
2.5'-3'- moist, hard, white fine-med. SAND
3'-3.5'- hard, white, sl. sandy SILT (dry)
PID
(PPM)
3.5'-6'- gray, hard sandy SILT
6'-6.5' - tan, moist, sandy SILT
6.51-7' - wet, tan, coarse SAND
Log of PZ-11
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY. JLH
CHECKED BY: JLH
COORDINATES: LOGGED BY: JLH
TOC ELEVATION- DRILLED BY. PAJ
G.S. ELEVATION: DRILL RIG: PAJ
ELEVATION DATUM: DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
DATE DRILLED- 9-22-97
PVC Slipcap 10
3.86' Stickup
Sch. 40 PVC Riser S AMPLE U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
WELL DESCRIPTION TYPE REC RESIST (PPM)
Bentonite Seal - 0-6" - black, sl. sandy SILT
Filter Sand
2 6"-2'- black, silty CLAY
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010 -
Slotted Screen 2'-3'- gray, sl. clayey SAND (moist)
4
- 3'-4'- hard, It. gray, sl. sandy SILT
4'-5.5'- moist, white, fine-med. SAND
Endcap 6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Environmental
Services, Inc.
15.5'-T wet, white/tan coarse SAND
Log of PZ-12
Barra Farms
FILE NAME: ER97047
MADE BY. JLH
CHECKED BY: JLH
COORDINATES:
MC ELEVATION:
G.S. ELEVATION:
ELEVATION DATUM:
PVC Slipcap
2.17' Stickup
Sch. 40 PVC Riser SAMPLE
WELL DESCRIPTION TYPE REC RES
Bentonite Seal
Filter Sand
2
Sch. 40 PVC 0.010
Slotted Screen
I Endcap
4
6
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
LOGGED BY. aJLn
DRILLED BY, PAJ
DRILL RIG: PAJ
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
9-24-97
DATE DRILLED,
U.S.C. SOIL DESCRIPTION PID
(PPM)
boring not logged by well
FILE NAME: ER97047
Environmental Log of PZ-13 MADE BY:
Barra Farms JLH
Services, Inc, CHECKED BY:
JLH
Appendix D
Rainfall Data: 1950-1980
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1950
Element: Precip itation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 .10 0 1.43 .33 .15 .25 .40 0 0 0
2 0 0 .25 0 .45 0 0 .20 .60 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 .65 .16 0 .63 0 0 0 .65
5 0 0 0 0 0 .22 0 0 1.23 0 .08 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.90 0 .15 0 0 0
8 0 0 .20 0 0 0 1.40 0 0 0 0 .65
9 0 0 .30 0 0 0 .80 0 .55 1.60 0 0
10 0 .15 0 0 0 0 .10 0 .60 0 0 .25
11 0 0 0 0 0 .85 .15 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20 .15 0 0 .20 0
13 .55 0 0 0 0 0 0 .30 0 0 0 0
14 0 .16 .09 0 0 0 .93 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 .08 0 0 .95 .55 0 0 .10 0 0 0
16 0 0 0 0 .10 0 .25 0 0 0 0 0
17 .56 0 .60 0 0 0 .45 0 0 0 .15 0
18 .50 0 0 0 0 0 .90 0 0 0 0 0
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 .73 0 0 .12 .37 0 0 0 0 2.21 0 0
21 0 0 .21 .20 .20 0 0 0 0 .60 0 0
22 0 0 .35 0 0 0 .15 .25 0 0 0 0
23 0 .70 .31 0 0 1.45 .08 0 .55 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20 0
26 0 0 0 0 0 .45 .12 0 0 0 0 0
27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 .15 0 .27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 0 .48 0 0 0 .99 0 0 0 0 .35
30 0 0 0 .20 .80. .10 0 0 0 0 .30
31 0 0 .15 0 0 0 .25
Sum 2.49 1.09 3.16 0.32 4.50 4.81 8.67 1.78 4.18 4.51 0.63 2.45
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6: 00 am o??.?u0.\ A,4, `- zg ? `?
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Yea r: 1951
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 .11 0 0 0
2 0 .30 0 0 0 0 0 .23 0 0 .50 0
3 0 0 0 .70 .50 0 .75 0 0 0 1.05 0
4 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 .45 0 .30 .13 .40 0 0 0 0 .70
6 0 0 0 0 .35 .14 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 .28 .35 .20 0 .10 0 0 .80 .50 0 .12 0
8 .34 .30 0 1.41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 .25 0 .76 0 0 0 0
10 0 .15 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 .11 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.38 0 1.42 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .12 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 .53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 .41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.30 0 0 .40
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 0 0 .09 1.33 0 .60 0 Om 0
18 0 .29 0 0 0 1.78 .40 0 .30 0 0 0
19 0 0 .12 0 0 .23 0 .06 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 .97 .46 .27 0 .13 0 0 0 0 .55
21 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .72
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10
23 0 0 0 .30 0 0 0 .68 .07 0 0 0
24 .17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
25 .13 0 .28 0 0 0 .37 0 0 0 0 0
26 0 0 0 0 0 0 .61 0 0 0 .13 .20
27 0 0 0 .10 0 1.27 0 0 .13 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 0 0 1.22 0 0 0 0 0 .25
29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .35 0
30 0 .60 0 0 1.37 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 .30 0 0 .26 0 0 0
Sum 1.74 1.50 3.15 2.97 1.72 6.68 4.25 4.13 3.01 1.42 2.15 2.92
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am
40 0,-A \& u0.l k a` -- 3S ,6
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1952
Element: Precip itation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 .70 0 0 0 0 1.30 6.10 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 .23 0 0 0 .05
3 0 .26 .35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .47
4 0 .87 1.54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 .47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 1.24 0 0 0 0 0 .15
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 .35 .65 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 .13 .10 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 .05 0 0 .75 0 .30 0 0
10 .37 0 0 0 .75 0 0 .18 0 .25 .10 0
11 0 0 .99 0 .10 0 0 0 0 0 .12 .27
12 0 0 0 0 .40 0 0 0 .10 0 .80 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 .63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.15 0 0 0 .16 0
16 0 .10 0 0 0 1.67 0 .12 0 .15 0 0
17 0 1.17 0 0 0 0 0 .88 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 .56 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 0 0 1.10 0 .20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 .17 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0 0 2.03 0
21 0 .27 0 0 .18 0 0 0 0 0 1.24 .48
22 .30 0 0 0 0 .68 0 0 .40 0 0 0
23 .52 0 0 0 0 .30 0 .45 .38 0 0 0
0 .75 1.02 0 0 0 .78 .44 0 0 0 0
0 .12 .75 1.73 .10 0 .10 0 0 0 0 0
26 0 0 0 .35 0 0 .41 0 0 0 0 0
27 0 .90 0 .24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.30 0 0 0 0
29 .70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 0 .25 .70 0 0 0 0 0
31 0 0 0 .73 0 0 1.21
Sum 2.53 5.07 6.45 2.52 1.98 4.90 4.35 6.40 6.98 0.70 4.45 2.63
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 an A-C?ct? q
g,q(,
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1953
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .31 0 0 0 1.90 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10
2 0 0 .77 0 0 0 0 0 .45 0 0 0
3 0 .25 .26 0 .93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 .17 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 .12 0 0 0 2.03 .60 .97 0 0 1.36
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .72 0 .85 0
7 0 .23 0 .55 .98 0 0 0 .24 0 .30 .17
8 0 .73 0 0 .30 .27 .42 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 .44 0 0 0 0 0 .38 .40 0 0 .63 .14
11 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.02 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 1.10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 .10 .78 1.80 0 .42 0 0 .55 0 0 .75
14 0 0 0 0 0 .23 0 0 0 0 0 1.45
15 0 .88 0 0 0 0 0 .24 0 0 0 0
16 0 .10 .26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 .10 0 .10 0 0 0 0 .23 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 0 0 .43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
21 .40 .47 0 0 0 0 .45 0 0 0 1.62 0
22 0 .52 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .17
23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .47 0
24 .60 0 1.37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
25 .10 .26 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0 0 .10 0
26 0 0 0 0 0 .18 0 0 0 0 0 .90
27 0 0 0 0 0 .19 0 0 2.60 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 0 0 .18 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 .30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .38
30 0 0 0 0 1.21 0 0 0 .08 0 .35
31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sum 2.35 3.71 4.96 2.35 4.54 3.79 3.28 2.49 5.53 0.08 3.97 5.77
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am
Avg r u Q? ?OkAO. ?-?2 . Z.
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1954
Element: Precip itation (in)
=1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 1.26 .98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .12 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .34 0 0 .10 0
4 0 0 .20 0 .93 0 .22 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .87 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 .15 0 0 0 0 1.57
7 0 0 0 .68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0' 1.48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 2.08 1.70 .17 0 0 0 .20
11 .20 0 0 .08 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0
12 .05 0 0 .67 0 .62 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 .55 0 0 0 0 0 0 .90
15 .15 0 0 0 .27 0 0 0 0 .50 0 .23
16 1.35 0 0 0 0 0 .90 0 0 4.00 0 0
17 .38 0 0 0 0 .43 .23 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 .21 0 .57 0 .93 0 .27 0 0 0 .52 0
21 .13 .10 0 0 .38 0 .22 0 .56 0 0 0
22 .24 1.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 1.50 0 .15 0 0 0 .40 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 .16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 .24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 .74 0 0 0 0 1.00 0 0 0 0
29 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.54 0 .30 .20 0
30 0 .38 0 .57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 0 .09 0 0 1.97 0 0
Sum 4.21 1.12 3.55 4.13 3.63 3.13 4.09 5.14 0.66 4.80 1.69 3.10
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am arruCk\, 3g.7-S
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1955
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 .14 0 0 0
2 .51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.16 .11 0 0
3 0 0 0 .32 0 0 0 0 1.46 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 .91 .13 3.56 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .09 0 0 .03
6 0 .17 0 0 0 0 0 0 .30 0 0 0
7 0 1.63 .70 .49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.04 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 .12 .20 0 .06 .18 0 .16
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 .97 0 0 0 .09 0
11 .66 0 0 0 0 .30 .17 .52 .36 0 .60 0
12 0 .22 0 .15 .10 .47 .44 1.62 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 .05 0 .50 .31 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 1.17 .42 1.58 0 0 0 .03 .84 0 0
15 0 0 0 1.04 .02 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 .24 0 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.64 0 .04 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.15 0 0 0 0
19 .20 0 0 0 0 .40 0 1.50 .59 0 0 0
20 .10 0 .36 0 0 1.70 .44 0 1.68 0 .85 0
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 .60 0 0 0 0 0
22 1.10 0 0 0 .16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 0 0 0 0 .51 .68 0 4.02 0 0 0 0
24 .40 0 0 0 0 .77 0 .31 0 0 0 0
25 0 .37 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
26 0 0 0 0 0 .98 .80 0 .62 0 .80 0
27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 0 0 0 0 0 .30 0 0 .28 0 0
30 0 0 0 1.48 0 .92 0 0 .53 0 0
31 0 0 0 .31 0 0 .53
Sum 3.07 2.39 2.23 2.53 3.90 5.42 8.84 12.37 10.05 1.98 2.34 0.72
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am
ahrua\
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1956
Element: Precipitation (in)
1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 0 .20 0 .38 0 0 0 .21 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 1.14 0 0 0 0 .35 0
3 0 .16 .34 .04 .45 0 0 2.40 .19 0 0 0
4 0 .40 0 0 .22 0 0 0 .41 .25 0 0
5 0 .51 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.05 0 0 0
6 0 .76 0 .13 0 0 0 0 .07 .40 0 0
7 0 .85 0 .11 .72 0 1.15 0 .22 .12 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 .27 0 .37 0 .04 0 .08 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 .16 0 0 0 .37 0
10 0 .04 0 0 0 0 .03 0 0 0 0 .07
11 .30 .38 .06 .82 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0 0
12 .03 0 0 .23 0 0 0 .70 0 0 0 .15
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 .40 0 0 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0 .05
16 0 .04 .96 .78 0 0 0 1.00 0 0 0 1.62
17 .13 .05 .56 0 0 0 .60 0 0 .07 0 0
18 0 .86 0 0 0 0 .03 0 0 .71 .08 0
19 0 0 .08 0 0 .49 0 .51 0 .34 0 0
20 .78 .74 0 0 .05 0 0 .03 0 .43 0 0
21 0 .28 0 0 0 0 0 1.75 0 .28 0 0
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .61 0 .43 0 0
23 .20 0 0 0 .25 0 0 0 0 0 0 .13
.45 0 0 0 0 .12 0 0 0 0 0 .63
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.58 0 0 .09
26 0 .23 0 0 0 .13 .66 .22 1.14 0 0 0
27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .14 .94 .04 0 0
28 0 1.36 0 0 0 .29 0 0 .16 0 0 0
29 0 0 .36 0 .27 0 .10 .07 0 .06 0 .22
30 0 .06 0 0 .10 .81 0 0 .25 .80 0
31 0 0 0 0 0 .18 0
Sun 1.89 6.66 2.82 2.11 2.43 2.27 4.36 7.60 5.80 3.56 1.89 2.96
Data valu es are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am qh???? ?o?oi= LI ?? , 3S
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Yea r: 1957
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 .13 1.88 0 0 0 0 0 0 .04 .32 .10
2 0 0 0 .06 0 0 0 2.02 0 .48 .31 0
3 0 .07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 .22 0 0 1.03 0 0 0 .31
5 .12 .05 .91 0 .58 .05 0 .04 .13 0 0 0
6 0 0 .04 .71 0 1.15 0 0 .10 0 0 0
7 0 .05 .19 0 0 .12 0 0 3.32 0 0 0
8 0 .05 .20 0 0 0 0 0 .06 0 0 .21
9 0 .22 .04 .76 0 2.02 0 0 .15 0 .12 1.10
10 .04 0 0 0 0 .24 0 0 .63 0 0 .05
11 .14 .12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 .63 0 0 0 .51 0 0 .20
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .05 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 .47 0 0 .30 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 .18 0 0 0 .80 .15 0 0 .10 0
16 .21 .10 .30 0 .05 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .15 0 1.41 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.82 .50 .75 0
19 0 0 .30 .03 0 0 1.40 .20 .05 0 .25 .06
20 0 .28 0 0 .31 2.73 0 0 0 0 .45 .10
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .43
22 .18 0 .35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 .19 0 .10 0 .50 0 0 0 .27 0 1.52 0
24 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 .06 0 0 .31 0
25 .50 0 .91 0 .09 0 .05 1.28 0 .26 .20 .44
26 .21 1.45 .10 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 .83 .70
27 .11 0 0 0 .84 .05 .07 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 1.42 0 0 .50 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0
29 0 0 0 0 .66 0 0 1.15 0 .78 .36
30 .43 0 .05 0 0 0 0 1.62 0 .21 0
31 .10 0 0 0 0 .14 0
Sum 2.23 3.94 5.97 1.61 3.72 7.32 4.32 5.23 10.06 1.42 7.56 4.06
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am ah h'A CI\ 4,.?O\ = S4 , 4 y
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Yea r: 1958
Element: Precip itation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .09 0 0
2 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .36 .62 0
3 0 0 .07 0 .61 0 0 .04 0 1.72 0 .13
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .48 0 1.31 0 0
5 0 0 0 .20 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 .14 0 0 .62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 .33 .60 0 .56 1.98 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 .82 .65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 .13 0 0 0 .13 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 .45 .10 0 0 .47 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 .60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .25
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0 1.00
13 0 0 .17 0 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 1.46 0 .41 0 0 0 .20 .61 0 0 0 .15
15 0 .07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .09
16 0 .52 0 .92 0 0 .26 2.00 .37 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 .13 0 0 0 .29 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 .40 0 0 0 0 0
19 0 0 .32 0 0 0 0 0 0 .15 0 0
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 .05 0
21 .06 0 0 0 .44 0 .37 0 0 .91 0 0
22 .23 0 0 0 0 .96 0 0 .35 .43 0 0
23 0 0 0 .27 0 .43 0 0 0 .62 0 0
.10 0 0 0 0 0 0 .36 0 0 0 .23
1.02 0 .85 0 0 0 .10 .25 0 0 0 0
26 0 .11 .40 .12 1.57 0 0 .52 0 0 0 0
27 0 1.10 .20 0 0 3.90 0 2.60 0 0 .04 0
28 0 .80 0 0 0 .41 0 .07 .15 0 0 .56
29 0 0 1.35 1.34 0 .05 0 0 0 .10 .75
30 .05 0 .20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 0 .87 0 0 0 0 0
Sum 4.17 3.99 3.87 4.45 6.66 6.95 2.12 7.22 0.87 5.69 0.81 3.16
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am 4 q,q ?
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1959
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 .05 0 0 .23 .88 .05 0 .14 .06 0
2 .50 0 .93 .88 0 .35 0 .14 .20 0 0 0
3 0 .03 .40 .17 0 2.48 .55 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 .89 .23 0 .44 1.18 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 2.04 0 0 2.08 0 0 .21 .05 0 0 0
6 0 0 1.70 0 0 0 0 0 .91 0 .38 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .24 0 .17 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .80 0 .23 .22 0
9 .55 .26 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0 1.38 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 .22 0 .73 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 .04 0 2.22 0 0 .57 0 0
12 0 0 .14 1.57 0 0 .11 0 0 0 0 .05
13 0 .60 0 1.47 0 0 1.80 0 0 0 0 .38
14 0 .13 0 .05 .75 .07 .14 0 0 .55 0 0
15 0 0 .06 0 0 0 .18 0 0 1.27 0 0
16 .10 0 .56 0 0 0 .30 0 0 0 0 0
17 .13 0 0 0 0 0 .06 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 .31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .06 0 1.48
19 0 0 0 0 .29 0 .05 .40 0 0 0 1.05
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .15 0 0 0 0
21 0 0 .30 0 .28 0 1.70 .41 0 .10 0 0
22 .90 0 0 .88 .41 0 .05 0 0 .25 .05 0
23 0 .05 0 .14 0 .21 0 0 0 .03 0 0
24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .32 0 .56 .05 0
25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .11 .84 0
26 0 .27 0 0 0 .44 0 0 0 0 0 0
27 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 .06 .19 0 0 0 .14 0 0 .14 .10 .05
29 .12 0 .23 0 0 .14 0 0 0 0 .12
30 0 .59 0 0 0 .56 .92 1.23 .38 0 0
31 .40 .41 .05 1.68 .12 0 0
Sum 2.70 4.64 5.76 5.39 4.56 4.96 11.39 3.52 2.63 5.77 1.87 3.13
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am
cthv??o?\ ?o?o?\ . 56.3x.
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year : 1960
Element: Precipitation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 .08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .05 0
2 0 0 0 0 .74 0 .70 0 .26 0 0 0
3 .68 0 Om .52 0 .45 .04 0 0 0 0 0
4 .09 0 0 0 0 .13 0 0 0 .24 0 0
5 0 .08 0 1.36 0 0 .65 .27 0 0 0 0
6 .98 1.67 0 0 0 .28 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 1.06 0 0 0 0 .04 0 .06 0 0 0 0
8 .20 0 0 .43 .52 0 0 .14 0 .25 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 .23 0 0 0 0 .34 0 0
10 0 0 .73 0 0 0 0 .05 0 0 0 0
11 0 .44 0 0 0 0 0 1.94 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 .10 0 .16 0 .06 1.05 5.12 0 0 .92
13 0 .10 0 0 .08 0 0 .14 0 0 0 0
14 0 1.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 .58 0 0 0 0 0
16 .06 0 .03 0 0 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 .12
17 0 0 .42 0 0 0 0 0 0 .04 .06 0
18 .18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 .15 .30 0 .12 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10 0
20 0 0 .21 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 .35 0 0
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .04 0 .08
22 0 .29 0 0 0 .48 0 0 0 0 0 .20
23 0 .15 0 0 0 0 0 .14 0 0 .06 0
0 0 0 0 0 .15 0 .21 0 0 .61 0
0 .45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
26 0 .06 0 0 .95 0 .45 0 0 0 0 0
27 0 0 0 0 .10 .21 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 .07 0 0 1.04 1.13 0 1.47 0 0 .12 0 0
29 0 0 0 .04 0 0 .84 0 .13 0 0 0
30 .18 .62 0 0 0 4.06 0 .32 0 0 .14
31 2.04 .46 .08 0 0 0 0
Sum 5.69 5.61 2.57 3.51 3.99 2.75 8.85 5.01 5.83 1.38 0.88 1.46
Dat a values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am Q,N,AI, 01?1 }M-Nra\ _ ? -+, 5 3
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1961
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .78 0 .06 1.70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 .29 0 .27 0 0 0 0 .38 .03 0
3 0 .26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 .31 0 .42 0 0 0 1.75 0 1.11 .18 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 .06 0 2.35 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .06 .14 0 0 0
7 0 0 .09 0 .15 0 .10 .03 0 0 0 .21
8 0 1.06 .39 0 0 0 .21 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 .14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 .80 .67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 .83 .05 0 0 0 0 0 .36
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .04 .37
13 0 0 0 .78 0 .20 .33 .98 0 0 .50 .98
14 0 0 0 0 0 .06 0 0 .50 0 0 0
15 .71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20 .04 .02
16 .06 0 0 .56 0 1.05 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .16
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 .30 0 0 0 0 .55
19 0 .09 .31 0 0 0 1.19 0 0 0 0 .13
20 .16 .06 0 0 0 0 0 .27 0 0 .56 0
21 0 .46 .32 0 .10 .06 0 .43 0 .13 0 0
22 0 .16 1.94 0 0 1.12 .03 0 0 0 0 0
23 0 .07 0 0 .06 .06 0 .78 0 0 0 0
24 0 .12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.40 .12
25 0 1.97 0 0 0 0 .11 .94 0 0 0 0
26 .06 .28 0 0 0 .27 1.45 1.12 0 0 0 0
27 .74 0 0 .16 .52 2.04 .52 .58 1.48 0 0 0
28 .70 0 0 .41 0 .30 0 .10 0 0 0 .05
29 .36 0 .13 0 0 0 .06 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 0 .16 0 0 .18 0 0
Sum 3.57 4.84 3.70 4.96 2.60 5.27 4.24 9.63 2.12 1.82 2.75 2.95
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am avx??.o.N Ao? a.V
4 8. H5
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year : 1962
Element: Precipitation (in)
I'
oil Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .37 0 .16 .78 .04 .38 .45 .38 0 0 .13 0
2 .18 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 .75 0 .97 0 0 1.68 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 .76 .70 0 .72 .28 0
5 0 0 .30 0 0 .02 0 0 0 .16 0 .88
6 .12 0 .09 .02 0 .64 0 0 .11 0 0 .36
7 .60 0 .05 .53 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 .07 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 .06
9 0 0 .06 .28 .78 0 0 0 0 0 .67 .16
10 .18 .20 .30 0 .50 0 0 .22 .13 0 2.90 0
11 .18 0 .31 0 0 0 0 0 1.25 0 0 0
12 .10 0 1.50 .20 .36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 .19 0 .40 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 1.04 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
16 .11 0 0 .02 .02 0 0 .26 1.44 0 0 0
17 0 .17 0 0 0 0 .28 .07 .32 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .92 0 0 0
19 .28 .45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .03 0
20 .09 0 0 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0 .02 0
21 0 0 .28 0 0 1.08 .04 0 0 0 .04 0
22 0 .98 .24 0 0 0 1.64 0 0 .62 .59 .17
23 0 .86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .15
0 .03 0 0 0 .53 0 0 0 0 0 0
.15 0 0 0 .03 .79 .25 0 0 0 0 .05
26 .07 .03 .48 0 .12 0 .33 0 0 0 .04 .72
27 0 0 .24 0 0 .27 0 .04 2.74 0 0 0
28 .88 0 0 0 .40 0 0 .19 0 0 0 0
29 .28 0 .04 .06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 .04 0 .03 0 0 0 0 0 .92
31 0 0 .05 0 0 .14 0
Sum 3.59 2.72 4.01 2.17 2.47 6.03 3.75 3.05 6.91 1.64 6.38 3.47
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1963
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 O .37 0 Om .38 0 0 0 0
2 0 .12 .03 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 .23 0
3 0 .44 0 0 0 .02 Om 0 0 0 0 .10
4 0 .07 0 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 .02
5 0 0 .04 0 0 0 Om 0 .99 0 0 0
6 0 .06 0 0 0 .13 Om 0 .07 0 1.93 0
7 0 .05 .46 1.30 .09 0 Om 0 0 0 2.68 0
8 0 .01 0 .05 0 .20 Om .30 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 .28
10 0 0 0 .03 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Om .03 0 0 0 .03
12 .16 .32 .11 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 1.03
13 0 .03 1.25 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 0
14 .36 0 0 0 0 0 Om .49 .40 0 0 .50
15 0 0 .53 0 0 0 Om 0 .15 0 0 .61
16 0 0 .03 0 .02 0 Om 0 .02 0 0 0
17 0 0 .25 0 0 .29 Om 0 0 0 0 0
18 .13 0 .07 0 1.82 .22 Om 0 0 0 0 0
19 .72 .03 0 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 0
20 1.22 .73 .01 0 .01 0 Om 0 0 0 0 0
21 .99 0 0 0 .72 .68 Om .82 0 0 0 0
22 0 .03 0 0 .96 1.79 Om .02 .03 0 0 0
23 0 0 0 .37 .34 0 Om 0 0 0 0 .03
24 .20 .03 0 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 .41 .40
25 0 .53 0 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 0
26 0 0 0 0 .12 0 Om .87 0 .38 0 0
27 .68 .35 .45 0 .02 0 Om .37 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 0 0 0 Om 0 0 0 0 0
29 0 0 .09 .42 0 Om 0 2.01 .11 .78 0
30 .01 0 .23 0 .61 Om 0 .04 0 .28 0
31 .22 0 0 Om .30 0 0
Sum 4.69 2.80 3.23 2.07 4.89 3.94 Om 3.58 3.71 0.49 6.31 3.00
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 6:00 am p

Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1964
Element: Precipitation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .57 .31 0 0 0 0 0 0 .45 1.97 0 0
2 .01 0 0 0 0 .92 0 0 0 .06 0 0
3 0 0 .33 0 .55 .12 0 0 0 .21 0 0
4 0 0 0 .01 .15 0 0 .37 0 .65 0 .14
5 0 0 .04 .10 0 0 .46 .09 0 3.50 0 .05
6 0 .64 0 .12 0 0 0 0 0 1.47 0 .14
7 .31 0 0 .09 0 .73 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 .52 0 .64 0 .05 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 1.22 0 0 .57 0 0 0 0 0 0 .24 0
10 .29 .02 0 0 0 0 1.53 .02 .03 0 0 0
11 0 .21 0 0 0 0 .23 .08 1.05 0 0 0
12 .58 .06 0 0 0 0 0 .01 .32 0 0 .05
13 .51 0 0 .30 0 0 .69 .46 2.44 0 0 .18
14 .03 .16 0 .02 .06 .40 .04 0 .38 0 0 0
15 0 0 1.97 0 0 0 0 0 0 .04 0 0
16 0 1.41 1.11 0 0 0 .12 0 0 .36 0 0
17 .06 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.29 0 .95 0 .05
18 .08 .38 0 0 0 0 .18 .34 0 0 0 .21
19 0 1.07 0 0 0 .08 .33 0 0 0 0 0
20 .19 0 .10 0 0 1.90 .39 0 0 .02 .38 .13
21 0 0 .47 0 0 .01 .04 0 0 .03 .09 .09
22 0 0 .25 0 0 1.41 .13 0 0 0 0 0
23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 .53 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 .01
1.24 0 0 .04 .11 .30 1.16 .18 0 0 .11 0
26 .06 .26 .63 .11 0 0 0 .15 0 0 .11 .19
27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.60
28 0 .53 0 .10 0 0 .91 0 0 0 0 .02
29 0 .21 0 0 .43 0 .06 .05 .05 0 .03 0
30 0 0 0 .58 0 .44 .71 .04 0 0 0
31 0 0 0 .32 1.33 0 0
Sum 5.15 5.78 4.90 2.63 1.88 5.92 7.05 6.08 4.76 9.26 0.96 3.86
Data valu es are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 arw\.,,a\ ko??\ = S4, ,23
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1965
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 .01 0 0 .60 0 0 .02 0 0
2 .02 .08 .01 0 0 0 0 0 .37 .09 0 0
3 0 0 1.59 0 0 0 0 0 .07 0 0 0
4 0 0 .08 0 0 0 .20 0 .05 0 0 0
5 0 0 1.08 0 0 0 .18 0 .04 0 0 0
6 0 0 .07 .04 0 0 .06 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 .36 .02 .37 0 0 0 .02 0 1.70 0 0
8 0 1.42 0 0 .34 0 .95 0 0 .41 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 .03 .70 .01 .18 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 .84 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 .05 0 0 0 0 0 0 .23 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 .04 .37 .91 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 1.27 .25 0 .10 1.39 .16 .01 .04 0 .08 .09
14 0 .54 0 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 .28
15 0 .64 0 .01 0 1.54 .02 0 .05 0 0 0
16 .36 0 0 .55 0 1.75 .46 0 0 0 0 .03
17 .63 .22 .11 0 0 .01 0 0 0 0 0 .04
18 0 .42 1.32 0 0 0 0 .11 .14 0 0 0
19 0 0 .01 0 0 0 .13 0 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 .90 .46 0 0 1.08 0 .12 0 0 0
21 0 0 .02 .13 0 0 0 0 .48 .05 0 0
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .02 1.65 0
23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .28 0
24 .23 .03 .32 0 0 0 0 .83 .13 0 0 0
25 .01 .68 .45 0 .28 2.26 0 .16 .74 0 0 0
26 0 0 .16 .31 0 .37 .03 .11 0 0 .01 .10
27 .01 0 .01 .33 .22 .10 1.15 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 .28 .69 0 .32 0 0 0 0 0
29 0 0 .02 .07 0 2.59 0 0 0 0 0
30 .20 .25 0 0 0 .98 0 0 0 0 0
31 .38 0 0 .03 0 0 0
Sum 1.89 5.66 6.65 2.51 1.77 9.33 9.88 1.65 2.23 2.29 2.02 0.54
Data valu es are for 24 hours ending at 18:00

Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1966
Element: Precipitation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 1.26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 .11 0 0 .68 0 0 0 0 .44 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 .16 0 0 0 0 0 .67 .03
4 0 0 .90 .27 0 0 0 .84 0 .21 0 0
5 .06 0 .90 .03 0 0 0 .49 1.82 0 0 0
6 1.27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .21 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 .04 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0 .01
9 0 0 0 .03 .03 0 0 .05 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 .79 .10 0 .36 0 0 0 .10
11 0 .13 0 0 0 1.54 0 0 0 0 .02 .14
12 0 .12 0 .03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 .38 0 0 0 0 0 .18 .01 0 .38 1.25
14 .23 .51 0 .03 .40 0 0 .24 .10 0 0 .01
15 .13 0 0 0 .21 0 .02 .04 0 0 0 0
16 1.17 .29 .10 .05 0 0 1.11 .03 .89 0 0 0
17 .04 .41 0 0 0 0 .22 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 0 .28 0 0 .11 .26 0 0 .15 .02 0 .01
20 0 0 0 0 .76 0 0 .02 .61 .53 .01 0
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .07 .39 0 0 0
22 .27 0 0 .05 .22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 1.05 0 0 .04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 .47 0 0 .39 0 0 2.76 0 0 0 1.09
0 .52 .08 0 .04 0 0 1.70 0 .27 0 .01
26 .87 0 0 0 .06 0 .45 .76 0 .05 0 0
27 .40 0 0 .21 .42 0 0 .24 0 0 0 0
28 0 .08 0 .01 .59 0 0 0 0 0 .50 0
29 0 0 .19 .03 0 0 0 .62 0 0 .87
30 .12 0 .01 .04 .04 .54 0 0 0 0 0
31 0 0 0 .40 0 0 .03
Sum 5.61 3.30 3.24 0.99 4.93 2.05 2.74 7.78 4.80 1.52 1.58 3.55
Data valu es are for 24 hours ending at 18:00
_
4a , O
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1967
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .11 0 0 0 0 0 .91 0 0 0 0 .10
2 .47 0 0 0 0 .05 0 .35 0 0 .19 0
3 .06 0 0 0 .40 .26 .16 0 0 0 .07 .44
4 .16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 .27 0 0 0 .62 .02 0 .11 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .34 0 0 0 0
7 .04 1.67 .25 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 .45 0 0 0 .23 0 .82 .30 0 0 0 0
9 .51 0 0 0 .20 0 .07 0 0 0 0 0
10 .27 .92 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.75 .27 0 .04
11 .25 0 .01 .11 .02 0 0 1.50 0 0 0 .52
12 0 .05 0 0 0 0 0 .17 0 0 0 .46
13 0 0 .27 0 .02 0 0 .31 0 0 0 0
14 .39 0 .01 0 .01 0 .36 0 0 0 0 0
15 .18 0 0 0 0 0 .21 0 0 0 0 .02
16 .06 0 0 0 .31 0 .02 0 0 0 0 .04
17 0 .15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 .44 0 .50 0 1.30 .03 .76 0 .59 0 0
19 0 .09 0 0 0 .42 .15 0 0 0 0 .04
20 .10 .19 0 0 0 0 .03 .01 0 0 0 0
21 0 .62 .17 0 .05 0 .10 1.46 0 0 0 0
22 0 0 .10 0 0 0 0 2.03 0 0 0 0
23 0 .25 0 .03 1.70 .86 0 .66 0 0 .62 1.12
24 0 0 0 .19 .13 .17 0 .59 0 0 .09 0
25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 1.80 0
26 0 0 0 .10 0 1.17 1.80 0 0 .32 0 0
27 0 0 0 1.65 0 0 1.87 .05 0 0 0 0
28 0 .21 0 0 0 0 .09 .67 .27 0 .04 .16
29 0 .03 0 0 0 0 0 .12 0 0 1.08
30 0 .02 0 .02 0 .83 0 0 0 .17 0
31 0 0 0 1.69 0 0 0
Sum 3.32 4.59 0.86 2.58 3.73 4.25 9.14 9.51 4.14 1.18 2.98 4.02
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00
= 501-60
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1968
Eleme nt: Precipitation (in)
IIIIII''
DU! Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .04 0 .26 .05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .65
3 .02 .08 0 .12 0 .21 0 0 0 0 0 .02
4 .13 0 0 .03 0 .15 .12 0 0 .13 .02 .37
5 .09 0 0 0 .06 0 .04 0 0 0 1.02 0
6 0 0 0 1.20 0 0 .93 1.11 0 0 0 0
7 .60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.03 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 .41 0 0 0 0 0 .16
9 0 0 0 0 0 .82 0 0 0 .04 0 0
10 X40 0 0 .03 0 .06 .05 .58 0 0 1.33 0
11 1.70 0 .38 .19 0 .06 .10 0 0 0 0 0
12 .21 0 .43 0 .03 .14 .93 2.36 0 0 1.27 0
13 .12 0 .18 0 .26 0 .18 0 0 .28 .02 0
14 .20 0 .01 0 0 0 0 .01 0 0 0 .15
15 .08 0 0 .14 .07 0 0 0 0 0 0 .40
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .28 0 0
17 0 0 .74 0 .02 0 0 1.07 0 .08 0 0
18 0 0 .18 0 .24 .01 .38 0 0 .29 0 0
19 0 0 0 0 0 .01 1.64 0 0 .42 .28 0
20 0 0 0 0 0 .43 .21 0 0 2.53 0 0
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .06
3 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .26
? .12 .01 .02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.16 .10 0 .06 .12 0 0 0 0 .28 .13 0
26 .01 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.33 0 .02 0 0
27 0 0 0 0 .48 0 1.06 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 .12 .02 .30 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 0 .44 0 0 .42 0 0 0 0 .10 0 .52
30 0 0 .33 0 0 .24 0 0 0 0 0
31 0 0 0 0 0 0 .08
Sum 3.98 0.63 2.27 2.27 1.72 2.60 5.88 6.46 0.00 5.48 4.07 2.67
Dat a values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 = .3g , 03
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1969
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .48 .10 .47 0 0 0 0 .17 0 0 0 0
2 0 .12 .96 0 0 0 0 .17 .13 .17 1.95 0
3 0 .62 0 0 0 1.52 .04 .19 .05 1.14 0 0
4 0 0 0 .14 0 0 .20 1.66 0 .01 0 0
5 0 0 0 .01 0 0 0 2.26 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 1.00 0 0 0 .04 .01 0 0 0
7 0 .08 1.10 .28 0 0 0 .22 0 0 0 .10
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 0 .38
9 0 .55 .02 0 0 .15 0 0 .42 0 .02 .03
10 .20 0 .05 0 0 1.89 0 0 0 0 0 .39
11 0 0 0 .19 0 .08 1.24 .17 .09 0 0 .68
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 .14 .03
13 0 0 0 0 0 .53 .04 .22 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 1.57 0 .37 0 0 .08 0
15 0 0 0 0 0 .43 0 .03 0 0 0 0
16 0 .05 0 .47 .09 .91 0 .01 0 .02 0 0
17 0 .76 0 .13 0 .09 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 0 .47 0 0 0
19 .03 0 1.19 2.15 .50 .03 0 .01 .03 0 0 0
20 .58 0 0 0 2.05 0 0 0 2.08 0 .17 0
21 .50 0 0 0 0 .62 0 0 .65 .03 0 0
22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .63
23 .01 1.30 0 0 0 .01 .05 0 0 0 0 0
24 0 .02 .26 0 0 .30 .19 0 0 0 0 0
25 0 0 .10 0 .08 .13 0 0 .16 0 0 0
26 0 0 0 0 1.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.02
27 0 0 0 0 0 .17 2.08 0 0 0 0 0
28 .01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 .25 0 0 0 0 1.09 0 0 0 .12 0
30 .03 0 .25 0 .97 .27 0 0 0 0 0
31 .01 0 0 .52 0 0 0
Sum 2.10 3.62 4.15 4.62 3.79 9.40 6.12 5.52 4.09 1.37 2.48 3.26
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 tn
\
okw
v o. a
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1970
Element: Precip itation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .18 0 0 0 0 .45 0 0 0 0 .67 0
2 .04 .52 0 .27 0 0 0 .01 .02 0 .07 0
3 0 .94 0 .32 0 0 .10 0 .05 0 0 0
4 0 .24 0 0 .32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 .07 0 .32 .92 .13 0 .30 0 .07 0
6 .12 0 .11 0 0 .04 .14 0 0 0 0 0
7 .61 0 0 .20 0 0 0 .97 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 .23 0 .03 0 0 0 .48 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.38 .35 0 0 1.95 0
12 .12 0 .27 0 0 0 0 0 .05 0 .10 0
13 .07 0 .03 0 0 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 1.59 .13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .37 0 0 0 0
16 0 .04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .91 0 .05
17 0 1.20 0 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0 1.68
18 .39 .02 .11 0 .05 .12 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 0 .02 .48 0 0 0 0 1.10 0 0 0 0
20 .04 0 .39 .25 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0
21 .02 0 .15 0 0 0 .02 0 0 .29 0 .08
22 0 0 1.17 0 0 .88 1.95 0 0 .21 0 .05
23 .04 0 0 0 0 1.74 .46 0 0 .16 0 0
.07 0 0 0 0 0 .21 1.31 0 0 0 0
0 0 .06 .10 0 0 0 0 0 .08 0 0
26 0 .47 .05 .02 .29 .24 .14 0 0 .35 0 .04
27 0 0 .19 .39 .08 .07 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.83 0 0 0
29 0 .07 .08 0 0 0 0 .08 0 0 0
30 .60 0 0 0 0 .78 0 0 .17 0 .25
31 .01 .36 .01 .21 0 .94 .04
Sum 2.31 3.68 3.51 3.25 1.20 4.46 6.52 4.81 3.35 3.11 2.86 2.19
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1971
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .07 0 .13 0 0 0 0 .05 0 .85 0 0
2 0 0 .73 0 0 0 0 .12 0 1.56 0 0
3 0 0 1.56 .07 .06 0 0 .20 0 .14 0 0
4 0 .15 1.45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .62
5 .24 .58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 .12 0 1.02 0 0 .22 .10 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 .05 .12 0 0 .58 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 1.05 0 .06 .23 0 .32 0 .78 0 0 .02
9 .73 .47 0 0 .09 .04 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 .07 0 .18 .60 0 0
11 0 0 .05 0 0 0 0 0 .20 .56 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 .48 0 .40 0 0 .01
13 0 .27 0 0 .79 .24 .59 0 .80 0 0 .02
14 0 .10 .44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 .88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
16 .09 0 .19 0 1.20 0 0 .45 0 .24 0 0
17 0 0 0 0 .04 .18 0 1.28 0 .36 0 .26
18 0 0 0 0 0 .02 0 .68 .01 0 0 .32
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 .07 0 0 0 1.25 0 0 0 .26 0
21 0 -.02 0 0 0 0 .16 0 0 0 0 .35
22 0 .18 0 .04 .03 0 0 0 0 .07 0 0
23 .18 2.22 0 0 0 .25 0 .72 0 .51 0 0
24 0 0 0 .64 0 .84 0 .12 0 .85 0 0
25 1.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .24 .62 0
26 .24 0 1.16 0 0 0 .22 0 0 .09 0 0
27 0 .22 .10 0 0 0 .06 .57 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 1.75 0 0 .10 .13 0 0 .13 0
29 0 .18 0 .37 0 0 0 0 0 .17 0
30 0 .61 0 .08 0 .31 0 .07 .01 0 0
31 1.23 0 0 .16 0 .15 0
Sum 4.70 5.38 6.72 3.70 2.89 1.57 4.52 4.42 2.44 6.23 1.18 1.60
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00
av.v\,ko,\ ko?\ =
y5
.3 5
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year : 1972
Element: Precipitation (in)
UU Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 .14 0 .20 0 1.01 0 0 0 .12
2 0 1.02 0 .05 0 0 0 0 .14 0 0 0
3 0 .06 .01 0 .17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 .01 .70 0 0 .59 0 .26 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 .04 .06 0 0 .36 0 1.34 0 0 0
6 0 0 .03 0 0 0 .38 0 .45 .04 0 .23
7 0 .04 0 0 0 .01 0 0 0 .01 0 .30
8 0 0 0 .54 0 0 0 .81 0 0 1.14 0
9 0 0 0 0 .45 0 0 0 0 0 0 .05
10 .17 0 0 0 .05 0 0 1.61 0 0 0 0
11 2.22 0 0 0 0 0 .09 0 0 0 0 0
12 .41 0 0 0 0 0 .58 0 0 0 0 .05
13 1.25 .76 0 .94 0 0 .08 0 0 0 0 .02
14 .76 .08 .02 0 .33 0 0 0 0 0 .23 .02
15 0 0 .01 0 .55 0 0 0 0 0 0 .87
16 0 0 0 0 .37 0 .25 0 0 0 0 .50
17 0 .24 .86 0 0 0 .16 0 .05 0 1.44 0
18 0 .13 .36 0 0 .01 0 .31 1.75 0 0 0
19 0 .82 0 0 .10 0 1.51 0 0 .12 .02 0
20 0 0 0 0 .02 .66 0 .03 0 .02 .78 0
21 .24 0 0 0 0 1.28 0 0 0 0 0 0
22 .05 0 .88 .19 .31 .27 0 0 0 0 0 1.06
.03 0 0 .01 .33 0 0 0 0 0 0 .05
I III 0 .15 0 0 .01 0 1.50 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 .34 .17 0 0 0 0 1.05 0 .06
26 0 0 .36 0 .03 0 0 .52 0 .01 .85 0
27 0 .26 0 0 .02 0 .46 .19 0 0 0 .03
28 0 0 .05 0 0 0 0 1.45 .39 .20 0 0
29 0 0 0 0 0 .20 .27 .66 .33 0 0 0
30 .35 0 0 0 .04 1.45 0 .49 0 .55 .03
31 .34 .84 .36 0 0 0 .30
Sum 5.83 4.26 3.46 2.27 3.86 2.67 7.35 6.59 4.94 1.45 5.01 3.69
Dat a values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 Arm yak AC-104a\?, = 51. 3 v
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1973
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .03 0 0 4.25 0 0 0 .48 0 .13 .10 0
2 0 1.82 0 .12 0 0 .02 3.10 0 0 0 0
3 .02 1.55 .53 0 0 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0
4 .45 0 .45 .08 .84 0 0 .92 0 .05 0 0
5 0 0 .10 .02 0 0 .75 0 0 0 0 .02
6 .39 0 .19 0 0 .02 .38 0 0 0 0 .10
7 0 .13 .02 0 0 .01 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 .58 0 0 1.70 0 .31 0 0 0 0 0 .35
9 .26 .53 .67 0 .57 .17 0 0 0 0 0 1.50
10 0 1.00 .02 0 0 .01 0 0 .38 .10 0 0
11 0 .26 .04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 .68 0 .15 .19 .03 .02 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 .03 0 0 .52 0 0 .82
15 .03 .73 0 0 .05 0 0 .03 .32 0 0 0
16 0 .17 0 0 0 .01 .48 0 0 0 0 .93
17 0 0 .22 0 0 .64 .12 0 0 0 0 1.28
18 0 0 0 0 .10 1.22 0 .12 0 0 0 0
19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .40 0 0 0
20 .08 0 0 0 .12 .02 0 0 0 0 0 .01
21 0 0 .22 0 .03 .19 0 .48 0 0 0 .71
22 .14 0 .21 0 0 .27 0 .61 0 0 .12 .08
23 .82 0 0 0 0 .36 .40 0 0 .01 0 0
2.4 0 0 0 0 .42 0 .54 .01 0 0 0 0
25 0 0 0 0 .24 0 0 .08 0 0 0 0
26 0 .03 .12 .03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .06
27 .12 .11 .07 1.02 0 .04 0 0 .02 0 0 .05
28 0 .25 0 0 0 .88 .57 0 0 0 0 0
29 .50 0 0 .69 .93 .01 0 0 .19 .10 0
30 0 .58 0 .13 0 0 0 0 0 0 .03
31 0 .62 0 0 0 0 .42
Sum 3.42 6.58 4.74 7.22 3.34 5.30 3.30 5.85 1.66 0.48 0.32 6.36
Data values are for 24 hours endi ng at 18:00
\
r
Is
4
t
a v?hv c, 5
, = q 8.5j
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1974
Element: Precipitation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.78
2 .35 .60 0 0 0 0 0 .17 .19 0 0 0
3 .01 .18 0 0 .22 1.05 0 .41 0 0 0 0
4 .06 .64 0 0 0 0 0 .41 1.90 0 0 0
5 .16 0 0 .81 .33 0 0 1.17 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 .46 .46 .32 1.53 1.58 0 .10 0
7 .O1 .48 0 0 0 0 .12 1.05 1.38 0 0 0
8 .14 .62 0 0 0 0 2.22 .65 0 0 0 1.14
9 .05 .08 0 .22 0 0 .21 .84 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 .58 0 0 1.22 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 .05 0 .16 .O1 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 .14 0 .04 0 0 0 0 0 .05 0
13 0 0 .22 0 .53 .36 0 0 0 0 0 .02
14 0 0 0 .41 0 0 0 .12 0 0 0 0
15 .07 1.02 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 .02 0
16 0 .10 .03 0 0 0 0 .86 .04 .20 0 .32
17 0 .84 .56 0 .22 1.58 .90 .01 0 .47 0 0
18 0 0 0 .76 0 0 0 0 .46 0 .22 0
19 .03 0 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0 .22 .96 0
20 0 .22 .07 0 .96 0 .82 .16 0 .23 1.15 .22
21 .11 0 .03 0 .01 0 .03 1.46 0 0 .32 .43
22 .12 .16 .12 0 0 0 1.97 0 .41 0 0 .03
23 0 .79 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 .25 0 .82 .16 0 .10 0 0 0 0
.56 0 .34 0 .03 0 0 .52 0 0 0 .02
26 .02 0 .37 0 0 0 .97 0 0 0 .18 0
27 .O1 0 0 0 .72 .25 .28 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 .02 0 0 .34 .04 0 0 0 0 .38
29 .26 0 0 0 .O1 0 0 0 0 0 .34
30 .21 1.67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .03
31 .05 .01 0 1.01 0 0 0
Sum 2.90 5.73 3.83 2.20 5.04 4.23 9.05 10.69 5.96 1.12 3.00 4.71
Data valu es are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 CL V\ ?ua?, -Vo*k ck\ = 52 Llb
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1975
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .04 0 0 .16 0 .47 0 0 2.25 0 0 .25
2 0 .03 .41 0 .31 .09 0 0 .10 0 0 .16
3 0 .33 0 .51 0 0 0 0 0 .11 0 0
4 .09 .03 0 0 .14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 .21 .93 0 0 0 0 .51 0 0 0 .10 0
6 0 .05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .27 0 0
7 .31 0 0 0 0 0 .71 .47 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 .35 0 .21 0 0 .10 1.00 0 .02 1.00
9 .31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .60 0 .02
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 .08 0 0 0 0 .27
11 .30 0 .31 0 0 .02 .29 .02 0 0 0 0
12 .05 .05 .05 .30 0 .04 1.90 0 .06 0 0 0
13 1.65 0 .58 0 0 .03 .34 0 1.50 0 1.15 0
14 .47 0 .20 0 0 0 1.08 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 .19 1.05 0 0 .96 0 0 0 0 0
16 0 .02 0 0 .83 .27 .40 0 .10 0 0 .09
17 0 1.96 .35 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 .09
18 0 0 0 0 .55 0 .10 .39 .20 .44 0 .81
19 0 .94 1.97 0 0 .33 .13 0 .31 0 0 0
20 .16 .23 .40 0 0 .07 0 .07 .22 0 0 0
21 .43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22 0 0 0 0 0 .31 0 0 .18 0 0 0
23 0 .02 .21 0 0 0 0 0 1.24 0 0 0
24 .34 0 0 0 .78 0 .98 0 1.20 0 .91 0
25 .82 .86 .43 0 0 0 1.13 .07 1.20 .01 0 0
26 .54 0 0 0 0 0 .08 0 .64 0 0 1.15
27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .09 0 .03
28 0 0 0 0 .03 .33 0 0 0 0 .02 0
29 0 0 0 .02 .03 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 0 .11 .25 .28 0 0 0 .08 0 0 .05
31 0 .20 .54 .37 0 0 .78
Sum 5.72 5.45 5.76 2.27 3.69 1.99 9.08 1.12 10.28 1.52 2.20 4.70
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 c<q\ ^L«` X0 0.` ? j 3.?cd
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Yea r: 1976
Element: Precipitation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov , Dec
1 .30 0 0 .05 .72 0 0 0 0 .03 0 0
2 0 1.08 0 0 1.03 .09 .03 0 0 .03 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 .32 0 .66 0 .11 0 0
4 .04 0 0 0 0 .81 .29 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 .12 0 .05 .48 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 .32 0 0 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 .05 .49 0 0 0 .90 0 0 0 0 1.58
8 .97 0 0 0 2.45 0 .02 .96 0 0 0 .29
9 .02 0 .22 0 .10 0 0 .69 0 1.94 0 .07
10 0 0 .03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 .01 0 0 0 .95 0 0 .02
12 0 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 .25 1.20
13 0 0 .21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .15
14 .04 0 .01 0 0 .06 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0 .11 0 0 0 .96 0 2.12 .17
16 .06 0 .51 0 1.25 .02 0 .11 .04 0 .55 .82
17 .10 0 .83 0 0 .35 0 0 0 .02 0 .01
18 .04 0 0 0 .31 .01 0 0 0 .63 0 0
19 0 0 0 0 .01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 0 0 0 .03 0 0 0 .72 0 0
21 0 0 0 0 0 .42 0 .94 .22 .63 .01 .10
22 0 .06 0 .01 0 .05 0 .22 .32 0 .06 0
23 0 .10 0 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 .20 0 .43 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .03 0 0
26 .27 0 .01 0 0 0 0 0 0 .26 0 .58
27 .75 0 0 0 0 1.24 .02 0 .20 0 .24 0
28 .85 0 0 0 0 .06 .06 0 0 0 .21 0
29 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0 0 0 .60 0
30 0 .18 0 .44 0 0 .08 .15 0 .02 0
31 0 .01 0 .01 0 .25 .01
Sum 3.44 1.29 2.82 0.18 6.75 3.51 2.37 3.66 2.84 4.65 4.06 5.00
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 alrCN \. c?\ ACa?- _ 1,0 59'
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1977
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .10
2 0 0 0 0 0 .55 .04 1.07 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 .03 0 .80 0 .22 0 0 .01 0
4 .10 0 0 .06 0 0 0 1.17 0 0 .11 0
5 0 0 .22 .24 .01 0 0 0 0 0 .03 0
6 .06 0 0 .24 0 0 0 0 0 0 .61 .36
7 .42 0 1.20 0 0 .69 0 0 0 0 .60 0
8 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 1.70 0 0 0
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.16 .11 0 0
10 2.37 0 0 0 0 .11 .59 0 0 .16 0 .04
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.49 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 .28 0 0 .03 0 0
13 0 .04 1.81 0 0 0 0 0 0 .96 0 0
14 0 0 .05 0 0 0 .52 0 0 1.31 0 .14
15 .84 0 0 0 0 .31 0 .97 0 .01 0 1.70
16 0 0 0 .06 0 0 0 .84 .10 0 0 .01
17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .36 .03 0 .02
18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.69 0 0 0 .16
19 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0 .99 0 0 0 .05
20 0 .14 1.17 0 .80 .52 0 0 0 0 0 0
21 0 0 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 .90
22 0 0 1.31 0 0 0 .01 0 0 0 0 .01
23 0 0 0 0 0 .42 0 0 0 0 .02 0
24 0 0 0 0 .77 0 0 0 0 0 .01 .01
25 .19 .86 0 .01 2.70 .46 0 .03 0 0 0 .48
26 0 0 0 .21 .07 .07 0 0 0 .71 .34 0
27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .66 0 0
28 0 .40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 .06 0 .04 0 .05 0 0 0 .05 0 0
30 0 .27 0 0 0 .03 0 0 0 .06 .04
31 0 .37 0 0 0 0 .71
Sum 4.04 1.55 6.42 0.89 4.35 4.00 1.47 9.47 3.32 4.03 1.79 4.73
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 aT-? 0.?
Y\ \j 4
?
? -
- o
, c?, - yb .0(,o
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year : 1978
Element: Precipitation (in)
I'I'
oil Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 .01 0 .38 0 .02 0 .03 0 0 .01 0 0
2 .01 .09 0 0 .04 0 .90 0 .45 .77 0 0
3 0 .09 .67 0 .01 0 1.40 .84 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 .05 0 .19 .11 .01 .02 .11 0 .03 0
5 0 0 0 0 .50 0 0 1.21 0 0 .82 .20
6 .01 0 0 0 0 1.11 0 .06 0 0 0 1.08
7 .52 0 0 0 0 .17 0 .02 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 .13 0 1.60 .32 0 0 0 0 .92 0
9 .33 0 .08 0 .26 .73 0 0 0 0 0 .01
10 0 0 1.93 0 .02 .38 0 0 0 0 .81 .13
11 0 0 .01 0 0 0 0 .01 2.54 0 .23 0
12 0 0 0 .14 0 0 .35 0 .01 0 0 0
13 .29 0 0 .45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 .73 .16 0 .29 .61 0 0 1.09 0 .02 0 0
15 .06 0 .08 0 .04 0 .42 .08 0 0 0 0
16 0 0 0 0 .02 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0
17 .01 .21 0 0 0 0 1.86 0 0 .01 .01 .01
18 .44 .01 .03 1.25 .13 0 0 .12 0 0 .01 0
19 0 .20 0 .84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 1.79 .01 0 .03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .04
22 0 .10 0 .09 0 .03 0 0 0 0 0 .06
23 0 0 0 0 0 .77 0 0 0 0 .02 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 .05 0 0 0 .33 .07
.48 0 0 0 .15 0 .17 0 0 0 0 .70
26 .57 0 .48 2.63 0 0 .43 0 0 0 0 0
27 0 0 .33 .07 0 2.10 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 .01 .04 0 0 0 0 0 .60 0
29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.94 0
31 0 0 .07 0 0 0 0
Sum 5.25 0.87 4.17 5.80 3.70 5.72 5.73 3.45 3.11 0.81 5.72 2.30
Data valu es are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 L. b. 3
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1979
Element: Precipitation (in)
Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 .06 0 0 0 .11 .01 0 .56 .02 0 0
2 .41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .20 0 0 0
3 .52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .01 0 1.57 0
4 0 0 0 .13 0 .95 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 .30 .30 .11 0 0 0 3.34 .15 0 0
6 0 0 .51 0 .02 0 0 0 2.21 .25 0 0
7 0 .75 .07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .55
8 .22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 .02 .19 .27 .06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 .04 0 .12 .42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 .50 0 .32 0 0 0 0 .02 .18 0
12 0 0 0 0 .53 .02 0 .01 0 0 1.94 0
13 1.08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .11 0 .37 0
14 .03 0 0 .74 .19 0 0 0 .49 .28 0 .30
15 0 0 .19 0 .19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
16 0 0 0 0 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 .10
17 0 0 0 0 0 1.79 0 0 0 0 0 .02
18 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 0 .86 0 0 .13 0 1.12 0 0 0 0 0
20 .07 0 0 0 .25 0 .05 0 0 0 0 0
21 .92 .03 0 0 0 0 1.57 0 .07 0 0 0
22 0 .13 0 0 0 .31 .53 .82 .10 0 0 0
23 0 .06 0 0 .25 0 0 0 1.05 0 0 .01
24 .26 1.17 1.58 0 .55 0 .36 .01 .10 .38 0 0
25 0 .50 .07 0 .33 .05 .73 0 .02 0 0 .29
26 0 .46 0 .61 .01 .01 .60 0 0 0 2.10 .02
27 0 .01 0 .48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 0 0 0 0 .04 0 0 .36 0 0 0 0
29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .01 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 .14 0 0 .26 3.05 0 0 0
31 .09 0 0 0 0 0 .35
Sum 3.60 4.11 3.41 2.65 3.54 3.26 4.97 1.46 11.32 1.10 6.16 1.64
Data values are for 24 hours ending at 18:00
E
Station: (313017) FAYETTEVILLE,NC
Year: 1980
Element: Precipitation (in)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 0 .04 .02 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.32 0 0
2 0 0 .29 0 0 0 0 .27 0 1.04 0 0
3 0 0 .21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 .06 0 .37 .02 0 0
5 .12 0 0 0 0 0 .62 .03 0 0 .82 0
6 .01 .05 .10 0 0 0 .04 0 1.65 .03 0 0
7 0 .37 0 0 0 .11 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 .30 0 .03 .03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 .72 0 .05 .07 0 0 .03 0 .01 0 0 0
10 .02 1.06 0 0 0 0 .12 0 0 0 0 .02
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 .28 0 0 0 0 .78
12 .48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 1.21 .02 0 0 .08 .24 0 0 0 0
14 .08 0 .03 1.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 .16 0 0 1.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
16 0 .02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .30 0
17 .01 .03 0 0 0 .03 0 .74 0 0 .02 .02
18 .08 0 1.41 0 .55 .20 .03 0 1.44 0 .99 0
19 .51 0 .02 0 0 .94 0 0 0 .02 0 0
20 0 0 0 0 .18 0 0 1.03 1.28 .09 0 0
21 0 .03 .61 0 .37 0 0 0 .05 0 .26 0
22 0 0 .01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 .48 0 0 0 0 0 0 .15 0 0 0 .52
.04 0 0 0 .03 0 1.37 0 1.39 1.25 .01 .12
0 0 .39 0 .52 .42 0 0 .47 .09 .06 .01
26 0 .17 0 0 .12 4.18 0 0 .03 .02 0 0
27 .11 0 0 0 0 .26 0 0 0 0 .03 .01
28 .11 0 0 .87 0 0 0 0 0 0 .03 .73
29 0 0 .91 0 0 0 .01 0 .25 0 0 .30
30 0 .03 .09 0 .02 0 0 .97 .59 0 .01
31 .54 .61 0 0 0 .52 .03
Sum 3.77 1.77 5.93 3.61 1.77 6.16 2.64 2.46 7.91 4.99 2.52 2.55
Data valu es are for 24 hours ending at 18:00 c', hr\uct\ A'o",ct\ - yb.o%
The status of daily data in the CIRRUS database is as follows:
Weather wire data available through 11/18/97
Preliminary data from National Climatic Data Center thru 07/31/97
Final quality-controlled data from National Climatic Data Center thru 04/30/97
Appendix E
Wildlife Species Observed at Barra Farms
Birds and other fauna observed at Barra Farm, Cumberland Co., NC. (X =found on Site 6
March 1997 observations. Clear, windy, 55 deg.). [Y =additional species found on site 11
March 1997 - clear, calm, approx. 70 deg.].
Wood Duck
XMallard
YAmerican Black Duck
XTurkey Vulture
XNorthern Harrier
Sharp-shinned Hawk
Red-shouldered Hawk
XRed-tailed Hawk
XAmerican Kestrel
Northern Bobwhite
XKilldeer
American Woodcock
XMourning Dove
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Eastern Screech Owl
Belted Kingfisher
Red-bellied Woodpecker
Downy Woodpecker
Hairy Woodpecker
Common Flicker
Pileated Woodpecker
Eastern Wood-Pewee
Eastern Phoebe
Great Crested Flycatcher
Eastern Kingbird
Barn Swallow
YBlue Jay
XAmerican Crow
XCarolina Chickade
XTufted Titmouse
Brown-headed Nuthatch
White-breasted Nuthatch
XCarolina Wren
Winter Wren
Gray Catbird
Northern Mockingbird
Brown Thrasher
Eastern Bluebird
Hermit Thrush
Wood Thrush
XAmerican Robin
Ruby-crowned Kinglet
Loggerhead Shrike
XCommon Starling
YWhite-eyed Vireo
Aix sponsa
Anas platyrhynchos
Anas rubripes
Cathartes aura
Circus cyaneus
Accipiter striatus
Buteo lineatus
Buteo jamaicensis
Falco sparverius
Colinus virginianus
Charadrius vociferus
Scolopax minor
Zenaida macroura
Coccyzus americanus
Otus asio
Ceryle alcyon
Melanerpes carolinus
Picoides pubescens
Picoides villosus
Colaptes auratus
Dryocopus pileatus
Contopus virens
Sa yornis phoebe
Myiarchus crinitus
Tyrannus tyrannus
Hirundo rustica
Cyanocitta cristata
Corvus brachyrhynchos
Parus carolinensis
Parus bicolor
Sitta pusilla
Sitta carolinensis
Thryothorus ludovicianus
Troglodytes troglodytes
Dumetella carolinensis
Mimus polyglottos
Taxostoma rufum
Sialia sialis
Catharus guttatus
Hylocichla mustelin
Turdus migra torius
Regulus calendula
Lanus ludovicianus
Sturnus vulgaris
Vireo griseus
Solitary Vireo
Yellow-rumped Warbler
XPine Warbler
Prairie Warbler
Common Yellowthroat
XRed-winged Blackbird
Eastern Meadowlark
XCommon Grackle
American Goldfinch
XSavannah Sparrow
XSong Sparrow
Swamp Sparrow
White-throated Sparrow
XDark-eyed Junco
Chipping Sparrow
YField Sparrow
XEastern Towhee
YNorthern Cardinal
Indigo Bunting
OTHER FAUNA:
XNutria (skeleton)
XWhite-tailed Deer
Xmole tunnels
YBeaver evidence
YFox (scat)
Red Fox
Gray Fox
Raccoon (tracks)
Gray Squirrel
XSnapping Turtle
XYellowbelly Slider
XGreen frog
YNorthern Cricket Frog
Turtle
Broad-headed Skink
Toad
Box Turtle
XMosquito Fish
XCabbage Butterfly
XSpring Azure
YCloudless Sulphur
Y?Skipper
YTiger Beetle
YDragonflies (large & small)
Vireo solitarius
Dendroica coronata
Dendroica pious
Dendroica discolor
Geothlypis trichas
Agelaius phoeniceus
Sturnella magna
Quiscalus quicscula
Carduelis tristis
Passerculus sandwichensis
Melospiza melodia
Melospiza georgiana
Zonotrichia albicollis
Junco hyemalis
Spizella passerine
Spizella pusilla
Pipilo erythrophthalmus
Cardinalis cardinalis
Passerina cyanea
Myocastor coypus
Odocoileus virginianus
Castor canadensis
Vulpes vulpes
Urocyon cinereoargenteus
Procyon lotor
Sciurus carolinensis
Chelydra serpentina
Chrysemys scripta
Rana clamitans
Acris crepitans
Chrysemys sp.
Eumeces laticeps
Bufo sp.
Terrapene Carolina
Appendix F
Sensitive Plants, Animals, and Communities Documented
by NCNHP in the Barra Farms Region
SENSITIVE PLANTS, ANIMALS, AND COMMUNITIES IN THE BARRA FARMS AREA
PLANTS:
White Wicky Kalmia cuneata
Northern White Beaksedge Rhynchospora alba
Rough-leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulifolia
Lewis's Heartleaf Hexastylis lewisii
Venus Flytrap Dionaea muscipula
Awned Meadow-beauty Rhexia aristosa
Threadleaf Sundew Drosera filiformis
Pondspice Litsea aestivalis
Southern Spicebush Lindera melissifolia
Sandhilis Wild-petunia Ruellia ciliosa
Savanna Yellow-eyed-grass Xyris flabelliformis
Shortleaf Yellow-eyed-grass Xyris brevifolia
ANIMALS:
Black Bear
Eastern Fox Squirrel
Anhinga
Red-cockaded Woodpecker
Pine Barrens Treefrog
American Alligator
Ursus americans
Sciurus niger
Anhinga anhinga
Picoides borealis
Hyla andersonii
Alligator mississipiensis
NATURAL COMMUNITIES:
Atlantic White Cedar Forest
Small Depression Pocosin
Xeric Sandhill Scrub
Pond Pine Woodland
Pine Flatwoods
Low Pocosin
High Pocosin
Peatland Atlantic White Cedar forest
Wet Pine Flatwoods
Coastal Plain Semipermanent Impoundment
Pine/Scrub Oak Sandhill
REGISTERED HERITAGE AREA:
Cedar Swamp
OTHER NATURAL AREAS:
Horseshoe Lake/Marshy Bay/Big Gallberry Bay
Little Singletary Lake
White Oak Pondberry Site
Bushy Bay Sand Ridge
Bushy Lake
Bushy Lake State Nature Preserve
Appendix G
DRAINMOD Parameters and Outputs
EXPLANATION OF DRAINMOD OUTPUT FILES
DRAINMOD output files are available in several formats, two output files typically used for
wetland hydroperiod analyses are the OUT and MET files. Attached hereto is an example of
each type of output file.
The first six pages of the appendix comprise a DRAINMOD OUT output file. This file contains
all of the inputs necessary for a DRAINMOD simulation. The inputs include the title of the
simulation, in this case an analysis is run for existing conditions (ag fields) for a typical Croatan
soil with ditches spaced 70 ft apart and ditch depths of 3 ft. The wetland criterion specified
(hydroperiod) is that the water table must remain 1 ft from the surface for 12.5% of the
growing season.
Climate inputs daily precipitation, maximum-minimum temperatures, and evapotranspiration
multiplication factors which are necessary for the model to calculate potential
evapotranspiration.
The drainage system design inputs include distance between ditches, ditch depth, saturated
hydraulic conductivity values, and surface storage parameters.
Soil inputs include a drainage table which gives the relationship between water table depth and
void volume; soil-water characteristics which give the relationship between head, water
content, void volume and upflux; and Green-Ampt infiltration parameters.
The objective of a DRAINMOD simulation for wetland hydroperiod analyses is to find the
conditions which meet the established wetland hydrology criterion greater than 50% of the
years modeled. The final six pages of this Appendix include examples of DRAINMOD MET
files. The WET files indicate for each year modeled the number of periods in a year and the
longest consecutive period for which the wetland criterion are met. The final analysis is a
summary of the number of years out of the total that the wetland hydroperiod is met. In this
case, the criterion are met for 14 out of 31 years, 17 out of 31 years, and 18 out of 31 years.
Therefore, the conditions simulated which produce the wetland hydroperiod for 17 out of 31
years would be chosen as the "correct" answer (greater than 50% of the years modeled).

D R A I N M 0 D
Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
VERSION: NORTH CAROLINA MICRO-UNIX 4.60a
LAST UPDATE: Sept. 1991
LANGUAGE: MS FORTRAN v 5.0 & UNIX f77
DRAINMOD IS A FIELD-SCALE HYDROLOGIC MODEL DEVELOPED FOR
THE DESIGN OF SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS. THE MODEL WAS
DEVELOPED BY RESEARCHERS AT THE DEPT. OF BIOLOGICAL AND
AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING, NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY
UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. W. SKAGGS.
*******************************************************************************
***************************
* D R A I N M 0 D -- 4.60a
***************************
Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
DATA READ FROM INPUT FILE: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD3S70.LIS
Cream selector (0=no, 1=yes) = 0
TITLE OF RUN
************
BARRA FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (AG FIELDS)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=2100 CM (70')/DD=90 CM (3') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 30 DAYS (12.5%
CLIMATE INPUTS
******* ******
DESCRIPTION
------------------ (VARIABLE) VALUE UNIT
---------------
FILE FOR RAINDATA .............. -----------------------------
D:\DM46\WEATHER\NWILMING.RAI ------- ----------
FILE FOR TEMPERATURE/PET DATA .. D:\DM46\WEATHER\NWILMING.TEM
RAINFALL STATION NUMBER .......... ................(RAINID) 319457
TEMPERATURE/PET STATION NUMBER ... ................(TEMPID) 319457
STARTING YEAR OF SIMULATION ...... ............(START YEAR) 1950 YEAR
STARTING MONTH OF SIMULATION ..... ...........(START MONTH) 1 MONTH
ENDING YEAR OF SIMULATION ........ ..............(END YEAR) 1980 YEAR
ENDING MONTH OF SIMULATION ....... .............(END MONTH) 12 MONTH
TEMPERATURE STATION LATITUDE ..... ..............(TEMP LAT) 34.16 DEG.MIN
HEAT INDEX ....................... ...................(HID) 85.00
__j
ET MULTIPLICATION FACTOR FOR EACH MONTH
2.01 2.32 2.10 1.72 1.23 1.00 .86 .82 .92 1.05 1.22 1.44
DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN
**********************
*** CONVENTIONAL DRAINAGE ***
JOB TITLE:
BARRA FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (AG FI
CROATAN SOIL/DS=2100 CM (70')/DD=90 CM (3') THWTD=30 CM (1')
STMAX = 1.50 CM SOIL SURFACE
ADEPTH =300. CM DDRAIN = 90. CM
0------------- SDRAIN = 2100. CM -----------0 -
*
EFFRAD =**** CM
HDRAIN =158. CM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IMPERMEABLE LAYER
DEPTH SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
(CM) (CM/HR)
.0 - 94.0 .150
94.0 - 247.8 .510
DEPTH TO DRAIN = 90.0 CM
EFFECTIVE DEPTH FROM DRAIN TO IMPERMEABLE LAYER = 157.8 CM
DISTANCE BETWEEN DRAINS = 2100.0 CM
MAXIMUM DEPTH OF SURFACE PONDING = 1.50 CM
EFFECTIVE DEPTH TO IMPERMEABLE LAYER = 247.8 CM
DRAINAGE COEFFICIENT(AS LIMITED BY SUBSURFACE OUTLET) = 2.50 CM/DAY
ACTUAL DEPTH FROM SURFACE TO IMPERMEABLE LAYER = 300.0 CM
SURFACE STORAGE THAT MUST BE FILLED BEFORE WATER
-'AN MOVE TO DRAIN = 1.00 CM
-'TOR -G- IN KIRKHAM EQ. 2-17 = 4.92
*** SEEPAGE LOSS INPUTS ***
No seepage due to field slope
No seepage due to vertical deep seepage
No seepage due to lateral deep seepage
*** end of seepage inputs ***
WIDTH OF DITCH BOTTOM = 60.0 CM
SIDE SLOPE OF DITCH (HORIZ:VERT) _ .50 : 1.00
INITIAL WATER TABLE DEPTH = 60.0 CM
DEPTH OF WEIR FROM THE SURFACE
DATE 1/ 1 2/ 0 3/ 0
WEIR DEPTH 90.0 90.0 90.0
DATE 7/ 0 8/ 0 9/ 0
WEIR DEPTH 90.0 90.0 90.0
4/ 0 5/ 0 6/ 0
90.0 90.0 90.0
10/ 0 11/ 0 12/ 0
90.0 90.0 90.0
SOIL INPUTS
***********
TABLE 1
DRAINAGE TABLE
VOID VOLUME WATER TABLE DEPTH
(CM) (CM)
.0 .0
1.0 15.5
2.0 22.6
3.0 27.9
4.0 31.4
5.0 33.6
6.0 35.9
7.0 38.2
8.0 40.5
9.0 43.0
10.0 45.5
11.0 48.0
12.0 50.5
13.0 53.2
14.0 55.8
15.0 58.4
16.0 61.1
17.0 63.8
18.0 66.5
19.0 69.2
20.0 71.9
21.0 74.7
22.0 77.5
23.0 80.3
24.0 83.1
25.0 85.8
26.0 88.6
1
27.0 91.4
28.0 94.3
29.0 97.1
30.0 100.0
35.0 114.5
40.0 129.1
45.0 143.9
50.0 158.8
60.0 322.6
70.0 491.9
80.0 661.3
90.0 830.6
TABLE 2
SOIL WATER CHARACTERISTIC VS VOID VOLUME VS UPFLUX
HEAD WATER CONTENT VOID VOLUME UPFLUX
(CM) (CM/CM) (CM) (CM/HR)
.0 .5900 .00 .2000
10.0 .5100 .40 .2000
20.0 .4600 1.50 .1080
30.0 .4200 3.40 .0070
40.0 .3900 7.80 .0000
50.0 .3750 11.80 .0000
60.0 .3600 15.60 .0000
70.0 .3450 19.30 .0000
80.0 .3300 22.90 .0000
90.0 .3200 26.50 .0000
100.0 .3100 30.00 .0000
110.0 .3040 33.45 .0000
120.0 .2980 36.90 .0000
130.0 .2920 40.30 .0000
140.0 .2860 43.70 .0000
150.0 .2800 47.05 .0000
160.0 .2760 50.40 .0000
170.0 .2720 50.99 .0000
180.0 .2680 51.58 .0000
190.0 .2640 52.17 .0000
200.0 .2600 52.76 .0000
210.0 .2580 53.35 .0000
220.0 .2560 53.94 .0000
230.0 .2540 54.53 .0000
240.0 .2520 55.12 .0000
250.0 .2500 55.71 .0000
260.0 .2480 56.30 .0000
270.0 .2460 56.90 .0000
280.0 .2440 57.49 .0000
290.0 .2420 58.08 .0000
300.0 .2400 58.67 .0000
350.0 .2283 61.62 .0000
400.0 .2200 64.57 .0000
450.0 .2150 67.52 .0000
500.0 .2100 70.48 .0000
600.0 .2000 76.38 .0000
700.0 .1950 82.29 .0000
800.0 .1900 88.19 .0000
900.0 .1850 94.10 .0000
GREEN AMPT INFILTRATION PARAMETERS
W.T.D. A- B
(CM) (CM) (CM)
.000 .000 .000
50.000 13.700 50.140
100.000 18.960 54.850
140.000 21.220 56.190
200.000 23.390 57.200
500.000 27.970 58.610
1000.000 27.970 58.610
TRAFFICABILITY
**************
REQUIREMENTS
-MINIMUM AIR VOLUME IN SOIL (CM):
-MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DAILY RAINFALL(CM):
-MINIMUM TIME AFTER RAIN BEFORE TILLING CAN CONTINUE:
WORKING TIMES
-DATE TO BEGIN COUNTING WORK DAYS:
-DATE TO STOP COUNTING WORK DAYS:
-FIRST WORK HOUR OF THE DAY:
-LAST WORK HOUR OF THE DAY:
CROP
****
SOIL MOISTURE AT CROP WILTING POINT = .13
FIRST SECOND
PERIOD PERIOD
3.00 3.00
1.20 1.20
2.00 2.00
3/15 12/31
8/30 12/31
8 0
20 0
HIGH WATER STRESS: BEGIN STRESS PERIOD ON 4/10
END STRESS PERIOD ON 11/16
CROP IS IN STRESS WHEN WATER TABLE IS ABOVE 30.0 CM
DROUGHT STRESS: BEGIN STRESS PERIOD ON 4/10
END STRESS PERIOD ON 11/16
MO DAY ROOTING DEPTH(CM)
1 1 4.0
4 15 45.0
10 14 4.0
12 31 4.0
WASTEWATER IRRIGATION
*********************
NO WASTEWATER IRRIGATION SCHEDULED:
-----------------------------------
***** Wetlands Parameter Estimation *****
Start Day = 76 End Day = 316
Threshold Water Table Depth (cm) = 30.0
Threshold Consecutive Days = 30
****************************** END OF INPUTS ******************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ------
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD:
parameters: free drainage
drain spacing =
--------------------------------
FOR 7/1953, NUMBER DAYS MISSING
FOR 2/1956, NUMBER DAYS MISSING
FOR 9/1965, NUMBER DAYS MISSING
---- time: 12/ 9/1997 @ 10:57
3S70.LIS
and yields not calculat
2100. cm drain depth = 90.0 cm
---------------------------------------
TEMPERATURE= 1
TEMPERATURE= 3
TEMPERATURE= 1
**> Computational Statistics <**
**> Start Computations = 657.307
**> End Computations = 657.706
**> Total simulation time = 24.0 seconds.
TABLE 2
REFERENCE WETLAND HYDROPERIODS
FOR CROATAN SOIL
BARRA FARMS SITE
Percent (%)
of Growing Season Number of Years Wetland Hydrology
Achieved
Crop land and
early successional
stages
(post farmland) Steady State
Forest and late
successional
stages
12% (29 days) 27/31 28/31
14% (34 days) 27/31 28/31
16% (38 days) 24/31 28/31
18% (43 days) 20/31 27/31
20% (48 days) 17/31 24/31
22% (53 days) 16/31 24/31
24% (58 days) 13/31 23/31
26% (62 days) 11 /31 21/31
28% (67 days) 10/31 20/31
30% (72 days) 7/31 20/31
32% (77 days) 7/31 20/31
34% (82 days) 6/31 18/31
36% (86 days) 5/31 18/31
38% (91 days) 3/31 17/31
40% (96 days) 3/31 16/31
42% (101 days) 2/31 14/31
44% (106 days) 0/31 14/31
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
111111
MA FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (AG FIELDS) (22o OF G.S.)
D
CROATAN SOIL/DS=180000 CM (6000')/DD=1 CM 0.03') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 53 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 12/16/1997 @ 11:31
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\AGMAX22.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 180000. cm drain depth = 1.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 53 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 53 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 84.
1951 2. 68.
1952 0. 36.
1953 0. 18.
1954 0. 40.
1955 1. 61.
1956 0. 47.
1957 0. 45.
1958 0. 48.
1959 0. 41.
1960 1. 62.
1961 2. 80.
1962 1. 54.
1963 1. 60.
1964 0. 42.
1965 1. 71.
1966 1. 99.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 11.
1969 1. 101.
1970 0. 36.
1971 1. 89.
1972 0. 34.
1973 1. 86.
1974 1. 68.
1975 1. 56.
1976 1. 102.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 0.
18.
43.
54.
38.
Number of Years with at least one period = 16. out of 31 years.
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
W4! A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (AG FIELDS) (40o OF G.S.)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=180000 CM (6000')/DD=1 CM 0.031) THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 96 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 12/16/1997 @ 11:31
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\AGMAX40.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 180000. cm drain depth = 1.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M O D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 96 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 96 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 0. 84.
1951 0. 68.
1952 0. 36.
1953 0. 18.
1954 0. 40.
1955 0. 61.
1956 0. 47.
1957 0. 45.
1958 0. 48.
1959 0. 41.
1960 0. 62.
1961 0. 80.
1962 0. 54.
1963 0. 60.
1964 0. 42.
1965 0. 71.
1966 1. 99.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 11.
1969 1. 101.
1970 0. 36.
1971 0. 89.
1972 0. 34.
1973 0. 86.
1974 0. 68.
1975 0. 56.
1976 1. 102.
1977 0. 18.
1978 0. 43.
1979 0. 54.
1980 0. 38.
Number of Years with at least one period = 3. out of 31 years.
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
III&A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (FOREST) (22o OF G.S.)
OCROATAN SOIL/DS=180000 CM (6000')/DD=1 CM 0.03') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 53 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 12/16/1997 @ 11:10
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CMAX22.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 180000. cm drain depth = 1.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 53 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 53 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 128.
1951 2. 111.
1952 0. 47.
1953 0. 42.
1954 1. 97.
1955 1. 94.
1956 1. 114.
1957 0. 45.
1958 2. 112.
1959 1. 81.
1960 1. 106.
1961 2. 131.
1962 3. 87.
1963 1. 134.
1964 1. 61.
1965 1. 152.
1966 1. 176.
1967 0. 16.
1968 0. 20.
1969 2. 111.
1970 1. 54.
1971 2. 113.
1972 1. 63.
1973 2. 139.
1974 1. 97.
1975 2. 60.
1976 1. 138.
1977 0. 28.
1978 1. 77.
1979 2. 116.
1980 0. 47.
Number of Years with at least one period = 24. out of 31 years.
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
J11111
FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (FOREST) (40 o OF G.S.)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=180000 CM (6000')/DD=1 CM 0.03') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 96 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 12/16/1997 @ 11:11
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CMAX40.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 180000. cm drain depth = 1.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 96 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 96 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 128.
1951 1. 111.
1952 0. 47.
1953 0. 42.
1954 1. 97.
1955 0. 94.
1956 1. 114.
1957 0. 45.
1958 1. 112.
1959 0. 81.
1960 1. 106.
1961 1. 131.
1962 0. 87.
1963 1. 134.
1964 0. 61.
1965 1. 152.
1966 1. 176.
1967 0. 16.
1968 0. 20.
1969 1. 111.
1970 0. 54.
1971 1. 113.
1972 0. 63.
1973 1. 139.
1974 1. 97.
1975 0. 60.
1976 1. 138.
1977 0. 28.
1978 0. 77.
1979 1. 116.
1980 0. 47.
Number of Years with at least one period = 16. out of 31 years.
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (FOREST) (16o OF G.S.)
OCROATAN SOIL/DS=180000 CM (6000')/DD=1 CM 0.03') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 38 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 12/16/1997 @ 11:12
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CMAXI6.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 180000. cm drain depth = 1.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 38 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 38 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 128.
1951 2. 111.
1952 1. 47.
1953 1. 42.
1954 1. 97.
1955 1. 94.
1956 1. 114.
1957 1. 45.
1958 2. 112.
1959 2. 81.
1960 2. 106.
1961 2. 131.
1962 3. 87.
1963 1. 134.
1964 2. 61.
1965 2. 152.
1966 1. 176.
1967 0. 16.
1968 0. 20.
1969 2. 111.
1970 2. 54.
1971 2. 113.
1972 2. 63.
1973 2. 139.
1974 1. 97.
1975 2. 60.
1976 1. 138.
1977 0.
1978 1.
1979 2.
1980 1.
28.
77.
116.
47.
Number of Years with at least one period = 28. out of 31 years.
TABLE 3
ZONE OF WETLAND LOSS AND
ZONE OF WETLAND DEGRADATION
FOR CROATAN SOIL
BARRA FARMS MITIGATION SITE
Modeled
Ditch Depth
Zone' of
Wetland Loss
(<12.5%)
Number of Years
Criteria Achieved
Zone of Wetland
Degradation
(<22% or 40%)
Number of Years
Criteria Achieved
Agricultural and Early Successional Conditions
(relatively low surface water storage and rooting functions)
(average hydroperiod = 22% (53 days) of the growing season)
3 ft 60 ft 17/31 255 ft 12/31
4 ft 75 ft 17/31 295 ft 12/31
5 ft 85 ft 18/31 330 ft 12/31
6 ft 90 ft 16/31 355 ft 12/31
7 ft 95 ft 16/31 375 ft 12/31
8 ft 100 ft 16/31 385 ft 12/31
Steady State Forested Conditions
(relatively high surface water storage and rooting functions)
(average hydroperiod = 40% (96 days) of the growing season)
3 ft 50 ft 16/31 445 ft 12/31
4 ft 65 ft 16/31 545 ft 12/31
5 ft 80 ft 19/31 605 ft 12/31
6 ft 85 ft 16/31 655 ft 12/31
7 ft 95 ft 18/31 700 ft 12/31
8 ft 100 ft 18/31 720 ft 12/31
1 Zone= modeled ditch spacing/2

TABLE 3
ZONE OF WETLAND LOSS AND
ZONE OF WETLAND DEGRADATION
FOR CROATAN SOIL
BARRA FARMS MITIGATION SITE
Modeled
Ditch Depth Zone' of Number of Years Zone of Wetland
Wetland Loss Criteria Achieved Degradation
(<12.5%) (<22% or 40%) Number of Years
Criteria Achieved
Agricultural and Early Successional Conditions
(relatively low surface water storage and rooting functions)
(average hydroperiod = 22% (53 days) of the growing season)
3 ft 60 ft 17/31 255 ft 12/31
4 ft 75 ft 17/31 295 ft 12/31
5 ft 85 ft 18/31 330 ft 12/31
6 ft 90 ft 16/31 355 ft 12/31
7 ft 95 ft 16/31 375 ft 12/31
8 ft 100 ft 16/31 385 ft 12/31
Steady State Forested Conditions
(relatively high surface water storage and rooting functions)
(average hydroperiod = 40% (96 days) of the growing season)
3 ft 50 ft 16/31 445 ft 12/31
4 ft 65 ft 16/31 545 ft 12/31
5 ft 80 ft 19/31 605 ft 12/31
6 ft 85 ft 16/31 655 ft 12/31
7 ft 95 ft 18/31 695 ft 12/31
8 ft 100 ft 18/31 720 ft 12/31
' Zone= modeled ditch spacing/2

-t c r,o
7-5
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
WIA DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (AG FIELDS)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=3600 (120')/DD=90 CM (31) THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 30 DAYS (12.50)
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 12/17/1997 @ 10:28
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD3S120.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 3600. cm drain depth = 90.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 30 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 30 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 2. 32.
1951 0. 18.
1952 1. 30.
1953 0. 13.
1954 0. 15.
1955 1. 47.
1956 0. 19.
1957 1. 30.
1958 2. 47.
1959 0. 21.
1960 2. 49.
1961 1. 30.
1962 1. 40.
1963 0. 23.
1964 1. 39.
1965 0. 27.
1966 1. 92.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 3.
1969 1. 33.
1970 1. 33.
1971 2. 65.
1972 0. 13.
1973 1. 81.
1974 1. 47.
1975 1. 39.
1976 0. 28.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 0.
16.
9.
44.
26.
Number of Years with at least one period = 17. out of 31 years.
a? ?-:??a loss a?a?y Sys
r
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
lll$A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (AG FIELDS)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=5100 (170')/DD=150 CM (5') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 30 DAYS (12.50)
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/ 7/1997 @ 14: 9
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD5S170.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 5100. cm drain depth = 150.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 30 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 30 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 32.
1951 0. 18.
1952 1. 31.
1953 0. 14.
1954 0. 15.
1955 1. 48.
1956 0. 3.
1957 1. 31.
1958 2. 47.
1959 0. 21.
1960 2. 50.
1961 2. 39.
1962 1. 41.
1963 0. 22.
1964 1. 39.
1965 0. 27.
1966 1. 93.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 2.
1969 2. 36.
1970 1. 33.
1971 2. 65.
1972 0. 13.
1973 1. 82.
1974 1. 46.
1975 1. 39.
1976 1. 46.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 0.
16.
19.
44.
27.
Number of Years with at least one period = 18. out of 31 years.
q? ?- ; e ?a loss analyS %5
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
I&A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (AG FIELDS)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=5700 (190')/DD=210 CM (7') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 30 DAYS (12.50
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/ 7/1997 @ 15:56
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD7S190.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 5700. cm drain depth = 210.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 30 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 30 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 32.
1951 0. 18.
1952 1. 30.
1953 0. 13.
1954 0. 13.
1955 1. 46.
1956 0. 0.
1957 1. 30.
1958 2. 47.
1959 0. 21.
1960 2. 31.
1961 2. 38.
1962 1. 41.
1963 0. 18.
1964 0. 21.
1965 0. 27.
1966 1. 93.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
1969 1. 34.
1970 1. 33.
1971 2. 65.
1972 0. 13.
1973 1. 82.
1974 1. 46.
1975 1. 39.
1976 0. 28.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 0.
16.
19.
44.
27.
Number of Years with at least one period = 16. out of 31 years.
ag ?-kQ Nd c+tvcy rat a v, o ?n
aVk tS % ? 3' a ? 4 cti?
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
AAA FARMS WETLAND DEGRADATION ANALYSIS (AG FIELDS) (2201 OF GROWING SEASON)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=15300 CM (5101)/DD=90 CM (3') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 53 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/19/1997 @ 12:47
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD3S510.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 15300. cm drain depth = 90.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 53 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 53 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 0. 42.
1951 2. 64.
1952 0. 35.
1953 0. 17.
1954 0. 39.
1955 1. 55.
1956 0. 27.
1957 0. 45.
1958 0. 48.
1959 0. 40.
1960 1. 62.
1961 2. 79.
1962 0. 52.
1963 1. 54.
1964 0. 42.
1965 0. 36.
1966 1. 99.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 4.
1969 1. 74.
1970 0. 35.
1971 1. 89.
1972 0. 32.
1973 1. 85.
1974 1. 67.
1975 1. 56.
1976 1. 67.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 0.
1980 0.
18.
31.
52.
37.
Number of Years with at least one period = 12. out of 31 years.
c{q k- Iet0 Qeyrana-ti oin
0,A0ly5;5 03
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
ll?A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (AG FIELDS) (22% OF G.S.)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=19800 CM (660')/DD=150 CM (51) THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 53 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/19/1997 @ 15:31
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD5S660.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 19800. cm drain depth = 150.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 53 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 53 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 0. 42.
1951 2. 64.
1952 0. 35.
1953 0. 17.
1954 0. 39.
1955 1. 55.
1956 0. 27.
1957 0. 45.
1958 0. 48.
1959 0. 40.
1960 1. 62.
1961 2. 79.
1962 0. 52.
1963 1. 54.
1964 0. 42.
1965 0. 36.
1966 1. 99.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 3.
1969 1. 74.
1970 0. 35.
1971 1. 89.
1972 0. 32.
1973 1. 85.
1974 1. 67.
1975 1. 56.
1976 1. 67.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 0.
1980 0.
18.
31.
52.
37.
Number of Years with at least one period = 12. out of 31 years.
L?•y r„ kcN A by vu a.
a vt u l',{ 5 ? 5 ( --1 d :
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
36A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (AG FIELDS) (22. OF G.S.)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=22500 CM (750')/DD=210 CM (7') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 53 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/19/1997 @ 16:24
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD7S750.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 22500. cm drain depth = 210.0 cm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 53 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 53 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 0. 42.
1951 2. 64.
1952 0. 35.
1953 0. 17.
1954 0. 39.
1955 1. 54.
1956 0. 27.
1957 0. 45.
1958 0. 48.
1959 0. 40.
1960 1. 62.
1961 2. 79.
1962 0. 52.
1963 1. 54.
1964 0. 42.
1965 0. 36.
1966 1. 99.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 2.
1969 1. 74.
1970 0. 35.
1971 1. 89.
1972 0. 32.
1973 1. 85.
1974 1. 67.
1975 1. 56.
1976 1. 67.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 0.
1980 0.
18.
31.
52.
37.
Number of Years with at least one period = 12. out of 31 years.
-4-0ve?'1- ?c?s5 c?.nalyS?s
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* CoUVricfht 1990-91 North Carolina State University
11WA FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (FOREST)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=3000 (100')/DD=90 CM (3') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 30 DAYS (12.50)
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/13/1997 @ 16:44
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD3S100.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 3000. cm drain depth = 90.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 30 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 30 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 38.
1951 0. 7.
1952 1. 33.
1953 0. 16.
1954 0. 1.
1955 1. 36.
1956 0. 0.
1957 0. 0.
1958 2. 47.
1959 0. 22.
1960 1. 35.
1961 2. 40.
1962 0. 20.
1963 0. 12.
1964 0. 21.
1965 2. 31.
1966 1. 95.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
1969 1. 73.
1970 1. 35.
1971 2. 88.
1972 0. 19.
1973 1. 84.
1974 1. 57.
1975 1. 38.
1976 1. 47.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 0.
18.
8.
42.
25.
Number of Years with at least one period = 16. out of 31 years.
-VdreS' ? \ a 5S
GtYl0.Ly5; 5 Cs Fa.-(,a?
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
1.A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (FOREST)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=4800 (160')/DD=150 CM (5') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 30 DAYS (12.50)
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/14/1997 @ 16:18
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD5S160.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 4800. cm drain depth = 150.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 30 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 30 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 40.
1951 0. 8.
1952 1. 35.
1953 0. 18.
1954 0. 3.
1955 1. 32.
1956 0. 0.
1957 0. 0.
1958 2. 47.
1959 0. 24.
1960 2. 36.
1961 3. 52.
1962 1. 46.
1963 0. 23.
1964 1. 30.
1965 2. 67.
1966 1. 99.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
1969 1. 38.
1970 1. 36.
1971 2. 88.
1972 0. 24.
1973 1. 86.
1974 .1. 61.
1975 1. 41.
1976 1. 51.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 1.
20.
21.
46.
37.
Number of Years with at least one period = 19. out of 31 years.

-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
BRA FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS (FOREST)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=5700 (1901)/DD=210 CM (7') THWTD=30 CM (11) FOR 30 DAYS (12.50)
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/14/1997 @ 16:28
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD7S190.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 5700. cm drain depth = 210.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 30 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 30 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 39.
1951 0. 9.
1952 1. 35.
1953 0. 18.
1954 0. 0.
1955 0. 24.
1956 0. 1.
1957 0. 0.
1958 2. 47.
1959 0. 25.
1960 2. 62.
1961 3. 54.
1962 1. 47.
1963 0. 23.
1964 1. 33.
1965 2. 67.
1966 1. 99.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
1969 1. 32.
1970 1. 36.
1971 2. 88.
1972 0. 26.
1973 3. 87.
1974 1. 61.
1975 1. 42.
1976 1. 51.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 1.
21.
22.
38.
37.
Number of Years with at least one period = 18. out of 31 years.
-EO reNPr a H I v u v u&-T' t v v % a?ol,fSi? C? ?
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
ll?A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (FOREST) (40o OF G.S.)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=26700 CM (890')/DD=90 CM (3') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 96 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 12/17/1997 C 10:29
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD3S890.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 26700. cm drain depth = 90.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 96 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 96 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 102.
1951 1. 111.
1952 0. 45.
1953 0. 41.
1954 0. 56.
1955 0. 94.
1956 1. 104.
1957 0. 45.
1958 1. 108.
1959 0. 49.
1960 0. 62.
1961 1. 131.
1962 0. 79.
1963 0. 86.
1964 0. 42.
1965 1. 152.
1966 1. 176.
1967 0. 12.
1968 0. 14.
1969 1. 110.
1970 0. 50.
1971 1. 112.
1972 0. 42.
1973 1. 137.
1974 0. 95.
1975 0. 57.
1976 1. 138.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 0.
27.
76.
115.
42.
Number of Years with at least one period = 12. out of 31 years.
_?-oveSN-- deyvaAa"t-1 ah
a"CLl? s? S CS ` C? i kc-\&?
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
U&A FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (FOREST) (40% OF G.S.)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=36300 CM (1210')/DD=150 CM (5') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 96 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/19/1997 @ 9: 9
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD5S1210.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 36300. cm drain depth = 150.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 96 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 96 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 102.
1951 1. 111.
1952 0. 45.
1953 0. 41.
1954 0. 56.
1955 0. 94.
1956 1. 104.
1957 0. 45.
1958 1. 108.
1959 0. 49.
1960 0. 62.
1961 1. 131.
1962 0. 87.
1963 0. 86.
1964 0. 42.
1965 1. 152.
1966 1. 176.
1967 0. 12.
1968 0. 14.
1969 1. 110.
1970 0. 51.
1971 1. 112.
1972 0. 42.
1973 1. 137.
1974 0. 95.
1975 0. 57.
1976 1. 138.
1977 0. 28.
1978 0. 76.
1979 1. 115.
1980 0. 42.
Number of Years with at least one period = 12. out of 31 years.
pro Y, P S t' d 4e Q-A Cc 6 vt
-----------------------------------------------------
* DRAINMOD version 4.60a
* Copyright 1990-91 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
RUA FARMS DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR MAXIMUM HYDROPERIOD (FOREST) (40o OF G.S.)
CROATAN SOIL/DS=41700 CM (1390')/DD=210 CM (7') THWTD=30 CM (1') FOR 96 DAYS
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 11/19/1997 @ 10:30
input file: D:\DM46\INPUT46\CD7S1390.LIS
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculat
drain spacing = 41700. cm drain depth = 210.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.00 cm
for at least 96 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest Consecutive
of 96 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30.00 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 1. 102.
1951 1. 111.
1952 0. 45.
1953 0. 41.
1954 0. 56.
1955 0. 94.
1956 1. 104.
1957 0. 45.
1958 1. 108.
1959 0. 49.
1960 0. 62.
1961 1. 131.
1962 0. 87.
1963 0. 86.
1964 0. 42.
1965 1. 152.
1966 1. 176.
1967 0. 12.
1968 0. 14.
1969 1. 110.
1970 0. 51.
1971 1. 112.
1972 0. 42.
1973 1. 137.
1974 0. 95.
1975 0. 57.
1976 1. 138.
1977 0.
1978 0.
1979 1.
1980 0.
28.
76.
115.
42.
Number of Years with at least one period = 12. out of 31 years.
Appendix H
Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis
HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
BARRA FARMS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared for:
Mr. Wes Newell
Environmental Services, Inc.
1100 Wake Forest Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27604
December 12, 1997
Project 97056
EDDY ENGINEERING, P.C.
Post Office Box 61367
Raleigh, North Carolina 27661
[phone]
Fax [phone]
.••???\A OAROZ-1 ;
'•?,r?I N??:?•.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the findings of our hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for the Barra Farms
wetlands restoration project. Barra Farms is located in southeastern Cumberland County within
Harrison Creek Bay. Ditch filling on the site is being performed to reestablish wetland hydrology.
This hydrologic and hydraulic analysis was conducted to estimate the effect of filling ditches and
the resulting redirection of surface water flows on and around the project site.
Off-site effects of ditch filling were evaluated for two specific areas of concern. The first area of
concern is the off-site property located adjacent to the southeast end of the site, including
Secondary Road 2041, St. John's Church, and adjacent residences. The second area of concern is
the agricultural road crossing over the historic upper reach of Harrison Creek on Kirby Pugh's
property.
We performed limited engineering cross-section surveys of ditches and the historic stream
channel of Harrison Creek. We also interviewed local residents about historic drainage patterns
and flooding. We developed estimates of peak flood flows for watersheds in and around the site
using US Army Corps of Engineers, Flood Frequency Analysis (HEC-FFA) computer program.
We estimated water surface profiles for existing and after ditch filling conditions for selected
return periods, using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers River Analysis System computer program
HEC-RAS.
Our analysis indicates that completely filling the southeast to northwest trending ditch up to the
southeastern boundary of Harrison Creek Bay could increase flood levels adjacent to the southeast
end of the site, including Secondary Road 2041, St. John's Church, and adjacent residences.
Filling of the southeast to northwest trending ditch to approximately El. 114.5 and creating a
similar shallow swale to the historic upper reaches of Harrison Creek probably will not
significantly increase flood elevations adjacent to the southeast end of the site, including
Secondary Road 2041, St. John's Church, and adjacent residences. The forest land between the
site and the southeast rim of Harrison Creek Bay will experience increased flooding potential
from filling of the southeast to northwest trending ditch to approximately El. 114.5
After ditch filling, the agricultural road crossing over the historic upper reach of Harrison Creek
on Kirby Pugh's property will experience increased flooding over current conditions, but not over
historic conditions (before ditch and canal construction). Because a significant portion of the
watershed once draining to this site is still diverted into the western canal system, water surface
levels at this road crossing are likely to remain lower than historical levels. We have developed a
recommended roadway section and replacement culverts to permit use of this road by agricultural
equipment under most conditions. Overtopping of the recommended road section will likely
occur on average once every two years. The recommended road section surfacing and erosion
protection was developed to be stable in the 10-year event with only surface maintenance.
We also recommend installation of stream flow and rainfall recording gages so that any future
analysis of this site can be correlated to actual site data.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................ - 1 -
1.1 Purpose ........................................................... -1-
1.2 Authorization ...................................................... -1-
1.3 Scope of Services ................................................... - 1 -
1.4 Project Personnel ................................................... - 2-
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DATA .............................................. - 3-
2.1 Project Location .................................................... - 3 -
2.2 Project Description .................................................. - 3 -
2.3 Survey Data ....................................................... - 4 -
2.4 Local Experience ................................................... .4-
3.0 FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSES ......................................... - 5-
3.1 Similar Gaged Streams .............................................. - 5-
3.2 Statistical Analysis .................................................. - 5-
3.3 Regional Curves .................................................... - 6-
4.0 WATER SURFACE PROFILE ANALYSIS ................................... - 7-
4.1 HEC-RAS Model Development ....................................... - 7 -
4.2 HEC-1 Model Development .......................................... - 7-
4.3 Model Selection .................................................... - 8 -
4.4 Results ........................................................... .8-
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. - 10-
5.1 Flood Storage ...................................................... 10-
5.2 Church and SR 2041 Area ........................................... - 10-
5.3 Agricultural Road .................................................. - 10-
5.4 Rainfall and Stream Flow Gaging ..................................... - 11 -
6.0 LIMITATIONS ......................................................... - 12-
FIGURES
APPENDICES
LIST OF FIGURES
1. EXISTING CONDITION FLOW DIAGRAM
2. REVISED CONDITION FLOW DIAGRAM
3. MODELING CROSS-SECTIONS
4. SITE SCHEMATIC
5. CULVERT DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION VIEW
6. CULVERT SECTION VIEW
7. CULVERT PLAN VIEW
8. HEC-RAS EXISTING WATER SURFACE PROFILE #1
9. HEC-RAS EXISTING WATER SURFACE PROFILE #2
10. HEC-RAS REVISED WATER SURFACE PROFILE
11. VICINITY MAP
12. FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSIS STREAM GAGES
LIST OF APPENDICES
A. FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
B. HEC-RAS HYDRAULIC DEVELOPMENT
C. SURVEY DATA
ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents our hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the Barra Farms project currently in
progress by Ecobank, Inc. This section presents the purpose of these services, authorization,
scope, and project personnel.
1.1 Purpose
This hydrologic and hydraulic analysis was conducted to estimate the effect of filling ditches and
the resulting redirection of surface water flows on and around the project site. Ditch filling on the
site is being performed to reestablish wetland hydrology.
1.2 Authorization
These services were authorized by acceptance of Eddy Engineering, P.C. Proposal 0137-97, dated
October 1, 1997, by Mr Gerald R. McCrain of Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI). ESI was
retained by Ecobank as a consultant for restoration of wetlands vegetation and hydrology for the
Barra Farms project.
1.3 Scope of Services
Eddy Engineering, P.C., assisted ESI with the analysis of the Barra Farms site by providing the
following professional services:
1. We visited the site to observe site conditions and take engineering cross-sections of the
ditches and channel of Harrison Creek. We used benchmarks placed by ESI's surveyor as
a reference.
2. A regional flood frequency analysis was performed to estimate peak flood flows for a
range of flood frequencies. We used the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers HEC-FFA
program and USGS stream flow records to perform this analysis.
3. Using the cross-sections obtained by you within the site and those obtained by us at other
locations, both supplemented by map data, we developed a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
HEC-RAS computer model of the site from Secondary Road 2041 to Secondary Road
1002. The purpose of the model is to estimate existing and future water surface profiles at
points of interest in and around the site.
4. We evaluated the effect of site modifications to drainage from the church along Secondary
Road 2041.
5. The capacity of the culvert near the relic channel of Harrison Creek was evaluated and
recommendations are made for improvement.
-2-
6. We analyzed the effect of possible on-site storage using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
HEC-1 program.
7. We attended two meetings at your office and two on-site meetings to discuss our analysis
and conclusions.
8. We prepared this report containing our analysis, conclusions, and recommendations.
Our scope of services did not include evaluation or identification of drainage easements, local
drainage ordinances, or other issues not specifically described above.
1.4 Project Personnel
Analyses and report preparation were performed by John L. Eddy, P.E., Project Manager, and
Patrick K. Smith, E.I.T., Staff Engineer.
-3-
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DATA
This section presents our understanding of the project as planned and site data that was available
to us at the time of this report.
2.1 Project Location
Barra Farms is located in southeastern Cumberland County, North Carolina, within Harrison
Creek Bay. Harrison Creek Bay appears on the USGS 7.5-minute series quadrangle map
"Autryville," a portion of which is presented as Figure 11 of this report. The bay is bounded by
Secondary Road 1002 on the southwest, Secondary Route #2041 on the southeast and NC
Highway 210 on the north.
The project site is a subset of Harrison Creek Bay. Approximate project site boundaries are
presented on Figure 11.
2.2 Project Description
Ditch filling on the site is being performed to reestablish wetland hydrology. A portion of
Harrison Creek Bay is being modified to restore wetlands hydrology in previously drained
cultivated and forested land. Modification of the site will include the filling of existing ditches
within the project site boundaries presented on Figures 4 and 11.
Proposed ditch filling will redirect surface water runoff from a ditch and canal system that
originates near the southeast comer of the site, runs through the central portion of the site, then
along the northern boundary to the western end of the site, then into a larger canal system to the
west that leads to Harrison Creek just upstream of Secondary Road 1002. Surface flow from the
site after ditch filling will enter the historic upper reaches of Harrison Creek. Figures 1 and 2
present a graphical depiction of the proposed diversion.
The northwest to southeast trending ditch (Channel 2 on Figures 1,2, and 3) leading from the
southeast edge of Harrison Creek Bay will be filled to approximately Elevation 114.5 on the
project site. All other ditches will be filled completely.
Off-site effects of ditch filling were evaluated for two specific areas of concern. The first area of
concern is the off-site property located adjacent to the southeast end of the site, including
Secondary Road 2041, St. John's Church, and adjacent residences. The second area of concern is
the agricultural road crossing over the historic upper reach of Harrison Creek on Kirby Pugh's
property. These areas are shown on Figures 1,2,3, and 11.
-4-
2.3 Survey Data
ESI provided us with an aerial topographic map, on-site bench marks near proposed cross-section
locations, and cross-sections of ditches within the site. We performed limited engineering cross-
section surveys of ditches and the historic stream channel of Harrison Creek from on-site
benchmarks. Other cross-section data used in our analysis was based on available mapping. In
many cases, the surveyed cross-sections were extended using data from the aerial map and from
the USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map "Autryville." Locations of cross-sections used in our
analyses of proposed conditions are presented on Figure 3.
2.4 Local Experience
During our site reconnaissance, we interviewed local residents about historic drainage patterns
and flooding. Flooding of structures was not reported to have occurred although overbank
flooding of ditches was described as frequent (one or more times per year) in the area surrounding
St. John's Church near cross-section X1 (see Figure 3 and 11). Historically, a small area
northwest of Secondary Road 2041 was reported to have drained and may still partially drain
under Secondary Road 2041 into a canal and bay system leading to Turnbull Creek. The
agricultural road, near cross-section X23, is also reported to be frequently overtopped (see Figure
3 and 11).
-5-
3.0 FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSES
A regional flood frequency analysis was conducted because stream flow data from Harrison Creek
is not available. This analysis was conducted to develop peak flows for of 2-, 10- , 50-, and 100-
year flood flows in and around the project site. A summary of these analyses is presented in this
section. Detailed information on flood frequency analysis is presented in Appendix A of this
report. To prevent repetition, the interested reader is referred to this Appendix for more detailed
information.
3.1 Similar Gaged Streams
We gathered stream flow and watershed area data for the nine hydrologically similar streams and
watersheds in southeastern North Carolina listed below. The locations of these in relation to the
Barra Farms project site are shown on Figure 12.
1. Browns Creek near Elizabethtown
2. Big Swamp near Roseboro
3. Buckhead Creek near Owens
4. Hood Creek near Leland
5. Mill Branch near Tabor City
6. Reese Creek near Fayetteville
7. Tenmile Swamp near Lumberton
8. Turnbull Creek near Elizabethtown
9. Wet Ash Swamp near Ash
The above watersheds range in size from 2.62 to 60.10 square miles with a median of 16.00
square miles and a mean of 19.38 square miles. Project site watersheds analyzed as part of this
project range from 0.18 to 10.72 square miles in area. The selected gaged watersheds are
considered reasonable for use in predicting flood flows in and around the project site because the
gaged watersheds are similar in terms of location, size, slope, land use, and geology to the project
site watersheds.
3.2 Statistical Analysis
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Frequency Analysis (HEC-FFA) program was used to
statistically determine the peak discharges of the selected watersheds for several return periods of
interest. This program uses the Log Pearson III distribution with regional skew correction to
estimate flood flows for a range of exceedence probabilities. Each set of stream gage data was
entered into the HEC-FFA program with the same regional skew coefficient of 0.25. The regional
skew coefficient varies significantly over this area of North Carolina and would be different for
each of the watersheds. However, for this analysis, the regional skew coefficient was selected
based on the location of the project site. HEC-FFA program output is presented in Appendix A.
-6-
3.3 Regional Curves
From the peak discharges estimated for each gaged watershed by the HEC-FFA program, we
determined the specific discharge in cubic feet per second per square mile (cfs/mil) for each return
period of interest. These were plotted against watershed area on a log-log scale, with a separate
plot for each return period. An upper bound envelope was established and used to interpolate and
extrapolate the specific discharge of watersheds within and around the project site. Extrapolation
of peak discharge was limited to watersheds of about 1/10 of a square mile or more. The regional
curves are presented in Appendix A.
-7-
4.0 WATER SURFACE PROFILE ANALYSIS
Several computer models were developed to describe existing and post-construction conditions
and to quantify the effects of filling in the ditches. Results of our water surface profile analysis
are presented in Appendix B of this report. To prevent repetition, the interested reader is referred
there for more detailed information.
4.1 HEC-RAS Model Development
Two HEC-RAS models were constructed to evaluate migration of water from the site to Harrison
Creek. The first model was developed for existing conditions, the second for revised conditions.
Flow data was obtained from the flood frequency analysis previously discussed for the 2-, 10- and
return periods. Schematics of these two models are shown in Figures1 and 2. Manning's n-values
for channel and overbank flow were selected based on site observations and standard references.
Values were selected toward the lower end of the probable range due to the shallow -slopes and
resulting lower velocities expected in this system.
4.2 HEC-1 Model Development
We also developed two synthetic hydrologic and storage distributed element models using the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Hydrograph Package computer program HEC-1. These
models are graphically depicted in Figures 1 and 2. A hydrologic analysis of the Harrison Creek
watershed was conducted, including delineation of the watershed from USGS maps, soil type
mapping from SCS soil survey data, land use estimation, stream channel and cross-section sizing
and evaluation, rainfall depth duration frequency estimation, stage-storage approximation and
stage-discharge approximation, to develop a computer models of the watershed in the HEC-1
computer program. Sub-watersheds ranged in size from 0.1 square miles to almost 11 square
miles. Evaluation of site soils and coverage yielded a weighted SCS Curve Number range of 74 to
90 for the sub-watershed in and around the site. Individual sections of stream channel ranged
from 1,300 to 10,200 feet in length.
Two HEC-1 input files were constructed to model the watershed based on Snyder's unit
hydrograph method. The first model was developed for existing conditions (before ditches are
filled), the second model was developed for revised conditions (after ditches are filled). These
models required input of entrance location and flow direction, channel length, slope and cross-
section data, culvert and roadway elevation data as well as sub-basin drainage areas and SCS
curve numbers. Rainfall data for the 2-, 10- and 100-year design rainfall events were used in the
form of Depth Duration and Frequency ( DDF) values, derived from NOAA HYDRO-35 and
NWS TP40 to approximate results of precipitation on the watershed.
-8-
4.3 Model Selection
The HEC-1 models produced results sufficiently similar to our HEC-RAS models that all future
analysis was conducted using the simpler HEC-RAS model. Based on this finding, we conclude
that storage effects within the bay system watersheds are adequately represented by the flood
frequency analysis curves developed from similar watersheds.
4.4 Results
Based on the above evaluation, the HEC-RAS models were used to estimate water surface
profiles for selected return periods of 2-, 10-, and 100-years. The results of our analyses are
presented as water surface profiles on Figures 8,9, and 10 and in the following Tables 1 through 3.
The apparent anomaly in the tabulated data at X5 (Figure 3) probably results from the existing
condition model forcing all flow through the existing channels, when overtopping and diversion
would probably occur. Such flow-dependent diversion would be difficult to model. Also the
revised site conditions, including a new swale toward the upper reaches of Harrison Creek (area of
X102, Figure 3) does increase channel capacity in the area of X5 (Figure 3). Conclusions based
on these results are presented in the next section of this report
Table 1- 2-Year Storm Water Surface Elevations
Location Existing Conditions Revised Conditions
Cross-Section X1 118.36 118.40
Cross-Section X2 118.36 118.40
Cross-Section X5 118.04 116.74
Agricultural Road 114.20 115.38
S.R #1002 108.57 108.49
-9-
Table 2 -10-Year Storm Water Surface Elevations
Location Existing Conditions Revised Conditions
Cross-Section X1 119.02 119.22
Cross-Section X2 119.02 119.21
Cross-Section X5 118.72 117.10
Agricultural Road 114.50 115.70
S.R #1002 110.62 110.42
Table 3 -100 -Year Storm Water Surface Elevations
Location Existing Conditions Revised Conditions
Cross-Section XI 120.26 120.02
Cross-Section X2 120.26 120.02
Cross-Section X5 119.99 118.23
Agricultural Road 115.65 116.31
S.R #1002 114.79 114.79
-10-
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on our analyses, we have drawn conclusions about the effect of ditch filling within the
project site. Specific areas of concern are addressed and recommendations for site modifications
and monitoring are presented.
5.1 Flood Storage
Generally, watersheds similar to those found on this site will exhibit significant storage effect
along channels and in depressions. The effect of storage on runoff is offset by the increased
runoff potential from the large inundated areas. Also, for a significant portion of the year,
depressions may be filled with water before the onset of a rainfall event. Based on the evaluation
and on the similarity between our hydraulic model (HEC-RAS) and synthetic hydrologic and
storage model (HEC-1), we conclude that storage effects within these Carolina Bay system
watersheds are adequately represented by the flood frequency analysis curves developed from
similar watersheds.
5.2 Church and SR 2041 Area
The direction of flow of some channels could not be readily discerned from survey data alone. It
is possible that one channel paralleling Secondary Road 2041 could flow in either direction
depending upon ditch and culvert condition and surface water loading. Currently, ditch and
culvert conditions appear to favor flow into the site and Harrison Creek for all areas northwest of
the Secondary Road 2041 culvert.
Our analysis indicates that completely filling the southeast to northwest trending ditch (Channel 2
on Figures 1-3) up to the southeastern boundary of Harrison Creek Bay could increase flood levels
adjacent to the southeast end of the site, including Secondary Road 2041, St. John's Church, and
adjacent residences. Filling of the southeast to northwest trending ditch (Channel 2 on Figures 1-
3) to approximately El. 114.5 and creating a similar shallow swale to the historic upper reaches of
Harrison Creek in the vicinity of X5 to X102 (Figure 3) probably will not significantly increase
flood elevations adjacent to the southeast end of the site, including Secondary Road 2041, St.
John's Church, and adjacent residences. The forest land between the site and the southeast rim of
Harrison Creek Bay (upstream of X-4, Figure 3) will experience increased flooding potential from
any filling of the southeast to northwest trending ditch.
5.3 Agricultural Road
After ditch filling, the agricultural road crossing over the historic upper reach of Harrison Creek
on Kirby Pugh's property will experience increased flooding over current conditions, but not over
historic conditions (before ditch and canal construction). Flooding at this road crossing is likely
to remain lower than historical flooding because a significant portion of the watershed once
draining to this site is still diverted into the western canal system. We have developed a
-11-
recommended roadway section and replacement culverts to permit use of this road by agricultural
equipment under most conditions (See Figures 5, 6, and 7). Overtopping of the recommended
road section will likely occur on average once every two years. The recommended road section
surfacing and erosion protection was developed to be stable in the 10-year event with only surface
maintenance.
5.4 Rainfall and Stream Flow Gaging
We recommend installation of stream flow and rainfall recording gages so that any future analysis
of this site can be correlated to actual site data. Continuous hourly monitoring of water level and
rainfall at several points within the site would aid in future modeling of surface water flows in and
around the project site.
1
Drainage Area /1
0.18 sq. mi.
Drainage Area /2
1.29 sq. mi.
Drainage Area 13
0.49 sq. mi.
Junction
O X2
Channel 1
1300 ft.
Channel 2
6500 ft.
Drainage Area /78
3.14 sq. mi.
Drains
4.16 ;
Cross-Section
/ X
Junction
0 :g
/6
R.
1002
Environmental Services, Inc. Barra Forms Flood Study
Raleigh, North Carolina Cumberland County
EDDY ENGINEERING, P.C. North Carolina
PA. am 11w euaexr, it seer (as) se-10 va (at she-tee Project No. 97056
i:.
EXISTING CONDITION
FLOW DIAGRAM
December 1997 Figure 1
Drainage Area /1
0.18 sq. mi.
Cross-Section
X5
Channel 1
,300 (,.
Junction
O X2
Drainage Area /7A
4.16 sq. mi.
Drainage Area /78
3.14 sq. mi.
?Channel 3A
00 ft.

Drainage Area 13
0.49 sq. mi.
Chonn4, 2
6s00 ft.
Drainage Area /4
0.50 sq. mi.
Agricultural
,ZRocd
Drainage Area j5
0.79 sq. mi.
Channel 5
5400 ft.
Drainage Area /6
0.17 sq. mi.
S. R.
X1002
Environmental Services, Inc. Barra Farms Flood Study REVISED CONDITION
Raleigh, North Carolina Cumberland County
North Carolina FLOW DIAGRAM
O 'EDDY ENGINEERING, P.C.
ii I PA.0SW UM NC = (NOsi IN M"518-10 Project No. 97056 December 1997 Figure 2
Drainage Area 02
1.29 sq. mi.
Cross-Section X23
(Agricultural Road)
Cross-Section X25
(near S.R. #1002)
Cross-Section
X104
Cross-Section
X102
Cross-Section
X5
Cross-Section
X4
Channel 2
Cross-Section X2
g Cross-Section X1
gl (near S.R. #2041)

\--Cross-Section
X3
1000 0 ,000
SCALE: 1/2 in. = 1000 ft.
ST. JOHN'S
CHURCH
Environmental Services, Inc. Barra Farms Flood Study
Raleigh, North Carolina Cumberland County
North Carolina
EDDY ENGINEERING, P. C.
PA. M &W omit in Mow= W (NO 51 IM Project No. 97056
MODELING
CROSS-SECTIONS
December 1997 Figure 3
Environmental Services, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina
A EDDY ENGINEERING, P.C.
M OR OW iA= R V= ISM slb-UQ M (an 0-103
Barra Forms Flood Study
Cumberland County
North Carolina
Project No. 97056
SITE
SCHEMATIC
December 1997 Figure 4
LO
w L.
a
LLJ :3
Qf 39:
O
'
W
Q: U-
LL.
>
N w
Z I-
0? I-
ZON O Z
3 Z n
?-

NW U

NW Q ? ?-
=
O O 0 rn

o rn
Q
0 W Q(r x U 3 w L
~v
W H

O ZY

V > W
J
0
a
= 0 W (n
W
0 Z O
U
n 0
0c ZZ
Gi W: 1--
cn N O
Q
O Nwm v

N Z O (n
LO
cO iD
U c O
7 O
0 O .C r
O
0-5 0
> 0
L
w m c U Z
I- E L- s ?.
w Win`
E Z O
U
?U a
0
m
w
Q
U
O LO (V c O Q"' a
N 0 c a
-
H U)
5
O U
`
Z O
ch w
-5°
z

Em
w
c

J O o
=
Q > w
c
4
`'' w
-1
0 2
3

W
z
Y U) V)
<I- w
OU
Q
2

~ >Z
W
Z
? cn 0 O D U
Lj L)
O V) I
Q W U-)

Wom Sao
Q Q
N
2 M

V) `°
° -tc) L)

N -

I.i r-
J
W
6mpTl&jjd+/s6v-oq/gW/!ow-L6 :-pi
J (D

F- ?

i X
~ j
O)
O
LLJ W L?
C? >

Z W
Z 0)
W O rn
W O >
O O r-
U U
W JQ
n Z p n
j
. a .
J W . O -J
O 0
Z cD E
0 Z^ W X U
Z= F-?
O pZ
O
N
J
z0 Y OW
O = Z N c LO
0
W ~ p C O
07
101
O) cn 0
6
Q
(n L
U
Z m

Oa U)
O
Z
-
?.

U N iD C) -0
L? E Z O
p
o
a) o
LU a
v
o
0

> _
N cn
a) c

LLJ m
4-
Q U
I
a) U)
'
V) o
C s
Q
v v
?2 N o ?7

U p
_ n
a)v w:
N
U) w --
v v
O
5 O
z
I N-0 o
v Z c
CL ?va) Ev+ w
.
Ui--
cr C
N C O ?
C
0-2
cDW
J 0V)
?
17
M . U _
+ W
°
? ? in ° w
Q) Q C
Q 0 U
u to
ON

V) , 1- to
w W
o
04
d' W Z
e-
W J
W
J
Z

Ow

w
a?
0
wWN= LL-
> LLJ
Of
N
a >
DMZ W Z
O O
U a
O

cr F-Z m `
`
n
WO E
Z
O cn
w
3: o
U
00'_
O 0 W 00 U
O
N
1--
LLJ
I J to
U ? 0
_0 c O
I 0_ OU•O ?
U c0
N
0 Z
' co E Z r
00

M j- CD
0-0
u-
E z
0
Lo U
` a
v
m
w
J

LO N C O ?~

•- CN
O
C
• r
_ s
to
o C s

O
Z `U ?o
a)
w
.5 0
Z

E?
•
w
?
°=
;Of
W ca
L
w

O W Y
Q Z U
a0=
(n ~
O 2 a>
F- o°' w 0
o N
no a o
wU (?Jw ?
J Z of l< C0 a
? 0 N F-- W LL. z
O U)
O -J =
W O
N U
W Cr
O U

? X
W
Q Q
Q
V) Of
N
g
U
WW*Zsbjjdj/WW.-W9W/lojd-LG mu
00

a?
N w
J LL.
:) 0
N Q
W

(3)
(n (n 01

U U
W Z

E
N V
X ?
p
W
v ?
c LO
0 O
c
p u p ?

NccU Z
0
s
N
cz o
C U d
O
m

1
1 C 0 Qr
8 c
o

I U O ~ -"
ffi L- U ' a
\ (nom w
0
?z z

. E -C
c w
? o
o
c Q ?
? =
w

? O 1l9
O O N
C
(U) UODUAGS
I I ; I ;
d
p'
e ?O Odd rO IN N??TN
iu?i

I 3 ?w

I 3 ;? Iw

1
I
3 ?? ;v
to
N Q)
? O
V) J LLJ
?
?
D ILL. J
li
O
V) Of
m

rn
v) vi
of

1 Z n
_ m

??IWD

W

v x (?

W
Q
w ,
,

a
?. to
N
c to
O O
D O .C (-
U
O
O
U o
a O Z
$ a L- t
?' O L- U
E ?• l0 .O p p
E Z O
y
V
' =1 L.
U Q
o 0
m
U E
\
?.
c
\\\ N ..
c

\ 1
\ \\

`
w
V) a
L
w
?
l
\ \ '. L
v p
Z
m I \ \ C

\
O
00

\
\
p
LL)

6
C C?
(u) uop-s
I
I W
I I
W I
} ? I
? I } ?}
?
O
}a dd
O??
?fO IN
N???N
I
p

I

I

I
? I

, r-
w
0
w
J
F- LL.
J o

W?
L6
V) 3 rn
o
i
U V)
i
E
w
U
U

L/) LO
O
C
0 U
O
c
M 0 Z
?
0
c -c

EZ 0

a L.
U a.
0
m
? I
E
b
"a ig
?8
a

v

S 0
c

C.7
cn
0
o >
a
V) w
? w
r °z0
c
E
c
0 0
?
>w Q
c
W
~ a
\

Uot:a-cov C)t?occo- \ ? -a _

? N
?
?-
? C
r
p In
G
(3)) Uopene13
.I I ? I
13 31 ? I ,
d d T' IN N?? iN
W w
3
3 ?U I
w
3 ,r,?
?
I
I I
I ? I
U ?
+? o
Q LL.
U ?
O cn Z °'
O
a?
O
00 p rn
NCU O Z
E Z 0
L
°? a
0
m
E
C
U p
•? U ? a
(N w E
w
0
oZ ??
c
w
C •?
O 0
W
w=
I
ra) i ej".,
all I
-a--, N N r
U
•? E
Q I -_?k
j
.I

O I ?
1 ?
?' eel
?d A
O I .??E:?
G°
I \

U ? i
O o

`?? •r• o O/O , t,

?
i O

I J

9071. yL,rf'"j,:dl: SMwe.we-? t ?'?--
t ' Y•nC .` lo){.s. 1. Ceoe• ' ••?:aYrr.y i 1 ,-..
% 4ti' +, , ` 1 077. L. /..
1 : 1 E (? `F'-•- •.`K••w•r •\ ( 1077.7{
loasf j3 , ?at1 ed?1• r J 1? ettev le
Y
bfl s 11. Reese Cr. ( 1 1 Be`e'n'
• N}M.
Buckhead Cr. ?. V. ?? Big Swamp --..M 4;--'o' J`
,• r na?Y F` •J1SteerMO. rLUM.w!!?_.J 4- _ r
a
T
`s
°
n
a
2
n
0
I`
Rwle.s ` >,to tlsn t ... ! - ?? fCJ S L ' 1 enlex
/ Aa,f... Ned. YBI. ."C'
`? r{WYu
a5 t ?i tn6y ?! r
?I1{.1 •e• 1).LLI/.. ?ie c CeefldNe ? 1l+ Ro f°'° ? ? '? ? ?A•' u?.
ij)f.7t. )? Ouws?r•ao. ,W9A '• 10 q i
91142.91,411 1 t.l7 / ` f?•. It SITE
•eh , 1 ???'" Y•{we11•
743. 2\2-t
Ir t.-303 30
r?or?/// 9? ?r./• ?' C IN/.0 • //
j sm. / 0.1.1•n ` • '?.•. ! r ,p..?.rM•m T s? ( eyMl ~
?'w /u , S.? .).?{7 V•_ / P. ToMnw ry ? \! • = M ? 1 +
Y \_ 11•wn.rt ). y1• /. Sol, JIr11 INnpew `.
0.1 N•M? W.1• ` M
:I eu11iI3gA194p? pi?• : _ J L +`N7 •.. ?/ 1063 t . 10 0
Oak
t.l:. y-. dole 04.•, •: ytfr al sto• et.,. Cr 11e
,oi . 4418 !Tenmile Swamp w... ? b.l.t r
%
1 sas.N i, ; os:. ITumbull Cr. SYnly?%?
ok. Nock 41WO
t?' , 1 Ousxn yL.Y???.,,, c.1
+• • C?a •? L a. ,\v os•ot; ?' ?'q_ ?. ?J'. Lis loal?l ~
_..E h[a.w el)
c.e mber3ert
a a Rxf•?,?? hu
syf{: '[LYw.e.rtan N\ Mn ,• _ 1.3
?, Il,i'' , •L 4n L.1t ???lll
No 2 Browns Cr. C ' 1 for .{ w
Z.Lf MCC old '•` ".:Jf 4• ?)]a..fl "Iy 10 • s ?,
_ ^l - IM t`a Jr. Yfi•. oa•o .0{7.0{ ?..+.
r s _
1141.33
".\y' T /?f i• ' ?• 1 •?seete.eOli' ` _ ?/y !. , . \ ?•,. R s
}}
4 Callao.
q.l.N'( Pr .11, n 0 0f0 071 S'
m 1? DD n u
g
i of YT 41 13e `? . ?."' . ?..?` \. bx: nNl. ?.?•, ?? ,`?. S l. O ^ L
J'i t) •li. r ? ? ? ?o• 1°57.7. •\' /
J^,•1,.: ' euwecl ' \ • .un
``tN)!??, } ' _ -
.•Iisl.Y
Wt.LaV W
\?10N.{ % w-•.
I)1{.31? ^{. w f? IS.l.olr •• `• •1 ` Lao.
? • ... 1091.20 Vylat{vill9 •eeen,?
` 1?•{.L3 wan /.h 07.9
-
7W C-do h.tlseu•n ...nee .t NNN .fC ?-? IWMe • /
ee?? h
l •ws2.Yi L r •_. • , r ,
?yll.9?LS Br ;.1ee r{ •tu t?\/1 Yn nY•
O L EJ'-?' 101 •• Hood Cr. L.I.n
b1
\.?1•r?lleen. .: (Mill Br. - .'?'°Ef•=- - r _ ?L9nv.
•
` 1097;.
`` ?? t7M0«t e? '%, •?' X108.62 1 10!9.!1 4^• -- ' \? J Cree.
?_??, •Yall.
Stream Guaae Stations
1. Browns Creek ??h•n Wet Ash Swamp
107M •, ,.-
7 Big Swamp ?,LOns•oee: 1 N . '_••
?lrelee JY• _ - lob.ts . e r .
3. Buckhead Creek y '°'"
4. Hood Creek
?? ?'?' Cr^ ••
5. Mill Branch
r . • '' • tx•ea.p s•u7
6. Reese Creek-,.r_ 2•»1 „te
a•.
7. Tenmile Swamp
8. Turnbull Creek
9. Wet Ash Swamp
Environmental Services, Inc. Barra Forms Flood Study FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
Raleigh, North Carolina Cumberland County
EDDY ENGINEERING P.C, North Carolina STREAM GAGES
P-1a&a =t = (NO WIN pt(ngste-ter, Project No. 97056 December 1997 Figure 12
W
Q
a
a
O
v
a
w
w
W
x
W
a

O
N
O
W
.=i
F
N
W
?o
4
p
!v
F
O
m
La]
.a
O
!J
O
W
F
O
e
f")
N
A
? O
Y W
,O J
F 0
N W
F F
a o,
d m
O W
F 4.
C 4Z1
d ?
O
m_
a
F W
W E.
W O
m 3
0
yO O
4
m
b N
P O
1.1 M
4 0
3:3:
N V)
O W
F ?+
F 4
m d'
W
OZ
0
a W O
a
W
Oa
m G
a
m
? y
. 6
2 ?
W E.
W 2
~ O
O ;
W
W
m 0
O
F
w
W
3
3
m
m
a
Z
F .[1 O O O O m .r .-. O. N 01 1.1 r O m
H01 O.P ?••I .•1O Pm?ti?
N
.7 fu N.+.?.-1 m
F OOO
W U ?
Z Z f.>1 F
p? O OOOOOONm PNO [•1 O Z
'

[u 0..7
OOO V.O,.
01 Wo m
r+
m
Z
W am m w
z [•.

V N
.[f m.,r P.O
wObN.y a
W
co > W am
W W M
m V F .i F

N Z a000g
N
°

0

0 S
O F
m 3 a m
°
U t•N ?IT?
?ri. 2t F 7 N m
SS.
M N m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m
U W .•?N 000000 i(10. V

W. ul U V
W
d x
W

N?mQ.A O. .
..
F

S

ml l00
r.•O o o
m PPJI O
E- r N N
16
C.
N
m U
G F

F4 ..7
W
C; 14 r r.D P
00 0 P m.•1N •+
en Jf
00.
3
W p-p?? m
d
d 0
'
mmP N.?. P.a
Q
W KZ C >
Y Y
d w ? I
.l
p m m y
W O
F W a ooooorroooom
Pm O.Or P.D P1•1 .•? m ptp?
d
O
O=. C tr
U rPr 0 i .m•. ..y. .D .•'f .. F a.
i p
H
C7 EW
a•

W
E.
m Z
a W
W V .D
W
Z C7 e
.-IZ Fm
Vw WOE
zaW
WWa4o
W F ?+
O Z m Z + +
+ +
V a 00 w
0ZZ[...n ++
d W 0 .4 ,
X U a + +
+ +
O U W Q -
U .•. m U`a + +
+ +
VU''
OO •T + 4
++
gJ O m
COe + +
Qa >
p Q ++
+ +

m S + {
? W
S + +
+ +
F + +
+ +
......w. w ++
+ 4
+
C7
O
a + }
+ +
+ +
m
F m
w a a « • O
. Z
3
+ + 7
.
O
P
m O
F + +
+ + m
W
II
m S
F + +
+ + a
D
m N
...n •• N ..7
¢ W
cp
p + +
+ + .]
Q
o

Z61 .rF0 m N V W C. W N ? ++ .+
4 ?? N Z ? m X Z ++ o
„ p 3 3
O O f
.1
O F .+ t
n Q
+ r++
2•• A.0 w [a z U P r m m Q++ N
r 4 W W Z r
• [uOFO rn
r 4. 0 4

W W . a
.. [u
N
Y
W ..
4. II
Q 3
W W O
X m o F
ZO
W F F++

G++ Z

r°+
W p m W>
a WC-0 S S
C 4 3
p O W
a F p
Z N 8 O
t? >
W m ++
F+ t
WQZ
4>p ZZ as
O[,. U WO
Or In C7
W F
Uz 7++
d++ m
O
p C r
08
? W W
.a .7 U
Wp m
Z -0
N N `•I W
F> Z++
++ d
0 Z
a s O
[+ m a0
O 3
O z0
O z0
E. ¢W
Y ++
t. ++ U
z

4. d a

F F
'
W.7
.74.
F
a
m
N
FO
F
555 m([1
W ".fl
Z
m
F.-1
O++
++
z .
,
F.
G
d
Z .
-.
i•

: [
d Y

+? + +

:u
+
O
d
• • • . . . . . . I
•.?
0 FFF
• F F F p
+ .•I m
• O • p
r W + I
4 +
L. n
fu +
.Z.. t
+ d +
+ R O +
+aai++
t 4. +
+0 6 t
+p S0
+ W Z +
.a0 .0 [+f 01 N Nm Pr•.r I•f Of .pN mN.rr P
.7d NNr Ot+f Jf m••I 1•f bm.•. PIO OtNPr
61F of Om.+.O .•. .ONrNre.f mt•fm P01P
.•. '•.N NM t+f PPNN.D V r r mm 0.
W.7
3d
m
z 3 O O O O O N N O m r N r 0 .O O N O N
woo

>.aw
••.•••O2mo P Pl•f
0 WN.O P.DP PN. ... ... .., ..
or.c Pl•f .r...•.
W [uU N

W
a
p
a s d
ow 4 O P N m O r . 0 7
ow r SO0 N0 .O r NCO tO W V tO -?
4iW. 0?O1m T0??•.mmrnmaa+?arn?a+a+

Y
z
.-IN 1'n PN.D r m010.•IN 17 Pt(1 tD ?m
3 NO 1f0; OO UIr C; Or00NO.OO
Om
p .i [..
w [uU 17010 NP.O •+00 P.O .rNPPNQ.P
o .+ ?. 17 P ...+ .•..+ r .+ b
N
N
a
y
4
M.nr m O.O..NNP P.ormm.rN 1'1

m W m N m N N b (O .O t0 t0 b t0 t0 .D (O r r r
- m 0l m Ol 41 01 01 T
m - 01 - m 01 O
Z -
W> .•.N O r1 •Dm OtOr PO. .n
r
?
~
(.? 4 N
N
N
z 17a1or17rvr+..aono+.•n r7 lnv
0
L .r .r
11
X
W
a
N
a
r
F
z
W
a
W
O
N
F Z
E F >d
U) a m
F w
a
w I- o
O
U N
O = 4p
N
W
Q
a
a
O
P4
a
/-
FF.??1
h?•l
t
0-4
W
a

m m O N
m
M

m Ot O
? M
N N
O p
w
f tl tl
a
?
4 Z ? O m f
£? Y W NN
UD = 061
z
Q O ? F 4 .?
.] F m F
W F
GF 3 0 w
7
am W W Ow
ODm
w a H
Z ..?
F m cc0
a
W
0 0 M O
m Z w p
?
4 W
?U+F u z sw
OU, w c NQ
Hof d ?d
S
Q
? ? Vi 4
$y
/Z
t•
'
dQ
W
O F .3 F
Z
..7
f+ H d0' W 14 O Z W d
4U1 m C
0 f O

N 3

; F O

N
.7F
u
U S Z
W
.4

Z

o
f'1
W
Q
Z O
7
trail
F O m O F C
O
O D
yW 3 D O
O
Z
7
C1 m Q W
m D
w
N O O
F/
T 000000C P hN
r Ni(Ir 100.0 mQ1 M Or N
.E
a ? mNNP?O .•? mM H.ti H
NPMN.-i .r
F
o00
U
u z Z?
>
N
Z H W F
'n 0
Z
D N
O O O C ;O C ;O O N r M P M O Z m H
1 .0.3
7. w OOOO?PP.-? O»b0
10 N m m r m 10 r M M N N
0: W C wow
>W m m
U MN.?m PNH m W ..7w Sw
m

E .U• E ..A
rFr??
0 O
Z
0
S
ff
..77
O
m Fm
3 Oo
m S0
U Q S S.OdNN
'j
y
Q
? z Ug N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H
Q HN?(1 N
O ti
w SW
W U U f mT T 01
NY F M 1 0
d x
W N?O c 0
t0 P N OO

N h MmNI?
•
m N
.+
„ y U
W H O O O O O O O r M P M N 3
E.7
H 00 Nr 01P PNm.• r N
NNN.-? •+ O
?
W W
m m
d Q w MNmNNH.y
N y
w C > w w m
Z
d H
U W Y X W
Dmm

D 3
m N
G D .i
W O
F W.] OOOOOOOh OM Ptn
O P N H O m 01 N O? N m M ,7.
?
i C W iC0
Q F W
»w
d? O: br.c O.(1 `?O.ANNHH
Hr i(1 PN.rH I
L
F Dmo F
dHdp
z6
Za

?OIU
? (
.? [
:
q
S V1?C4

O:
W
E
m 2
W
w
W U 10
W
Z C7
E. 0
N
H Z
f?HWO
Z C W
W W =:Q 0
WE-
.
Z II Z H
O H a 1 ++
+ +
U D O b
m Z Z w N + +
++
aWUHh
0 W ++
+ +
U mU mw

U ++
+
+
J+
O .m
O e r +
+
+ +

44 4
D 4 +
+
++

m S + +
+ +
? W + +
S
F +
+ +
+ +

[J + +
p + +
• • a • • d + +
+ +
m U + +
r
r
m + +
+ +
imi ?n .. rMi
m01 W ••
Lu
O D
W ++
++
?
H p £
IH
N
.y
E 9 O
co i.
? ++
Q W
N
wM E E Z m O Y
m e2
? ++
?+
D 33 a Fn • ++
x ?' AA 40i utv a inm a2+'
a
Q W G7Z h
? C q
4
M
3
E +
F++
?w&FO a.

• w06?•^ ••

W W -w i
4
Z w11

Q WWO

Ym0 ZO

W E»
++
9-
mW>
W
C C F O gg
Q 3
O O
d FO
Z mgO
(7 >
W m ++
F++
w W Q Z
> Z Z aO W S C4 O D U'
N E.
H D++
D
h
S w W U 3 H 01 w z++
?
h mr: aOO
0 M°. F-.°. W w++
id iY.
E? El W
F w
m N
a 0 mw
Z H 10 O
N N O++
D++
d d

Ha

FF E+E F

y O W

w? m >

m
Z+
+
i]0

F
O
N
C
Z
w
+
w i
2 +
+ d
+ Z O+
+ ? 0 +
+ O ? +
+ +
+Z O +
+W Z +

a0
.7d 10 NO?U1HrM010NmPOr M01N HmP
h NNOmNM.•a mt0MH0110PHO.h PN
M F P 01 P 01 M m M m N h N h H
H
o m
O
3 W w
lw.
.-.HNNMM PPN N10 t0 h h 01 a\

m
z
0ooooomoooomoMO..omo?n
H
N
w
W Oo0NMOMM.•ah m..PPMm g.h
Nr10N 0, -mm mm M M NN
N
?
t
it
U •
PI
•1 .
D
m
!
W
0 a Y.
W
4 MN H.000001 m PNM.•1.OPr MN
h b 10 h 101D Y1 ?Oh 1D t0101
N 10N1D
4
1
4a. a, o+m mo+mmmrnamrnalmrnmo,rnma
.rHHHH.r H..n ..aH H.r H.r HH.r .•
3
.••INMPN10h m 01 O HNM ? m10h m010

3 Oo 000.0M1 0000.0 O.-l0 m0
O w m
D A m M 0M r m N P r 10 m o m v+ .? M ow o
NMIOrPN
M N M P?l1NM MNM
MH
W W U ?
?
M P
?
Z
4 C N PNhmTO.•a NNPPIO m 010..•, NM
Q
m W ?m of of mo•n 10 10 10 10 10 .vW 10 10 10 1o r r r
01 O1T01 C1Nrn01 01 01 01 01 0f 01010101 T am
Z N .•..?HHw.?.v ..r H.r ..?.-?H.r H.?HHHH
hW
a OOmmOONN N OOth NO P1DN P10N
l
Z N.+m•DNP01 N01 .wP0 M 01 Htp HM••P
O
N
? N
Qt
N M
II
O
Y
W
F
F m
m W
W E-
W
>
0
m mcp
O W
F w
N F
[.a7 D
d
On -
m W
I. 2 4
m W F
m F W O
F
W W N [7
F
7 S
W =O 0 H
7 D
O 0 6
1 S m
M
W
Q
a

W r m
b
m r N
01 O
N 111r U1 01 N m Hm
14?r

O 14 .O
N N
N
e
m m m u u
h p
2 W 2 W 33
X O x O W.x
ornm
Pm W W yy
> a ; rOiN
> E.
>
H
4 7
F y F y F Q
10 e r F F F E. W 2
mmm a o a > OW7
[ £
.y .. 94 -3 W ¢0?p1 a h
F m E,• Q ? O
N N O O W O W W
O b

F .
.
W
F .
W a
W
OG a
N
W E-
G
W
o
z m a w a
y a
W
0 G W
0 Q Q
y7 r
W
•0010
e
01
O
O
O QO
y A
•
. y
a +
. y
a z
? ? O
N
y
2 W y
Z W y W
2 S O
W m a i y > .?
> F
W > .?
> 1
t7 > > >
r r r
01
y y
F W
F W O E. W O rzi W ?•
»
y a
O
.
n tyi] a O O f a i] M U S 10.1 f- U
10 y u F w ..7 S .U-. O 10/1 U
N N a
w .7
F Z
O O F
O z
O
O w
3 z
O F w
m Z
W
e a+ .r
= 3 W f.7 N Y tt
t??? LQi.
W y fw
O a m S m to q
g
m G W I
y O O
F O
01 W r W N P 14 D\ W O t O N N
1(1 .y W y•-1 mPmyPmN m
,E
y mmNNN•a .r
y
O O O
.7 W
U H
?
W
2 z >

W t
.1 F
y 0 z
pN 0

lu O.i O W mNme Wyr001N

P m ?1ff W.rmmr 11) P
11
O
E-1
Z m 1-1
W a c [?i7
O W r W NPmNN.? W W.• Wr V
U 0] 7
Z 0
0
F 0
0
H N O 3 a y
W
ZVZ F
Q -; O W Y
2.7Ny
z U a N 1(10 0 0 00000 0 0 y
.yN?OO r
W
a
W
U X o W 010101
F
r
G
.
W ?
,
S N
N00
N N ?f1 1/1 0
41
F O NM N.ti

0 U
W .F+ N N.. P1A m01y N101A 01 3
U 1
'« 1I1 PPm N N.a .y r.ff P N .7
m
d a W C.
W a
z O Q
.
+
W YWY
y
W O 01111414 P.?rN14mr N 7. a W Q
p

» W
mPmmNN.y ..,r ?f Pm
a4
/?S
z
F

u V
U ?
O 4?d1
gp
pq
S U C H
.?
a.w
W
F
y Z
a W
W V 10
W
?
z c?
C7 .+ W Ot
zaW
WWaQo
W F ..
?
-i
WO .Z•y 2.
a i +
i +
7 Q O 0
y z 2 W N
++
aWO.?r
a U .?
OUWQ-
U.?yU`0
++
. O 4• . 01
1 + +
$
a O b y v ++
44 a >
Q 4 i +
. } p
y S i +
+ +

? W + +
+ +
S
H + +
+ +
+ +

aQ i i
+ +
(?
O + +
+ +
a ++
+ +
y U + +

N Z + +
+ +

y + +
++
1
iN ••o
E
N Y L Za
Q Z
3 Q
N ++
W
e
F v 14

V 0 O O . S

3 y i

.7
+ +
++
yy
I( W N L L z G O y x N ZL ++
Wm
i+ O ?CX
V V W
7 W
Z
F N y Q'
• ++
•++
z••••?d Ad «LOj x v1WN 'Q+++
QW W Z r « N. W N 3 E. F++
w W 7 F 0 a1
? W OQ•+ ••
W
W •-• W
y W
a W U
Q
Q W W o
O
x
C Z O
W F
> Q++
Q++
+
aWG Q a F 0 £
T S
4 Q O U Z £
y£ [
.7 y F
+
W WQZ
> Q Z
Z a.i
E. W1
? 00
N F
- O++
r
Q W W V m W Z++
(
(pp?? z?
8C O a.a

D.E. WQ
a S
x
U
zoo
azr
QFW F>
W +++
++
W++
W y a W3 a D
Im N y m O O++
E. C. FW m a° W- F
m ++
0. O. E. W t
i7
N Q
Z + +

y 'Q++
?•• w••?• w O w
F
F F O W
Q +
W .+
W +
Z +
Oa t
Z O +
+ 119 s C N t
+ i
+ Z O +
+ W Z +
.40 M!9 .020 W W..1410 W .+P1D 01re 1001 N er 01 NM1r O
.]0. N1001 •..m.ll ONPr O?.r 1410 W ON1nr 0. .a e10 m.+
M F 14 10 01 .N• b T N J l Q I N N W.•• 1 f 1 W .+ P W• •. O P r O m r
O ^•.+NN N mmmP a PU1Ny 101010 rrr W W W
W 7
30.
N
zm O1 O W 14 0114 P9.4 10.4 1+ O1I JI NO 0011410.+.-. PN
woo r r ~00101 W r r Pm m NN000000010101mr.D •O
W W V N N N N .-1 .-1 .r ti .• .w .•1 ..? .r w .a .y w ..n .r .r
C
W
z as m mb.nm Pr O W TN1p r.rNmN0101 V1 .•1NOOPN m
d OW ? rNryurrlcm r101010ryr 1010 itf 1n 1or W rNr1(I
y a 1+ a W 01 Qt T 01 ? ? 01 01 01 O O. 01 0. at a\ 01 01 D• 01 01 01 01 01 01 01
.••1 N N ...+ ..1 A .-I ..I N .-1 .•1 .-1 ...-1 .y .• rn .•1 .? .-1 .4 w w w
N 3
e
N Z. ?NmPN10r W 01 O.+NmPN10r W 01 O.•INmP1t110 r
G aQ a4 n+•r .y .+.y .r .r .?.•y NNN NNNNN
Q
r
P
. .
3 14010 .+01D W NOr M.-10101N .+N.•1 N..OmrnmP W P
N 02 OOr r O e mlo or 0114 01 m OmNr O W Nmr 0110 .+m
O Q.7 NwN .n ..I .. .n .•?.rw.+ N..1 N.•+
WWU
1 N
2 .F7
O Q7'j..
H Q q' NmP1fl 10 r W 01 O.rN
10 mP P10 10 10r10 m10 10 0110 r 01.8 r N PPP10r
Q N N i(1 N 1n N Yf N N 1D 1O 10 r r r r
0 y W rn01NN010+mmrn mmama110 01m ma+T mg 010f mm010f
d z
t7 7 J+ OOrr010 r1v m0110P W Oy100.+Pm0m0110 .+r W
IZ-1 W G n.l N N r-1 ..1 .? N .t N N .+ .w .• ..I ti N .+
O O mWlnmmrrnWr rlorWmOr0lmWOrm10mN1DW
y
E.
a
N
a
z
W
C7
Q
a
a
O
v
a
Q
w
W
x
L^?^J7
W
a

Qt O m N
N
?

-1
N N

N Q1
O
N
H1 e O
N M
•
4 tl
4 tl
m 3c
Y O Y 0 Y Y
w
W o
4 W N W

> > ON
F ' F F
q' .7
F N
W F N F 4
W
f.
1 F
F Ed
F F W
w
3
m ..4
w W
o O f
d
a
m a m
q a0
O W
w
F
W O
F W 0
Oa4 K
r
..
of F w E. 1
= W
V Z U Z Oww'
d ? d Bpi ZN
0
O O a
[
41 y
•? W •? m m

N
1 m
w F
w
F w F
O
Z w F
m a
[
iz O W w
N 3
N O a
w N
N
(? F
$ N
N E.
.7

0 c O 0 0 m 0 C
?

m S m co 0 fY
FN OOOOOONt•1001'Ib O N
T
•j' Ne•1Tr1Drm0111r 1110
O 11 .w m e .. m e N •-..•1
W
r
U 1"111 N••?.+^. N
F
Z 000
W
Z ?
2 c
.l F
p 11 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 11 r 11 O H
fu 0 .7
'j. CL O r 0 11 m r N N 11 P r m
b.yr N17bmP?1N?
o
a Z W
W a N N w
> W a W
U r1o PI.I N.-. Wm W a?..U
£
N U F ]
F
F 0 0 0 0
w wV m :wn

u Q
z z N 1n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N
a N V
S w
W*
aUX N m 0 0 0
F
11

W nv
iro0
O O r 11 0
4411
F m rf N N O
!• 4• N f

p F N U
W H
F.7 0000000/0 x111 e e
mrmrm11mrlPPmo 0
O
[Uil 0?{y? N
W
G b P rl ? N .•n .r 10 1'1 N .r .•i ?
K
W 0a'Z w Y
3

G. r.
? t
i1
pW WN
DI O 000000010 Nm O P
` y I
w
n r ONr1l1 t
11111 O N
10 MN N..?
.-o z
HOP
' -
rw F
VV 18
' xmuaa
a
a
w
E
W Z
a W
W U b
W
Z t l `o
H Z F 11
(•Jw W01
Z 11 W
P
Wwaa
o
F .
w
N Z •+
C. H
h' I + +
+ +
C7p Ob
N Z 2 G 11 +
++
+
Rag r.
Nr ++
+
OU
U
WUO +
++
((??
r 0 0 .O
++ +
0 0 N
b
> +

+
a +
W S p + +

?w
2 i +
+

+ +
+
F + +
+++

i +
++
W

. w ? w . a
a + +
+ + F
a
W +
+ W
.
i
W +
; +
+ W

a
M
11 N
O + +
+ +
)+rn w•+ zz
4 p T N ++ Z
.•7 .a N L Y yy
F
i+
z00 .rE0 a 7
V O !• Q
.... d 311 7
.
q
4 N 2 w 0 Y4 ++
a. p 00 0 a F
e ++
Z •• 00 d p
a:
R q
U
•1 • Nm +
K
a w .
N 3 F +
F +
t
u F O m Z ?. II ww0 ZO 4++
? ?hd1 O W W> £W£ W `y°m Y FC NymgO >F p+
a a F 0 4 p 0 w z t7 w w F+ +
+
b. wltZ ZZ a.3 w W O a O F ++
>p
O r
WW Ou.
U aG
V p0
m w
N uZ
w LL++
z++
08 0 ?? a0
O 0
0 ZO
2 a?ZO
0 Ft>.7 .
++
W a a W
.7 N r
C N 01 N O++
FF
>> A W
H S FO
a W 1-111
Z FN
W + +
p++
d d
Z
F F
y W
*?
wl Z++
itl
I
-?a E.FF p W p +
+ i
+
r +
Z +
+ 0 +
+ I F +
+ a N +
+ C. i
+0
+ a a +
+ZO+
+wZ
+ + T +

.7 O
=fY 11 OPO1P 01 t'1m 1'1 m Mr Nr Nr.r b.?lp Oill
t.1r Or'1 r OPr..P m.+11mNN m NbNM10
m E P mn1r .+1p0 P 01 Pf r Nb011 01 e•1 m N1D .. ill
w a .r .+ N N f•1 f•1 ? e e 11 11 b 10 10 r r m m 41 Qi
3 fL
W
E.
Z 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 010 P m m m V O ..
W O W
>41, 111 Nb ebPb0lNm NN N Or 1p 10 e 0 11 PP e10
00111 - Om mr b b b 11 N e P NNNN.•.
W tr v N ? ..., ., ....

W
a
w
p
a s Y
O w
Q m 0 D O y r P 0 ff r 0 O M P N N C m
111 r 1(f 10 10 1D 10 .0 0? 1n 10 11) N r r b r 10 10 in vl lD
4
1
¢a. nmm?ma+mmm??rnammm?rnmmm?
.r .•1 .? .r .y .n .. .•1 .r ...r '. .....r w
m
•+N H1e 1110rm010 ti
N e11br m 010 .?N
N
.
i
N N r•I H.•?NNN NNNN
m b00000000b mm.y O C; O b 1 m
ow

p.4 h.
W W U
P P 11 O N 10 m P b 11 P b N b m b P r N e 10 N
NNObb?r..ONNPb.+m.•nN11 01 P11m
N ...+ .. .. ..

?
y
a
0010.•?
N
O.r wt.IP
br
m
w
bw bw bw b
0000000b
b
bb
b r
01 O1m T01 ??01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 (l1TTAtnT
0
i+ .
.1
.. ....-1 .•. .•? ..a n.., ?.., .•y .r .y .-? .....? .....1
w
> >+ 111'1000010 111011110110.-1 t•1m b01 0(•11111
w G
+ .+ .••I N N .-1 .•1 N •+
."N-MN ----
z
N.+011101011+101b n'111 N 010 mr bm00N1"1

Z
0
r
N
F
W
W
F
a
,W..
0
F
N
w
F
a
rwr
.7
O
O
W
C7
Q
a
a
O
V
^O
W
/w
W
I
W
x
A?7
F
W
a

N M N
N M1 O
M N M
• N
N .+
q
n a
Z O 3d?
Y Y Y
W N N
z In
M W
> F 4H
E- 0
F E fi w
a > 00
01..
a 4 a0
O W W O
W a
2 ? ? W
U Z OaWa
W p m 4
O •? m
H ? E _I
m fal N W
F F .Z
F w O Z W Z
tad .mn O S .m-. r.
7 S O O
E. z
O O O W z F
O W W 4 0
0 h W
S m N m 0
F In bd
a
W
N Z
a W
W V ?
W
Z O v
?••? Z F N
lJwWm
Z a W P
W W a Q 0
W F w
U. O ? N Z r
C f
t7p0?
f>N W Z OZ Or
a u0
V Cti(? fnUb
ao?-
e
?o >a
• i. p
N S
O =
F
N N
H N ••N
J .mi S N
W.nEN
fu M
Z •a
+ 4Wlii r
lu p C F 0
m?Waz
p >pr
Z -
8w
r a a
F
a
a
z
C.
uu
V O
4 Y
E E
zz
W7 .Wl
E- E-
0 .0.
E-
0
F N O v M O v 4 N N C 9 m m O
H m
E N O V O M N N O e N .?
.timM1.ORMN••
a ? F O O O
U Z
U 2
H > F

W
p
W
O {
7
F 0 z
Z
N 0
4.Oa O O O O O m m r v v M1 N
mONMmmN•-.OrNM

a N
aHN W
W af
Z •4. ? MMMmNNti
WV V MNH
m n
>
W
j
W
Ew
V N ? ?
r
-i
? F a
F
?U. Z q
aOOO T
N F S 0 0 F
N l7 S a N
w
U 1-
a SS 07N
w
'j.
E- Ca
Z
V
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N
ZQ ~ N N H
a y W
W U U
? - N N m m m m F v M v 0 0
b r N O O
? ? m e N O
M O N .•.
F
N
N
N
7~ ?
N V
N
p
w
f
A
F a 0000 •+mm.n0 b NCO
O.O .pNm NMNM1 CM.a 3
O
W w+y MN.+..?M1 N M.•? ?
[xAOZ >WWM
O ONy Y

W O
O 000 M.o c.rNO b-.
N M ?
7. N
(X W p
4 F Z W
F W a
d a?' M ?O .r ?.mmNNr
N
N.•a .. C?DVM.r aGG
F p ? O ?
uV EaS

4
+ +
+ +
+
+ f
4 t
+ +
+ +
+
f
i

O +
+ +
a +*
a +f
++
++
++
r

F
+
+

U
p +
+ +
z
Q t
d
N ++
O
? • m
,
u 0
N xN y
W y H
G m Q
• ++
• + +
C'
• W G
f
l Cf « W

` [a.. a
Z M
H u Iwo F
ZO F ++
a++
V p y
NG [>
1W F++
p O
0
W Z
Q O i
U
f
j N N r
•w Z++
ag ar MH+ tH toil Q
SW I ++
.Wl [au .E F o 0W WO 0 F .m-. O + +
w F W ! Z + +
+•FFF *7 p N y +
• FFF « • (? « • W +
E-

+ Ir +
t +
+ w ?
+ Z O +
+ z N +
+m.3.
+ +Z O +
+ z +

a O
a d b MmNNm V.-.M1 Mm?DN mN.nM1 v
NNM1 OMN mHM b m ••.P H)mN Qr
21
, NON.+.O .. tONrNrMmMmcmv
0
0
Wa .•.+NNMMCeNN?O?O rr mmm
3 ?.
m
z a .-? N O N O O O N 0 0 0 m N O V 0 0 0
W O N m r M H r N O m N v M N O O r .D a N
m NMMNN N.r •-. .+.+^. .. ••+
W V

K
p
as yf?'

iZ
Ow OmNmCOrN.+.r NOMMNmm
W
?DNmNmM1 NNfor ?0 ?N.D Nwb w
mmmmmmmmmmm?mmmmmm
4i+

y .? NMeN ?Drmm O.•??M vN.Dr m
3 V N N O N N H O< O O O m O O N 0 0
O N
pa h. r m?OHr mN?OO r M N MvN N C'
••? NMNm.. H NMti.y N.+
W f..U

a m m
M N fD r m m O H N M
0 .+
p v tO r

n HI
m 1
r
NNNNN NlDbtO mm
?O b
m
mmmmmmm
mmm202O! M
.
> >+ H?0 mNM1 Or NHMN HH NCO NM
W C .•i N MNHN H N.+ N
M mM?oHMrmM H.00 Mr M vMM
z0
Z
N
M .m•.
N
O
Y
W
> >
E
N W
F F
3
:l m
0 p
O W
fu
E.
U z
w p
o..
a
F
F7 > o
m W W O
Em m m O
raW E O o
a O a
oo
f .] m
W
C7
Q
a
01 O1 01 N
O N O
I+I b n n
n
p U
? O W 13.]
Y W ? t?/1
W ?
O ? OW
F a?
y ? N
a 3 O 14
0 0
W O E.
F m a 0
O W W WO
f L pp[[ C
IZd F W
u Z d W
w o `? ad
d
O N T NN
y faml h W 'i
W E-
W O Z > d
r 3 F r Z
O
O O 3 O F
.7
(m.1 t3+1 f+p7 4
? m am
m 1 m p
a +
W
F
N Z
a W
W U b
W
Z O .O
.•. ZFN
C7 .? W 01
ZaW
WWaao
W F .+
pw ?2~
OOb
b O
Z Z 4 N
4. W Oi-Ir
a U 7
ovWa-.
V 1•.NUb
YOOt .01
JOH`
40 4
•Y p
N S
7 W
F
V) b
.Y7 01 M N
Q? FN
Zm . O
G W N
W N
Y p
_ ..
? a W W Z? r
+ (?..dQO rn
W Tap 1%W>
pa>pZ
80 z-
? G
a
E
d
w
m
1
O
m
0
O
1
a
F v
? Y
C Z
2
m 1
u ?+
0 7
vo
d d
W N
N N
N d
M H
as
E- E-
2 H
.. 0
rn O r
F N
r. O1 ba•? N.•. ?.m O.h h N H
br.A P.nN 1'1 NbP PIN
E
.] ? mrb.n Pr1N.+
H
OOO
U Z
Z Z >7 E.
pN O 000 00
r
0
,
m
V) (D
Z
Z
Z
f..0.] P
N1g
OOOmrNr
n10m
b 0 .
•.
.
W aNb?
ZO L.. Nof N..Or PN.w .w W W H W w U
N Z U F, E.
E. Z 0 0 0 0
In E-= 0
73m
U F S S .7 N y
F W z
Z u g N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N0
0 U
C S W
d u x .
+N?mO?01 O? 1
i
H
M o m o 0
W N O N 1 0
N 1"1 P N N
F

F rn u
p
W .•.
E.7 OOOOOmOt rf r N b.f1
0001 Nhr N h 01h NM 3
O
W A N
x N .y .y O b P fn .+ ?
m
w
d^ O 0 b N Y
p 3
W O
E
A
00 001 NPh i'1 O b.•.N N
z p p 7 h
K,W Q p
. W
D> W 010 PN01P.+h OhbP
b!M
woP . r Q
C
1 QF2 W
p
O O
F
U - Zy
p
O
U p
g
SNUIz

+ +

U + i
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
a Z ++ E.
a ++ a
m W + + A
in a ++ a
Y
2
F
p + +

?t
F t
l
N + +
u
l ? .'? !
. + + fu
Z ? H y Y N ++
d q m to

? W Q
W a
U
+ +
N m + + +

F++
* a Z r 3
W WO F
ZO a++
p 0 w Z Q b g?mry c w N F++

04. a
U W O
Q Q 0
W E
?Z 7++
d++
V
a
W O
o N 4]
F> M++
+
0
O v
i
W Z
O -+ .7 Z0
a Em a
W
S +
4.+ +
Fw a 4o .m•IC N.r

F Z
W
Y p ++
Z + +
FE. E- E- N0 O h y W Q+
? EFF • + U' + + W +
+ +
Gv +
IY +
Z +
+Z 0 ++
i C N +
+ 4..a +
+ O j i
+IZ.3Z +
N
.70
=G. b..r N m1?1 O1P O b.•.h N ml?f 01 P
b..bNh 11m P O N.+bNrt.f mP
mF b.-.bNh 1'1m PON.•.b Nr Mm P
W .07 .•. .+ N N t•f 1?1 P 1n i[I b b r r m m 01
3 W
N
F
2
3
Ob1f10 N O0 ifl Om 11 O Y1 NOOI'1
ON
a
U Q•O?N PbN00. O. rf .?1 .+000r b
b b P1 M N N N .+ .••I .•n ?..-..? w .r
W [
i.

W
O
a
O a a.
w N.y 01r P O Th.-. .O mm t?lNO rf
0b
r 1n 1(f b b bbb b bNbbh N
a N Ot 01 01 O1 O1 01 Qt 01 at T Qt 0+ 01 0? 01 at Oi

7. ..N n'f P Ntp h m TO.n ?F1 v NtOr
3 .'1Oh.A 00 m0 NO b1001(f O N

W O m
fai. U '0m b O POI+I OON 011.10+.-. 01r N
b N .-1 t+1 N .•..•..-. N N .•..+ ...? 1?1
N
;
y
K
1?)Nr m 010 ••.N NPPbr m0.0 ?.

N
W NN.t)Uf 111b b bbb bbb bb r r
0.01 01 01 01 0. 01010101 Ot 01rnmrn m m
E.
Y
.r .r ..l .+ .•.....n .•..-1 .r ....y .-r .+ .-..-1 .•.
Oh
OINP
Nr P
O
W a
p N?
N
to .+NN.+
?
ZO P011+f .1I r 01N N.y POMf m.1m N 1"1
.y .r
Z
01
O r
? m
N
? O
Y
W
Q >
F N
N W
F F
W
W.
E-
=
W
0
[u
E.
w E.
U w
a
V)
a
F W
w E.
M E. w 0 f+b7
N a h S F
W W a
E.
7 =
aW o O o
E. w
O O 2 O
Z m 7
W
Q
a
• O N
O m O
T N I'1
b
II M
? O id w
Y Y Y
W m m
4 > r0. N
> E G w
F m F
m W m
F W O rzd
4a7 0000 m O
a Q a0
O W W O
W a
F W S a
u z Ow
a,
W D m 4
d 2 O
O W UO1
••? m E 1
a
N W N W
F Z .7 I 2 Z
F w O z wa
a m S F m Iz•I
W .+ O .Si .r a
F Z W Z O
O O 3 O F
O O 3 O ?
O Q m Q W
S m I m m
F
a
a
2
W
N
FN
Nn bbmOn Nn110b 0 O m
1.101
'J.' Mb.•Ib 01O mOfNOIn Yl
b N N O f? 1? N^ I.• ?
? W F O O O
W U
z Z W F

2100
0 OO 01N T r mN001 n
O z
z
Z

4.0.7
z . L.
bO1 ON Nn Om01b 1'1 O

10
01 n NON ••? ••? •w •••?
~

a m r
•I
amm W

a
O
U .
•1
m f
il
S lw U
w wf
H F .7 S FQQ
F zz OOOOS
4444
1111
?+ N
N (7 3 C
U
F
SS.O.7NN
N
W ZZ
U Q
y
NI(10000000000
N
Q
K ^NNN O
E V
S W
W U U N
mTQ? 0? n
i
F
-mo.
W x
W O ONO O
n O b 0 O

F t+1N •••NO
m m N I
„ m u
G F
W ?+
Omt•10b NONbN ? O
3
F r 7
W w O N 01 n (? 1 O N t •' f N N O n
w O1n bN OIN
.•.•?.-? !)
m
x
W
m

41CZ y
K
wY Yw
O. Ir
W O

E
4
b.rn bN 01C; 0c;

n

y ON.N7rY

f?f?? W Q C
W
=>W m
m 0 0 N PMYI N1 .gym
rb... N.. .. .., Q F Z W
mC
DOF

V
u F ?
47
w
(
?
O FO
S m U a Q

W
F
mz
a W
W U b
W
?
Z 0
+ Z F V 1
0 Wa
Z a W
WW=

W I
E-
04
NCZ.- + +
+ +
O O O b
mz Z4. 1n
+ +
a W O I
OUrU.1Q-• + +
+ +
U m U b
O + +
+ +
?w (] O1 . m
g`? 7 0 m -

L O b w +
+ +
+
+ +
a >
in a ++
++
N S + +
+
+
? W +
+
S
F + +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+
C7
O +
+
+
a +
+

m + +
N F + +
wN .N•1 uu ? rai] m ++
>Im
Z
N V O y
y
Q z
«
r
F
?
?
O
.7
a
3
N ,l,77 ++
++
y
7.m.+
O
q W N .
i .
.I U
Z Z r
d
O r
d
Y Q
Z ++
WH EE
C ? N 6 ++
Y
O
u C C, z E.. • • W •++
.. if.
Z
+ Q W Wz n Y u •
W
. a

Ou b
U

m

3
to m
F
4 + +
F++
?4WiOQ? 01
W m m W> ??
$ T V4.
3
3 a
F G WWO
N T O (z E. 0
` Q++
O*+
a a F 0 QQ 44 G O m Z O ?
W N F++
rr W4Z
> 4 ZZ as
4.
O
W WO
m G(7
W F
N z ++
W++
O n
So W W U
s° ..7 1.1
M N W M++
+

7a O
44 o
O z
Oy z0
Fm w ++
4++
4. rL a
FF
7 Wa
.74.
F W
F N
EO
Q mr1
w 2M
z Wm
F-
m o++
+ +
O++
h01
w
: F
:d W. >.
0 z++
wd

• • • • . w • w • O
O FE.F
• F E. E. m
• 1-I . m
. 0 w
. ? +
. W +
F
0
a
Q
W
+ r
4
++
r
4. +
z+
a +
z 0+
+'avE-i+
+W.3+
+o
+o r
+ w z +

.70
=0. br101N N m O..n n1 OIbN mN..n O
N10n O t•1N m.+e?tb mAOb OIN vn
m F 100Y1 .•I 10 r• b Nn Nr 1'1m M1m 0010
x.07 .•I .rN Nt•11+1 PONNbbn nm m01
3 0.
N
zrd 3 0000 Nm O m 010 mf•'11(INONN..
?
O
M
0
W .741
w u POP 017N N
N N Nr•10 •. ?r•?..
N

w
w
O
a t+1 c
01
It
m
.rb
01 .n
mONN
O ra
IFt >W. .0
0
. n
b
I (1bI! 1
b. bb b n N n? On J t N 1 O
10
rnmmo+mrnrna+m a+rnmrnrnrnolrnm

x
.T.I
.•I Nr'f ONbnm01????????Op
3
ON 10 . . . . r •. N O N O m 0 . . . . . .
101'101101001 m N.+mON n.-Im.•Im..
0 aU .•IN ••I NN •r 01+1ONON.-1 .•N.-10
1N?
q
z
P, 1 V Obn m010 .+N O1
1D b bbbbbbl0n nrn
000010
mrnwma+a+o+olm o+mmarnmamm
F
z „ .. ... . . ........ .
.. rnn bn
Of ON
N N O.rn
W Q
m N
N N NN
z n 01 10 t1 .••I t1 N .• .+ O l7 O1 .•+ 1.1 f7 N .. N
0
Z "
01
? O
Y
W
=7 Q
F N
m W
F F
3
tad a
a m
m
O W
F L
w F
a 4zi
? o
•O.I
a
N rW1
F
m W W O
N F m $
F m ~ .07
W. 7 z O
N E. O
a o m
0 o a
I .7 m
00
W
C7
d
a
E-
LaL
l?
O
v
1:4
a
rT?
1?1
W
x
11?? 1
a

M O N
t0
17
•
N
N
r 10 O
M f?l
u
u u
Z W 3 3
_
Y O W W
Y Y
W O N N

> FN

H F Q .QQ7
N
W C
F 3 O W
E.2 07 a l7
m C O
W
O W O
Z •+ yy
Q W
U Z d
W

W
O p
a?
to 6
a
o ?
a
-, V y
S 4
y
E N W
zZ
N a

W >
W '
O O
N
W d
F a1 3 F a .z•. F
4a7 .4 127 ... C

.4
Z
O
W O
z n
W
E. 0 3 O F W

O v fY/1 W
a 4
m I Q
mo m
m O 0
FN
•+O1 0000000/0 .+NNe
r N •+.ff 10 N.r t+l lW .rmN

? e t•. NN •?.••? F 000
W U W
5 z >
W F
W
O 3
4 N O z
E. Z W
ul0
Z 0 a
Z u 000000 0 1+1 mTV1W
0 0 0 01 10 ct .•. V V .G N 1W
b.r?O f'fbNb1.1N N.? O

a z N .-.>
MOW
N
O
U N NmIN.+

m W
m W rW. ?
a $
UFa F
0
0
F 0
0
S
? N
U' 3 a N
U 4 SS.O.INN
yz
Q
W VV Nilf 0000000000 m
.,
UKW .+N000000N O+ U
W U)
W V U
NNm01T Qt
F
r NNOO
d x
W Y m m 0 0
01 000

F
N r 1' 1 O 1 N? O

r N N
I
W U
DE
W 4
Fa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m N O N V
00t+1N Om lOV mOW1 3
O
V.m.
d
y ... .r Plo^ovNn. ..
r N a
fa.
Ql
.
x N.. 3
3
1 0Z
4 2
m .7 1
.13
> f
W x x W
G 10.
O N m N
0 3
W O
O O O O O O N m O m N m N

? c c a

q' W Q p
Q
'> 4.
d
a o+r 011/1N if101 TN.a .. .+
011G C1•1N.•? G O O
F
5
.

g
=
O
U (
? o
f/
1?
G

U O
a SOGQ
a
W
F
N Z
a W
W U b
W
Z , d
••? 2FN
Z
WG W
W Id
a Q0
W F +
S. M N Z
G' 1 + +
« }
w z Z N } +
0. W 0 .?-.1.r
U ++
104v t
i16-
Q - W u n ++
+ +
(?
>. O 01 .01 +
+ +
?OIW .y. V i T
G4GGG c a '+
2 +
N +
} i
W
? + +
S
I. + +

+ +
+ +
E
a + +
+ +
O
m + +
++ N
K 3 + + F
.w... o o
F ++
+ + a
O
m S
F ++
+ + m
W 0
M
m W + + WW Q
'1 r
??
Q mmQ
N O ++ a O
HN ••1
•
m.n F? 10
•0 O !.
U
y O
Z W 3N
r4 .7
Q ++
+ +
4. 1+. N C C W q
47 .0-1 O V1 y
Q ++ O

u :D
0 Z F I +
m w + +
++
y. q
+ QWWZ r I . 4
1
a s Y
W MO
In .
3 m
F. Q
F++ N
Z
• 4.' F O Ot •• •• W W fu II W W O z O , O
•h. OIQw
(
0mW> WW
yy££ m a

u Q

FD YmO

o
10 WF

> O++

i+
a7
C mF0 K4 a o
00 z W WM F++
W W R Z
K>G Z Z WA
04. a
A W O
a 0
W F
Nz '++
W.++ W
O
G
g 5'
3.4
W W U
W pO
a '
ZmZ 10
In
O N W
F > N++
+ + a
.aa `?
W G 14 h. 4. g
W a a O.
+
N ?Fm
aaaS wW
m C
O++
FF
M :D a W
F F F O
F W .i
Z F..
N ++
+ F

M F n
.
F
N 4
7
O !
.
N +
Z
W + O
.•7

w• a w+••+• '
0 r F F F
+ F E. E. w D
w N
• U
w • O+
w 14 + d
1
a+
u +
m.
z«
+ G +
+ Z O *
+ C y +
+ L ..A +
+ O
+ZO+
W z +
« + + +

.40
?a 0000000000000000000
0000000000000000000
2E-
!f ?NONOil1 Oh O1/1 ONONO N Oln
0

3
.-. N N I'1 M V V 1(1 b lW r r m m O. T
0.
F
Z 3 0000000000 O T Ob0 N.J•. .e7O
W o o
>a U. 0100 N1000 NT m.•10 m0 W 0 a.••.m

Nr10 .+01r tONCnf'n1 t•1NNNNNN..
WWU n.+.. .r
O
a
6
7
a m 6,
O W ^ W N V 00 00 m<r r m W N W
NlWrr.D tW 1(110bN1010NN10101f110
m
?
ar o.mmmmrnmmo+rnolmaa+alrnolm

Y
7. ••. NI"I V N.Orm Ot O.-. N I'1 V N.O r m0.
3 ON OOO1D 0001 N O 000.!100 00
ON
A a W O.. 1W m.am NN O O1mNmPT 010 N
NNrNI'.NN101.'1NN M10 .wN V r 01 .-.

011+1 NformTO.-1 N 1.'1 V V V r
O••.

F W W
N N 1n N N N 10 t0 b lO t0 10 .D t0 1D 1o r r
-a0 aa? a-- -
a
-
O-
a
-
?
O
>•
Z .•.
.•..
•1 .
----- .•n.•.r..n.•.
.n
.n
-1
i .
.a
a. '. vlr r..r m.. ?.-,or1WONlo .nv
W C N N NN N.. ?.NN
Z .. 1+1m N10 .. rrr V rl ^.N ?.-i 0\.+1t1 ml'1
O
b b
? N
N .•1
II
Z Q
x W
F
F N
N W
W F
F
W
W 0
a
O W
F .Wr
W F
W D
d
? N
N m
I E. Z ..1
0 E. W O
m m a+l S
W H O
F
a s
4a1 a 0 0
a 0 O
E. D3
O O 6
S m
W
C7
Q
a
I?
a
O
V
a
w
w
U
W
x
X
W
a

Jl
M
I'1
O
M1 N N
r O
N N
N N
q
M II
Z W 3 3
_
Y ° Y Y
W m 41
m
4
> Z O
? N
F 4a
E.

N m

W
?C
E.
N G'
F F W Z
a > Ow
W ¢Oa1 aO fr
.7 4 a O
0
° O
w Wa

E
W W Ci
C

V
? Z
C dW
m Y.
d Z 4d
4
O m
N Z y
m
F W m W
F S
N W F W F
F w O z w

a
S
E. Z y
t
il .•1 C
A 0 N
a S O W

O 0
D O 3
m O F
an a

O
4
y 41
Z

S
m 4w
m0
W
a
W
F
H Z
a W
WU b
W
Z O 10
1-1 Z F 1n
U w W m
2 a W
W W0:40
W F
'GOp1o
a W O w M1
C Va
OUW4-
V.+m U_
a.Em .m
g01°o w..
•? C
NS
7W
F
N O
r1N ••O
mm W ..
.Y.1 r•1 S N
ZOI .w F0
4 W N
fr M
L O
U
+ 4fZ.1W Zr
f0Fm
W eo
car cae z°
O >Or
88 R..
m O m
E-
.0
O O O m m m m m O M1
N O.• 1 P N m W O e m r 1' 1
S
N Nm10MOr Nn.+
N .+ .•? .-1 .+
m
O O O
a r
U F
>
W
U Z 7 m
W W
U) 0 ZZ

2.11
O

0 0 000 m N mM t?l
0 E.

O
W
E?
Z m .+>
fro a

lr
2 ON.1e N1r ?. 1[lONmN

b 1n n N M1 m N 111 ('1 N .-1 .•?

O:
mm W
W a m
O
V OrN PN^. ••1 W
m W rr W.. U
a..S
m .U. Fa 1F?
O
O
F
N O
O
S
S
1
-. U' 3: Id0
N
ZUZ

44 4
H S S ..4 N N
2
U 4 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
z4 •-?N N V
a S W
U .-INNmOf 0101 r
.
F
m
0 0
G
X
W ? 01
?
E bt7O N
} Lm. N
? m U
(Oq .E•1 OOOOOOr O n n e1n 3
F a
.
•1 m r.l P .+ m .. N N .-. 1t) •-1 10
m PN•••1 .1
N
m O
?
m
W
m
G Q W i
-1 .
b P„f N
W 0
W 3 3
d1Z1 O aU)NY

W O
000000 mON ?l tOm ?
N to
{O? f0.1 z O
F> a
»W m m m m O N m N N 10 N r
OtiNON.+rPN.1 .r Q F Z W
OOOF
F=
V U P1'1NN •+••I (F?
; Z 2 fY Gqqpp.
S N u G 4

+ r
r +
i r
+
+ i
r i
r +
+
r++
+r

?
t+ i+ d
++
+ N

d +
+ m O
°
++
+ + b
w + + W
aW

? +++
t
+ + a o

O
m 7 ZZ
K x S N ++ .Z•1 ?o
E.
N
N Z O N ((a.77
Y ++ N
uu = Fe N + ++ °
33 • 40 i Z UN fnm 4++ vl
w tr gg W
o +
O
y q
3 1-14
O Zt
n
y
S
? wE..
> +
++ E
4
ZZ DO
sa
w f
/1
_ Z
WO
0 (
J
OD
F
Z
U F
++ ,1
1
N
W W U
10
N
1
1
0
1
M + +

p.
W 8 g a Z
W.]
a
W
3 N dN 10
.+m m O++
+ •1
.

W 0. r
i c
F Z
W ri) O+
Z++ F
O
.Z. F
O F
• F F F N
• 0
+ U' m
• i, +
+ W + a
6
4 +
fr +
Z +
+ a +
+D F +
+am+
+ra:
r0
+ O +
+ Z O +
+ N Z +

a 0
a fL b1'1mNNmP.-1M1 m1oN m1/1 .+n P
N NnOt•1Y1m.•. of b m.+e 10 mN eM1

M H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

N0111.+m.r10N hNr^'f molmeme
O
3 d .•1NNNrf 1•1P e111N 101DM1M1mmm

N
23 0000000 O 00001n 11 •-11f1N P
((?j 001
.?J a fr m r 1nmmN0 m N NNm1n PMmP.t
PNNr?0101D J/ PP1'1NN NN.+.r .-1
W U. U + r

a
0
[4' a Lfi

O W
{
C 1fl O n m m m ro O
1ff10 1(1 m 1?1 N
1D m1D1n1fl M1 rW 1010 10 1ffW 1010o 1flwo
Ul N
I
a
'
El
a.

.r .r .r ..
S
Y
y
.•1 N 1'1 P N 10 r m m O W N 1'1 'P 1tf ?D n m
3 N ONeC; C; C; 1N C; C; 100000
ow

O a W
Jlh m.1NON m t+f eNNe mmmNm
NN.•1 .-11010 N eN.•1P? NM1N1G eN
W W U .r .•1 ..1
N
a
7
.
Q
PI N lonmm00NNeetprrmm.+

N 111111 Y1 YIN U110 t0 t() l(lb b101D 10 t0 mr
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
C. I
2
!. .•. r M1 N m m O r N O 1?1 N .•1 N t•l b N m
W G .•1 N N th ...+ .•1 .•...1 w

Z Nminmmrlr orl ..morlm NlO .+m
O
n ..
N n
II
Z W
Y O
W
F N
E F
E-
0: ul .°?
m
O W
F fr
!Zd F
4al D
a
O
? a
m W
Z a
E- W E-
m > r,
N W W O
E? 11
F W m a
a a z o
W = O
a O O
e. W
°sm

vi 1.0

tit. ? t?. ? ? Z =

14.
V
cl O

.

3
Ilk

V
O
N
w,
V '? ^C C14 Q H11
• h RJ
• / 0 ? eJ

Ion
0
m
2-year Expected Discharge
Location
Buckhead Cr. near Owens 2.62 115 43.9
Mill Branch near Tabor City 3.85 151 39.2
Reese Cr. near Fayetteville 7.89 173 21.9
Browns Creek near Elizabethtown 14.10 140 9.9
Wet Ash Swamp near Ash 16.00 420 26.3
Tenmile Swamp near Lumberton 16.10 235 14.6
Hood Creek near Leland 21.60 636 29.4
Big Swamp near Roseboro 32.20 527 16.4
Tumbull Creek near Elizabethtown 60.10 468 7.8
2-year 2-year
D. Area Expected Expected
sq mi cfs cfs/sq mi

E 100
M
V
Specific Discharge vs. Drainage Area
2-year Expected Discharge
Cr
U
U
2)
10
c?
U
N
0
U
a 1
CD
0A 1 10 100 1000
Drainage Area, sq. mi.
t?
L
Q
.? cu
L U
jo .(n
¦ Q
L Q
X
? W
V ?
to cu
' N
V
V
CL
C0
oiw •bs
O
O
O
lr?
O
C D .0

c-
c
N
?._ CU-
n , O X
CD

W

c: A, On
fJ
. l/
?,
,? I-e
`
Y ryr

x
10-year Expected Discharge
Location
Buckhead Cr. near Owens 2.62 226 86.3
Mill Branch near Tabor City 3.85 528 137.1
Reese Cr. near Fayetteville 7.89 478 60.6
Browns Creek near Elizabethtown 14.10 753 53.4
Wet Ash Swamp near Ash 16.00 1210 75.6
Tenmile Swamp near Lumberton 16.10 442 27.5
Hood Creek near Leland 21.60 1650 76.4
Big Swamp near Roseboro 32.20 1840 57.1
Turnbull Creek near Elizabethtown 60.10 1660 27.6
10-year 10-year
D. Area Expected Expected
sq mi cfs cfs/sq mi
E
Specific Discharge vs. Drainage Area
10-year Expected Discharge
1000
Cr
W
.2
U
N
L
CU
U
N
6
U
U
N
a
07
100
10
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Drainage Area, sq. mi.
O
i
L
i
CY)
C'a
¦
?Jc
L V
Q •tn
i ¦
?CL
i L X
W
I?
c6
Q
O
I ? r
4
I.
I
C.
U)
O
O
r
i I , 1 4 i i I ?
- I ?- O

i
l! j I l j i
II'I
I
I ! '
I i j
,
' j
I
' ?

I i ! I

O

I
li .
I I I
! l i i ! I ! I I
w t
I I! I O L

I I I I

! W
II I I
Co
I? i
A
t
I ? N
•
!

, I c
I I ? ,I

O
O
ono %n
s
ic
er",
X
x
K
c11
?e

•iw ts/sfir.) `a6aeuosia oijioads
50-year Expected Discharge
Location
50-year 50-year
D. Area Expected Expected
sq mi cfs cfs/sq mi
Buckhead Cr. near Owens 2.62 344 131.3
Mill Branch near Tabor City 3.85 1250 324.7
Reese Cr. near Fayetteville 7.89 1020 129.3
Browns Creek near Elizabethtown 14.10 2830 200.7
Wet Ash Swamp near Ash 16.00 2510 156.9
Tenmile Swamp near Lumberton 16.10 674 41.9
Hood Creek near Leland 21.60 3070 142.1
Big Swamp near Roseboro 32.20 5170 160.6
Turnbull Creek near Elizabethtown 60.10 4620 76.9
E
Specific Discharge vs. Drainage Area
50-year Expected Discharge
1000
Cr
U
21
ca
U
U
0
U
U
a?
W
100
10
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Drainage Area, sq. mi.
O
r1
I
1
L
I?
(
MINIIIIIIIIII CU
L ?
I 4? U
? U
? L X
W
?s
v CIO
0 ?
LO
I ¦?
i
CL
CO
O
O
I V
O
I

1 I I ' I I I I I
i 1 I I
I

I I
I
I
I
I I O
O •
1

•
I I i
I I
CO

II
i
,
I
O L-
I I

I
I
1
?
Q

i;
it
1
I
I
I
I.
I O
Ca

I cu

I

l
i
.

l i i
I ?
?
I I
I I
? I
I I
I ?
i I
.?

c4 fl

.°n
S

c
?, O

O
O
O
_. a o v
Ir"
r ?
? M
dl cd

-iw ?bs/slo`a6aepsia oi?.i?adg
100-year Expected Discharge
Location
Specific Discharge vs. Drainage Area
100-year Expected Discharge
Buckhead Cr. near Owens 2.62 401 153.1
Mill Branch near Tabor City 3.85 1760 457.1
Reese Cr. near Fayetteville 7.89 1390 176.2
Browns Creek near Elizabethtown 14.10 4950 351.1
Wet Ash Swamp near Ash 16.00 3340 208.8
Tenmile Swamp near Lumberton 16.10 793 49.3
Hood Creek near Leland 21.60 3890 180.1
Big Swamp near Roseboro 32.20 8020 249.1
Turnbull Creek near Elizabethtown 60.10 7130 118.6
Lumber River at State Boundary 1616.00 22800 14.1
E
Cr
U
N
L
M
s
U
Cn
0
U
U
a?
a
07
1000
100-year 100-year
D. Area Expected Expected
sq mi cfs cfs/sq mi
100
10
0 1 10 100 1000 10000
Drainage Area, sq. mi.

O
O
r
D to
CU it
V
cr
CO
V t
X I
to
Fr}
. Q
?c
l1w
f'
:Y• ".alt' ? ..

N
Y
IL
N
m r
CL d
i LLS
CL o
4)
?O
L
m a` 'a a)
N
E
L ?
i
cc Od
L
cc .2 m
co 1-0
CD V U V co (D N N M
`- 0)
(0 N LO U) In et
ZO 0 LO 10
6 U NIt LO0 O
U.)U0
L N CO 2 CA
? Cp N NOf?O
>, L w- O CO CO CA O
O' U U? O?-NMOD
r cv Mn
00
L
ca y r
?N •-'
L U N LO CO
N U 0 v
75.0
00
ca N E
O% z u 00000 O
p Q? ti(0OCO LO tOOM co
cO X .?
W
N U CS 00000 Cl
CL LN VOCC~7N CO
U.) W v
? m E
0 C7 co
C fl.N NCC00LD CO N CNI
`- W v
N E
7,0 CMOLLOL N co
N X w
W
O
C d
?. O ._
2 C E Mr0ODCN 00
d O N LO ?-
c per,. .Q
O
15
l0

LL CU
2) m
tivNp.
Y
cc c

v
o N CO co co!
C)
a o
U
'C o
L
N .aa .-.
C9 Ex
co V LLB M
XXXX
to
Z
W U
r
X

fl
W
C
Q
ti
?c
L
LL

J

1
?JjeH

N

Q U ?
?
c o
_J °
m
m
co
3 0
0
? r
V M
? G
O

VI N
o

G
0

u ?

Z
I'

iSOn
c
ee ?
t
U
f9
N
00
(C
d
C.
D

0)

N cJ -
?
,

X `
t 1
7
Q
v
x
yf0a?i mmm c`o m m m`
i? ??0 •
010.0 ?0 iN ?N 10 t
N
_
.
cn C/) CD w
j W
? W
?
W .
O
X I?
M

x

I
? j Cl)
04

e-
1
I I ?

i

x
i

c
t
r{ O

°

!
6+ °Q N
C : I
L *
i
V c I i ! j
c

X
W ;?
I
i , N
a
y?
I ?
cn
C
0 ? i
I ? I
x U
C
I I -
O

? of

) 0
4 o

E I

LL
o
m Z

O
O

N
r
C14
r r
O O
r r-• O
00 to
?
(3!) u04ena13
-------------
---
VI
V
tL-
1
Z
7
V

a I ?
4)i m C' N m `m y
co

? T; T T T T l O l
• Cn (7 CA ... C9
I LII w U
U
?
111
I ?
i I O
O
j O
<t

I
I

r ?

N ; II

m j1 O
M I '??

cn
o
_o

o

N
X \\ ] O
w \ 14 rN
i \ C' v
i

w hT
t
O 1 I \ ? \ ? CD
\ ca
I
I
\
X C
LLI C ! ` ? I m
O
N v I I \ 1\ `\ ? T
O CD \ L

N O \ 1? I

`
t6
\
L I \ ` GJ
Co ! d x f
r0
-S f

j
I
I
0
O
(6 C4 8 C?
O
T

T T r
T T T O
{'? T O O
T T O
T O
'
T
(4) U04BA012
CO
co
co
0)
CR
'IT
C)
N N N Q
O c; 6 a;
-

O N

?-
N
?-
?
.-

r

r

r
o
C E
Y o
y
CL •?

m

0

0

r

?

N
w
_
•• ? + Q CM C
o.

m O ? ci
= 6
= ?
? Z + + C6 O
C W W ° r
N V =

r
L
y
L

M

M

O

N v

O
w _ co co Co + Q ? + + co
r.? to :
? 1. Z C6 .
0 N
G CL + CCt
_
V C13
0 _ c
?
V =
ca Cc C
O :3

L
U t
L
U

0 C
O
O .- c m w
E N
° cu
E

t/1 ° c (D o
0 E E CU o_ o

• V c w co

W O
J co
U
Z c - 2
? ch c c a , cn (n ? m

0 c c c L

U ""

= rn

c rn

c

c
o
w
..
o
c
(1) X X X rn X X X
I w w w I Q w w w cn +

O O N Io M M M 't m
H- X X _
X _
X X X X X
N
N
E C
U. O O r 04 LO L LO N N -
X X X X X X X X
W r.r
y
L CD
m
W O

N E
Z
Z Z

L
d

?! C ? N Q co tt LO CD 1-
C

a a v Z
M C -:N N 'CO µM !ct' N a (D CD to to (D V' Cn Cfl _ Ott) CDmCD Q) co t- ;Q CD
4 :O C O O a C O O O 'C) O `O O :O O 'O O O O :O ,O O O O O'
O O C7 i0 C 0 O :6 C7 ! FO a 'O Q Q O s0 O O :O ;O O o -0 !O `O i0 O FCi O '.

_a
.
M ;r O
O '.t` Q7 >CD o O
;O? 4 'O N ?N a
BCD ;O ;to to O yet C. O
`O O
:C) !O ;O 0 iOwC
O r0 O cr Cl ''O
iN O `O N IQ O '
!O O
r,- co -.O
=M

N .?
m O O
M C) er
ri M _
'S 'to CD
!M (0 CO
i6 cd CD
CD ;W <
:
-CCi CO w O
-0) =4')
:'. CO co ::co
.•. C d C,.1 '7O it0 p 3.CA :C O :d {m O 'i- O CD CD iCXS .CO :<D -M -.
Co tD to ?:. t? .CD i0 41 'N Im -M

! 'V i7 O : .O O tom.

} M i t0
;O
Lo
tD :
, <4
O @ V a .p O }"?; O CO 'ct c0
'
f M Cl iCD O .?- :n N ltl N M 1M O '-CD CC? , ip -CO
V N 7

?
' :O 1?.: t9 3M 'Co
?p CA
Nr
?
3cn
M O
jN Leh O :
:c7 t` {Cn
41 W Cn '
jC(1 -N
*
N C r
N W 0.1 ' tom, :QS CD
co i0 O M. C71 CA
;r m :r rL^1 ;a
M i4s .0 V-
C O ,4, ?M U?
3 :M Q 741: M N atfl
` 'r- 70

r - j
N
, iet
0 iM co co i N ;I-- h ?N ,oo `
'? N '7
O N M : M N r
r r r O i h t` -
r N M t Q) 0 h i iD O .
' rte CO?M _
.
•
" Lo CO : O
* ct ! CD 6} ....-(D •t0 ....

o 'o d
o d o
o 'c a tD
. Cfl h
ci '.o 0 L(1 ti
'
9
0 0 'o ' It 4ry
0 0 'o ) (D CO
U
o d io co 'CO :CO
c o `o h. _ ZD
ci o
j
'

O tD N
C. 0 0
O
:
' ....
d
of O O"

O O C
`

O Q O! i

O 'O O a .M

.M N et <t

-O {O O M M M

O O ;O N M M

4 0 C v- 7 Lo

O O :O O :
CTS O
0 0 'Ir

O
O
O
O 'd O a O- O 'O O ?O a .O Q o O O d 'a .O IQ O O OO O O O ,
O 'O
C) ;a o
o :o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o :o d o o.
+ ;o o o 0 0 0
' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.
0 0 0 o d o o ;o a io o
o o: o a o a :o 0 0 o o _.o io ;a `a
U -C) =O ',O .tj .O ! .O 'O O . >o 'O 'O . G7 f O a ?C? O iCi q 'O O O O AGO =0 t0 G7 ! ©'O
. .CD ;N 'CD :fl N CD C Cn :o CO 'V' iN C7} co iD M NOS i4) NV' U7 P- M
_
may.€,; M 4 N M O N
- M ;O
'V
N ,CT r m
O ;? Q
y ,GO CJS
O -D
;O M !tq
M i0 N
Cl ?
M O O Q Q'? O CX) co O CO •co (M ,tom C6 Q) r ? co 6) tom. co O CO i
r N r{ r N r t 'N
r r
G

_.__ ....., . .....r

5
?
.
""'- ' M s 0 N ' M O N ' M 4 N .? : CD !Y WN m co U, ; N N To ?-+* to ' [_' ...
0 o CD.. ': M e^_.
'

C6 C
:00 :M O
Q :0 Q
W fA
O Cr ;61 CD QS
: m ;tt) W
?
6 ;<D M !tp C,- iO N C3 .^.
.
-
-N . :
? co >00 QS t--
co Q) - %C
m !h co 41 t+ q iC7 Cp
;..

t. 4 tD : 1?. '?- r+ . t? :. t•- n :.-- r O -. a O a O O O! O O a7 4 '• a C 0 O` Cl 0..:
lL tt3 : 1-0 V7 >? SS tC3 hi N CV : co
O7 CD
et "?!" 'K
. N N N
r r
?
a O O
Q1 : CT . O
_?. dCD IC:J CD CC? '•7 tq ! 'C C' '•1' iTS -<J' C' Ch iM M !M CO :M ;M
I.M M M M M N N :N 'N N

?
a o a
o :C? o o 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 4 0 0
o a o 0 0 0 ,0 :0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o:a o' o?o"
0 0 0 0 0
o 0
to 7 ;
O N O R' cJ O CD i N ; Co co i 41 N ? co CA CV co ?. 0) N : 0o
r rY O! N ?7 W O CD N CD . N Co N co .
(SS : N 'co ; to (N - co C)
N CD N CJ
ll-- U ., : }r Co iN :N (?. N t? N :t` iN a N
,

rl

i r4 a - X03
!C ca F ° ?f a v ,=
..
"" 4^ c3 ??x N G iN ?: V a
.`w ?.,i ?rt? ??vv
! ?,r?
? ??x ?? r ?.
? ? ?'? ??C?fi?'• ? .? is
R r t9 (C.II`??'ii, Q,. Ll
t.: t r -?i"?t'? f a CO nltJ9
N .
CZ ..CO'
?
m Q:. ¢? m O ?` 4> 0 .D f _ '?,QS tcm` @' O m m m{ m- k
m as ar
y m u m m `,
co sa m" ro q? c?iU9 m, $ rs r c f r
ro ¢ m> a m a
?' cv M S a CZ m t m r3
m_
m m} m m a
!
Z- m p {a a v m

41
C
N
LU
c
m
C
LU

;,,f
?,O a
O 'OO

co
r
+O O

!co
to O ?:O

O O
O

:>T ON

M
0

iN r r CA C7S O

,O
O .O ';O
O A O
O 'O ;
O O O
:O O C
O i
D
r 0
O O C7 ' p p
O
O
. '
O
m t

. i• O
1. O ; V' N V'
{n tt'J N N l'Q' -N
W ; O ! O M N'to
CA l er ' C ti x
N N
07 : p
O O
O
CA O .....
^
0
p -

'CD
a CD
V• d
r :tW
0 'O
;N O 'N R
h to { ! p
:(fl f
,
:
a
-
CO

.
O N io
m h. ;0 h Cn O
r N W
3?, it-
3.CV
N M Ito ? ice. co . ! h.
iN m a ,
r : N sY : N -'T ! V'
iry 117 er e

1 t

, - v m a !c
h CO -O o °h m
M ) O to a a)
CO LL1 I CD o
: O i V
?
r M
tom- m (3)
(w h
.- v to a
o cn n o

t .;'
} +? t
CO O B CD
: h > N O
c)
N to ' ;
M !
t9 I ,
.
I .
? I c
i CA Q
M m i CS)
Cb c) m
_O 3

I . ?
.
'r M1 i N a
to
J+
: C
A O *)
CO

i
S
'
?i t m N M

t? N V'

O O i0 h

M co A. `N

M O N I N :M N r

O O d jr O !V' :

:?!' :CO O tp 'CO
i
EQ I'?
CA '
iCJ IN ?
V' CO C

Q
-- O 1 O O :O O 'a O 0 0 '
O O
' ' I
O t
L . O O r
N m co .C
W 'CV r

11 i >
_

O
O LO ?M N
O
I N O
Cl) } LO V' O iM Cl) - tt)
r (D CC) Jam- -tY)
h O OO ?.
.<?
- O
O V'
N
' -M
N a
' O :O Q
{ O it" . M N_ O a ;O :.
* O
d O O 'O
0 0 'O O
O
O =0 O N
O
V' N ? O O :O
O
O : O 1 O M N N
CO tt) C. CO :C C
O O O -O
O O Q O O 'O .

o 0 0
0 :o o:

`
o ;0 3
0 !0 3
0

a a o

0 0 0

0 0 0 O O O

0 o io
V, o: d oo o
o a o:CDEO ooio 6.8
;oi
oo o
a{o o
o'o ci
14, w ! i
N
O o !CO CO
;N a ;m N
M N . m O ;to
M :CO i Eto
N to O to
N V' L N 'O ACA
CD h
to M
O'
m d 7 ' i-

w
o'cS
U') (D m
ul icn
vltn P
y
-,3- to I
Cl) Ito C
J C
O
co to .V' W .
r

?CA M m 0) ;13
0) CA O a M CmDQhj Cm) 6h7 N !- co
WV N
x r r i M :? r O O '(0 O O O ?O

r i i
X j
m T CO co :co
0) 'N CD a N
CA : 17 N co O) Lc)
M M CO i O O n{
N .to ECA o N :O :
1 m tO M. h
Q CA in h N A)
to G4 -M1 O N: f3}
7 V -h
{2 ,t} (0.0 lt') CO O U-) to to r V' . to ' d r d- O .O C M O
ct
L11
. ?.,
T ??
,O r
i0 r Er -
e
O er

' '
_

.'t,
.^
_._....
N N N
i+ h: h
_..... ... o-_._
CO :CJ C6
h h h
_
CO :CD CD
- M M M

to to :.o
co : 0? Cn '
<
to u to :
i r+ . h ..

.n LO tr) -
r-

V) -to 6C)
: r

? •0 L.1)..:
L `'; N r to Y ' tt) :. to tO ! .C) to to M Cl) : M M M m . CO tt) O

_- _.?..... .-.--.-.... „_. ._... .M. _ _
:O O IO O :.O O O O -O O :O O. r i0 O O: BO O O
<. O 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 ;0 O O O N :O 0 0 O O
n). N L6 LC) LO io : to tCj h O - 9 tf')
-N co CA h :CA `Q'
.' s ?" C.? = r^ M N i N N
Q O ;0 .. ...__ O A 0
: O 0 0 d a O O
CA O LO ? O -O •' 7
h CA !V• :3 . h ,0 :<!'
, N 00 M N co
Cl)
UDo ;~ t
tL
4 } jJ T
`x ,
SxGY s
t ;MY } )
rf ri -i
( 7
q1 ?LpS
X ? w"f1
"
9
- 't=f1 d'
?r t C•` V Cr? !?
r? o Ci,- Cr' oho i?= 1 .i
t "' ,o`?C? a°?' ?" ? /^?- ?T r I O I
' a Q af Ec? Ec) {c
,
..
45 f
7 L .-• k? ` RI+.L b.y? S ?' ' r .Y t t } - ?i I $4. 1 ?.
26 (
c

.C ? y ?

? r {

?.?? 1 t.' I 3 "Sn

"Q07 t?:: M'«?4y^.y?.}`?,
-•
?? tm h k .. f ? Q
{'
?
? C7 f ffi
: 1 ?? c
2? 1+"S "{2 { C...

d '1" ? ^S }
QS • }
qi
?`? ?L ?Ql
M ,? '1t? to CY "? J
c Lc , ?'l c
G C . C C

`i4 ? Cd `ltF ?
.(" Tl CV {
iJ) I
Q? >.. ?
rn
m' -
m rn ?
? U J
t1
Z
Q
}
??[
m.. rn m ? - ro I ca m ro ro Jk
E
@
?"
)
? t
? ?
LFiS L'
1
iI] 67 CA J cJC J
cr -ro ?ca m ?v ? 27c
a) ro nl
'
? ?
,C }L t
o C> C? ICS U ?O
'???}?? 'IIr F? ? ? ;?..
;.
4?1 G3 N
,:may [U S-?
` @ {`?
` Q) {
.?? - Ql ? Al.
? ? ?
h`i ?
7?" rW r-4l
II) i t y?
.:I f a) m m I a:
F
t CfT C!2
f U5
=
v
C-
(QN1
? d ? ; ? 41 10 M 0 Co I
I? ?? ?p Oi f0 !c cN ! iN *p
'cn LU ,
w 13 ,v ,v

LU
C
U
i
' o
0
-o
C4 :?r

Ci
cJ I _ p
p X o
o
rn cv si
ols,?l -o
i?
N ?

to ' o
°
p i I o

i
r o0
L
U co
l0 v

1
CL -°-
.- - -- °0 0
?.c co c

to :
Ill ?, , \ !

+
Li
,?^ m
L
\ 2 U
c
U
U
o
a
-J
N ?t %.n 7

LL J
o0
co
Q o
N
_
r I
` 1 l..r

r.

'• - -
f•o

0
0

N
r
N r
r r

?
O
e- 0
p N
?-
(4) U04BA913
c`o
O
O
N
?
U
} M
* * co to * * *
O N N 0
y
Y c
o o r- ? ? ? r-
w
N
ti a > N

?
CD
..
>

6
'O
O
oi N
ai
*
*
ti
?r;
*
*
..
o
-
aci
o m W LU ?- r- r
•-
U

R co ? 114: ti co v
} OD o * * 6 vi * * * ao d
y

o o
cm c
>
N
Co
' c c
V C U V U ai
a S U N co
O ? 75 c c a M CO c o E

O d
c w
c C C p L
OR
y
IA ,
`
v c
w c - co M a
. 2 a) •
? O 0 Z vJ
co a - ?/
U c/
)
V/ ? :3
?
? c c c (? ? c c c

co

. T)

. LA

. LO

MO

A2

MA
N c
CD
G) X X X (D CD X X X
Z W W W Z Q W W W fA
C
O O N U.) M CV) M 't LO It
E- c X X X X X X X X
t/1
E E O
M
M
X N
X to
X to
X Ln
X X
v X X
LL W) LL
O ti
L ?
L
L
m
W it
N
W m H

Z
Z Z

L

W W C
I
N
M
M
IT
LO
CO
0 0
W it v Z
a
s
L
v3o��Y
•1�r
=d�
�` �s�i
� �
,r� -� '"'�6
� ���
�e��
�Q\•�w,- /
AM
,.F
a �
®�
.l"
€'ar"?e''a.✓yg.Ir,�.,%%/;/e�`�'a
kv
/�;,.5,
I�
ccsi�~�
-
MIN
a
c
Y�gW%�
_'rr� \,'\i 1
t l /" l✓,4
"'j
_'ial,
v9R`:MUM,
MEMBER
//�.:
n�
yJ
m �. a € q
r✓a�i
„i/
�\`\\u/!/
J��
�\ a.
\\\\\\�'\�lY//%///.,j')i
;
ri�;"P"?�
•....
'- �,. �� ''
C\�i-. N/
i/yE\\\&�
s'r�.
/8 /�j `
3Hl
¢
8a
♦j
'"
�a'1
i 'nN/�
`� iii
S
i'\C
'�y'x vg01y✓J+ 9 y
'Sc
¢Y
i' �,-�'
€L
-w
,1all
\3�ma
�
.�,i
�\i4•e
��
��+
Y
law

-6Mi O -. fitpl .GO'm N N; 00 :00 O
C- : O O: O O- ' O O <S -0 !CU CO O Q t.. 0 ...i.0..
-yy? `_QJ te?Sff' ; ttd Cb .C' : N ?Y 7 3 m :V !V'
;M tC7 ; r .4, ?N V' eS' ! ? N V 'V
f
_ E
to r h ?to to CC') NC' O i c•3 :T EO
I MM! M ? C)
N O QS <r D7 ' co C> M M N CJ) O M
M .L7 M ''C O 'in o -r .? .h-
r "C}' 05 - M O C' N I r
N
et ^'J h 3'. N N ; CO N M i CO M co
eY N 61 :N Q r '<t -tO r ? art -?'.
32. "A
iM M ;COI N O Q ! h .CO P OO iO
Cf,
- ? : iN M to :W M CCf ih M -^ O ?O ;O_
Cl)
!tD 'M h N O '.O O O i Q ,Q .O
.r?., `,.q0 Ea O O O A O O a C)
O ;.O i O ;O `Q
. co
O t- N7 Q -0 M O V
g >`,f'tr M N v+ M :M r CO CO CO ; A S :M
Qto :v to :QO r.f) a o v O r
? CiJ:^.-•; r r it i
C ::lam
C W
O
r
Oh ?IcM9 Gh') zco co
M C) 7 CO C1
{Z gam' Q :O O -OO O O
6' r
Q} L' 4 '-•_ O co i ;'C' M h N M C) N 01
...(.-. M .-- M O h- M O C(y CD h i v C h
O O 4 MO O et
Ct L r
J
_.. ..........
n tr LO LO LO 12) tf) to -t() in
tf) Cn L7
CO : h '?.. h r r r CO CO '. fD
co
2 o:o 0 0 0 0 °o °oi°o
p o: o 0 0 0.0 o a a o 0 0 0
cty k o o 0 0 0:0 0 ;o 0 0 o 0 0
i ?? O h O !` O iQ) O Cn ? Q) O tfj
t- u+-: --" CS N co ? 0 i N : O a> i h m C t? (T C'
co "O;f? M ;N r iM N N N 00 ;CC
M .M
sa i
lk.
L
tl-l CU*'
o -; ut m.. c ; vi = m m m m (ra.y. ' ,cvr mr .en.
?E? i` 12M 1 N Ar( I O r.S n? AA LA Y1 - ?h),L?J>=
?110M AQ911 iEV qv DiZ?LOZod
CHOW, nI,&jOm P J-,- r v?ab5 ? 1988
TABLE 2.5.1
Manning roughness Coefficients for various open channel
surfaces
Typical
Material Manning roughness
coe[&ient
----------------
Concrete
0.012
Gravel bottom with sides - concrete
0.020
- mortared stone 0.023
- nprap o.na;
Natural stream channels
Clean. straight stream
Clean. winding stream
Winding with weeds and pools
With heavy brush and timber
Flood Plains
Pastore
Feld crops
Light brush and weeds
Dense brush
Dense trees
Source: Chow. 1959.
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.100 SIZLt; cU Ez> r1
FGA vvl? 1.J D: t?
1'1 = o. 035
N D"r:
JS(
if
1 L C 5 5 t7_F1114
k-D Gk,4nI riI L
Us 9' h = 4.OSo 7-H 12vt., 6k(o u I-
12RO55- SAC iloin/,
0.035
0.040
8.035 le d.DSo lnl Artg4S
Q;461t i% 61-E 1412 L, yI
S?Lt= 4:-,t 1-?) Y1
F'?O IL i' L•Oo D FL A I h -SS
f) = 0. O-So

PROJECT NAME: Barra Farms Date: 11106197
PROJECT NUMBER: 97056 Prepared By: PKS
REDUCTI ONS
BM # BM Elev. BS HI FS ELEV Stadia L Stadia U Distance Distance
ft. Backsight Instr. Ht. Foresight Pt. Elev. ft. ft.
ft. ft.
X1A 120.276 4.31
3.51+0.8 124.586 5.21 119.376 4.98 5.43 45
BM Correct 124.586 4.92 119.666 4.66 5.19 53
124.586 4.34 120.246 4.03 4.72 69
124.586 4.96 119.626 4.77 5.15 38
124.586 4.64 119.946 4.56 4.77 21
X1B 120.276 4.74
3.94+0.8 125.016 5.28 119.736 4.88 5.68 80
BM Correct 125.016 5.46 119.556 5.1 5.72 62
125.016 7.78 117.236 7.52 8.03 51
125.016 5.33 119.686 5.14 5.56 42
X1 120.276 4.61
124.886 4.91 119.976 10 W
124.886 4.76 120.126 2 E
124.886 5.42 119.466 4 E
124.886 6.47 118.416 6 E
124.886 7.87 117.016 8 E
124.886 8.38 116.506 10 E
124.886 8.39 116.496 12 E
124.886 8.19 116.696 14 E
124.886 7.51 117.376 16 E
124.886 6.57 118.316 18 E
124.886 5.60 119.286 20 E
124.886 4.69 120.196 22 E
124.886 4.61 120.276 24 E
124.886 4.84 120.046 26 E
124.886 4.99 119.896 28 E
124.886 5.26 119.626 30 E
X19 120.52 4.80
125.32 4.68 120.64 10.8
125.32 5.41 119.91 15.5
125.32 8.70 116.62 21.3
125.32 9.14 116.18 24.3
125.32 8.86 116.46 26.5
125.32 7.16 118.16 30.3
125.32 4.91 120.41 36.4
125.32 4.85 120.47 39.9
X20 120.099 4.63 9.3
124.729 5.09 119.639 0
124.729 5.83 118.899 14.2
124.729 7.28 117.449 17.6
124.729 8.46 116.269 19.3
124.729 8.74 115.989 21.8
124.729 8.21 116.519 23.9
124.729 5.22 119.509 29.8
124.729 4.93 119.799 35.2
X21 118.953 5.46 15.7
124.413 7.53 116.883 19.8
124.413 8.57 115.843 23.7
124.413 8.15 116.263 28.1
124.413 6.8 117.613 31.6
124.413 5.32 119.093 35.1
X22 118.383 5.12 8.1
123.503 7.35 116.153 12.1
123.503 8.29 115.213 15.3
123.503 7.89 115.613 18.1
123.503 6.38 117.123 22.8
123.503 5.45 118.053 26.8
BM # BM Elev. BS HI FS ELEV Stadia L Stadia U Distance Distance
Backsight Instr. Ht. Foresight Pt. Elev. ft. ft.
X25 108.446 8.22
1 116.666 7.34 109.326 25.00 L 225
(Upstream) 116.666 7.4 109.266 50.00 L 200
116.666 8.32 108.346 80.00 L 170
116.666 7.7 108.966 100.00 L 150
116.666 6.36 110.306 150.00 L 100
116.666 5.46 111.206 200.00 L 50
116.666 4.71 111.956 250.00 L 0
116.666 7.83 108.836 23.00 R 273
116.666 7.52 109.146 50.00 R 300
116.666 8.76 107.906 100.00 R 350
116.666 7.5 109.166 150.00 R 400
116.666 7.56 109.106 190.00 R 440
116.666 7.85 108.816 250.00 R 500
116.666 8.21 108.456 290.00 R 540
116.666 .7.35 109.316 300.00 R 550
116.666 4.4 112.266 350.00 R 600
116.666 14.5 102.166 12.50 R 262.5
116.666 11.61 105.056 17.00 R 267
116.666 12.24 104.426 12.00 R 253
116.666 13.95 102.716 3.00 R 243
116.666 13.12 103.546 7.00 L 237
116.666 13.6 103.066 13.00 L
116.666 8.22 108.446
X25 108.446 8.22
2 116.666 4.2 112.466
(Center) 116.666 4.13 112.536 50.00 L 150
116.666 4.31 112.356 100.00 L 100
116.666 3.95 112.716 150.00 L 50
116.666 3.75 112.916 200.00 L 0
116.666 4.74 111.926 50.00 R 250
116.666 5.17 111.496 5.17 R 205
116.666 5.24 111.426 150.00 R 350
116.666 5.51 111.156 200.00 R 400
116.666 5.45 111.216 250.00 R 450
116.666 5.65 111.016 300.00 R 500
X25 108.446 8.22
3 116.666 13.54 103.126
(Downstream) 116.666 13.67 102.996 10.00 L 190
116.666 6.62 110.046 24.00 L 176
116.666 6.32 110.346 50.00 L 150
116.666 6.63 110.036 100.00 L 100
116.666 6.43 110.236 150.00 L 50
116.666 6.71 109.956 200.00 L 0
116.666 13.44 103.226 15.00 R 215
116.666 10.22 106.446 22.00 R 222
116.666 7.36 109.306 25.00 R 225
116.666 7.46 109.206 50.00 R 250
116.666 8.37 108.296 100.00 R 300
116.666 8.54 108.126 150.00 R 350
116.666 8.95 107.716 200.00 R 400
116.666 8.3 108.366 250.00 R 450
116.666 7.82 108.846 300.00 R 500
X25 108.446 3.75
112.196 6.41 105.786
112.196 4.98 107.216 4.90 5.06 16.00 0
112.196 8.52 103.676 9.84 8.63 20.00 4
112.196 9.06 103.136 8.93 9.17 24.00 80
112.196 11.05 101.146 10.92 11.20 28.00 12
112.196 9.24 102.956 9.07 9.42 35.00 19
112.196 3.69 108.506 3.50 3.91 41.00 25
112.196 3.14 109.056 2.91 3.48 57.00 41
# BM Elev. BS HI FS ELEV Stadia L Stadia U Distance Distance
ft. Backsight Intr. Ht. Foresight Pt. Elev. ft. ft.
X23 112.805 5.59
118.395 4.48 113.915 25 N 350
118.395 4.31 114.085 50 N 325
118.395 4.35 114.045 75 N 300
118.395 4.01 114.385 100 N 275
118.395 4.55 113.845 125 N 250
118.395 4.15 114.245 150 N 225
118.395 4.13 114.265 175 N 200
118.395 4.1 114.295 200 N 175
118.395 3.31 115.085 225 N 150
118.395 4.39 114.005 250 N 125
118.395 3.61 114.785 275 N 100
118.395 3.72 114.675 300 N 75
118.395 3.86 114.535 325 N 50
118.395 2.95 115.445 350 N 25
118.395 3.51 114.885 362 Sm. Ditch 7
118.395 2.1 116.295 375 N 0
118.395 4.41 113.985 11 S 411
118.395 4.49 113.905 25 S 425
118.395 4.25 114.145 50 S 450
118.395 4.43 113.965 75 S 475
118.395 4.32 114.075 100 S 500
118.395 4.02 114.375 125 S 525
118.395 3.75 114.645 150 S 550
118.395 3.29 115.105 175 S 575
=A 114.145 5.87
120.015 4.97 115.045 25 L 325
120.015 4.88 115.135 50 L 300
120.015 4.9 115.115 75 L 275
120.015 4.64 115.375 100 L 250
120.015 4.72 115.295 125 L 225
120.015 4.67 115.345 150 L 200
120.015 4.58 115.435 175 L 175
120.015 4.4 115.615 200 L 150
120.015 4.2 115.815 225 L 125
120.015 4.04 115.975 250 L 100
120.015 3.84 116.175 275 L 75
120.015 3.45 116.565 300 L 50
120.015 3.05 116.965 325 L 25
120.015 2.58 117.435 350 L 0
120.015 5.06 114.955 25 R 350
120.015 5 115.015 50 R 375
120.015 5.03 114.985 75 R 400
120.015 4.96 115.055 100 R 425
120.015 4.81 115.205 125 R 450
120.015 4.72 115.295 150 R 475
120.015 4.69 115.325 175 R 500
120.015 4.53 115.485 200 R 525
120.015 4.18 115.835 225 R 550
120.015 3.7 116.315 250 R 575
120.015 2.72 117.295 275 R 600
120.015 1.01 119.005 300 R 625
120.015 6.72 113.295
? X33331
r .?
r ? 4 ,°r"' ?jam •n ? i?, a ?+'>•(' n.T"fr I"•y x* < ? .'

titi.7 .
? Y ?r'
? ?
?? tr? ••'
, ?,r.]4R om
t, r r ?
`
t, ;
}v , r ? ,,++ ,
•?
? `
Y
? r ? ? t
+. .r vc - ?
r +d.,
a
?
c? k ;
,
.
?
? 6
{ !y
i ..i rr,r
t! ? 1 5' 9 d ?r?,
1 `? * r i?
} ry ? o { r? ?' t t
S .a
?{ < ,,
,.y`??t ? `.fl,}
, l ^ -c
* r
•1
i f r
41
R?µ?f t';r ? .r - '? ; t?.i ? a t ' ? .+' ?
.s` - s_ ay- ?' ?'a`? rte,
F'{?S..k,.?,"',.` re , ' r ,t t'? •
n ? ` r J r qy3 • .?. ?9?
' ?r r
` t
l.Y h +C A'
` 11 ..+ '
,?•R ?i
f ! !. 7
{ 1 t .
00

'i> ?? l'?'s
.Y y } :• t r 1 gyp' j 1
u
t.
` r
•

r?
{
= 1 y
r r
y sR
? r
?
+
?
'•
?
:n? 4rfa ,? a w
r r
?+
.
,
t ?;l 'i
? ? ??., ,?,?+..

u? f t?.'4 If f '}?b:?
? e
?« ,S pY?j ?% T?•t? ?SY% ly
JZ ..'..., +.+{ i
y t .n- t r' f r? ? 32t f wy??fS ??.?
:r..
R

w,
P

- y
_ 3rC
N, ?e
t4•
-J