proposal to request funding from the virginia aquatic

Proposal to Request Funding from the Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust Fund (VARTF)

NW-3 Reed Island Creek (Webb)

Date Submitted to the Corps: December 4, 2015 1. OBJECTIVES The Nature Conservancy (the Conservancy) has prepared this request from the VARTF to establish an approximately 61-acre mitigation site in Fancy Gap, Virginia in the New River Basin (HUC 05050001). The project will provide livestock exclusion, stream restoration, stream preservation, wetland restoration/creation, wetland enhancement, and buffer restoration and preservation along approximately 6,180 linear feet of tributaries to Grassy Creek. Contact/Project Specifics:

TNC Contact: Diane Frisbee Stream Project Manager 490 Westfield Road

Charlottesville, VA 22901 434-951-0537 [email protected] TNC Project Name: Reed Island Creek (Webb) VARTF Tracking Number: NW-3 Project Type: Livestock Exclusion, Stream Restoration, Stream Preservation,

Wetland Restoration/Creation, Wetland Enhancement, Buffer Restoration, Buffer Preservation

Locality/County: Carroll County Stream Name: Unnamed tributaries to Grassy Creek HUC: 05050001 Basin: New River Geographic Coordinates: 80o36’8.014’’W, 36 o40’3.067’’N Property Owner: Total Mitigation Site Area: 61 acres Stream Restoration: 4,172 linear feet Stream Preservation: 2,008 linear feet Livestock Exclusion: 4,209 linear feet Stream Buffer Restoration: 5.5 acres Stream Buffer Preservation: 15.2 acres Wetland Restoration/Creation: up to 9 acres Wetland Enhancement: 7.4 acres Wetland Buffer Restoration: 19.4 acres Wetland Buffer Preservation: 4.8 acres Non-tidal Wetland Credits: 13.65 USM Credits: 7,830

mailto:[email protected]

2. SITE SELECTION

A. The 61-acre Reed Island Creek (Webb) Mitigation Site contains approximately 6,180 linear feet of frontage on unnamed tributaries to Grassy Creek, and approximately 16 acres of floodplain which contains evidence of prior conversion of wetlands to pasture (see Attachment A – Map 1 and Attachment F – Property Photographs). This project will include livestock exclusion, stream restoration, wetland restoration/creation, wetland enhancement, and stream preservation, and will provide for protection and restoration of a buffer up to 800 feet wide on these resources. The unnamed tributaries on the Mitigation Site flow to Grassy Creek, a tributary of Reed Island Creek, which ultimately drains to the New River. Please refer to Attachment G – VARTF Offsite Mitigation Checklist and Attachment H – Norfolk District Prospectus Checklist for additional information. B. Description of Property. The Mitigation Site is located at 370 Keno Road in Fancy Gap, Virginia. The property is owned by and is zoned as Agricultural land use. An aerial photograph and topographic map of the Mitigation Site are provided in Attachment B. C. Description of Streams. The Mitigation Site contains 6,180 linear feet of 1st and 2nd order unnamed tributaries to Grassy Creek. The property has been in agricultural use for many years and is currently used to pasture cattle. The cattle have unrestricted access to all waterways on the property. The majority of streams on the property exhibit significant streambank erosion and instability, an inappropriate and unstable pattern, and a lack of suitable habitat features and riffle-pool complexes. Approximately 2,008 linear feet of high quality streams are located in mature woodland and will be preserved.

D. Description of Wetlands. The floodplain consists of heavily grazed pasture with minimal woody vegetation. The Mitigation Site contains approximately 19 acres of mapped hydric soils (Hatboro silt loam). Site inspection of the soils indicated that hydric soils extend beyond the boundaries of the currently mapped hydric soils. No NWI wetlands are mapped on the Mitigation Site. However several wetland areas have developed along the streams. Side channels and seeps at the toe of slope provide surface water to these wetland areas. Some of these channels show evidence of channelization/ditching to de-water the floodplain for cattle. Some berms are also currently present from previous grading activities used to move water off of the pasture. The compaction of the soil due to decades of grazing cattle is likely also contributing to the perching of surface water and rain fall, allowing for extended periods of saturation in these areas. A delineation to determine the extent of streams and wetlands within the Mitigation Site was completed in November 2015. The delineation documented 7.43 acres of non-tidal wetlands within the floodplain. The delineation will be submitted for confirmation following completion of a boundary survey of the Mitigation Site.

E. Description of Buffers. The majority of the buffer area is in open heavily grazed pasture use. Approximately 20 acres of the site is in mature woodland located along three stream reaches which will be preserved. F. Utilities and Structures. A small barn is located within the Mitigation Site and fronts along Route 640. The barn will be removed and this area will be included in mitigation activities. A small overhead power line crosses the Mitigation Site in several places. The Nature Conservancy is in discussions with Appalachian Electric Power to determine if the lines can be relocated or removed. In addition, Keno Road bisects the Mitigation Site. Any lands within rights-of-way associated with utilities or roads will be excluded from crediting.

G. Natural Heritage Resources. Natural Heritage resources located about 0.8 miles from the site include the Wards Gap – Piney Creek Wetlands Conservation Site, ranked B4 (moderate), which contains an elemental occurrences of bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii). From the Department of Natural Heritage: “This site includes a mosaic of wetland, upland, and pasture/meadow.” The property is also adjacent to an element occurrence of bog-willow herb (Epilobium leptophyllum, G5/S2), located on Blue Ridge Parkway National Park lands. Several additional occurrences of bog turtle are mapped by DGIF within 2 miles of the property. A review of databases maintained by DCR, DGIF, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) indicates that 4 species listed as endangered or threatened are known to occur in proximity to the Site (2-mile radius for DCR and DGIF). Based on a DCR database search within a 2-mile radius of the Property, 3 species in the vicinity of the Property are listed as Species of Greatest Conservation Need in the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan. Information on natural heritage resources is provided in the tables below. Natural heritage resources are also shown on Attachment A – Map 1. The T/E Coordination Package is included as Attachment J. DNH, DGIF, and FWS Data

Common Name Scientific Name Global Rank State Rank Federal

Status State

Status Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly

Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii G2 S1 LE LE

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis G2 S1 LE LE Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis G1G2 S3 LT

Bog turtle Glyptemys muhlenbergii G3 S2 LT LE

Bog-willow herb

Epilobium leptophyllum G5 S2S3 None None

DNH Conservation Sites and Stream Conservation Units Data

Site Name Type Biodiversity Rank Site Description

Wards Gap – Piney Creek Wetlands Conservation Site

Conservation Site B-4 (Moderate)

This site includes a mosaic of wetland, upland, and pasture/meadow.

Species of Greatest Conservation Need Identified in the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

Tier 1

Bog turtle Glyptemys muhlenbergii

Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly

Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis H. Compensation Planning Framework. The Mitigation Site contains tributaries to Grassy Creek, which drains into Reed Island Creek, a TNC aquatic portfolio stream. Incompatible

agriculture and grazing practices have been identified as threats to the health of these systems. These priority areas are identified in “The Nature Conservancy’s Watershed Approach to Compensation Planning for the Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust Fund” – Exhibit A of the Program Instrument (www.nature.org/vartf). I. Protected Lands. The Mitigation Site is adjacent to the Blue Ridge Parkway National Park. Several properties protected with conservation easements are located near the Mitigation Site. Protected lands in the vicinity of the Mitigation Site are shown on Attachment A – Map 1. Adjacent properties are comprised of forest and farmland, and are zoned as Agricultural land use. J. Impaired Waters. The Mitigation Site contains tributaries to Grassy Creek, which drains into Reed Island Creek. Reed Island Creek is listed on DEQ’s 303d list as impaired for not meeting water quality standards for aquatic life and recreation, due to E. coli. K. Cultural Resources. A review of the V-CRIS indicates no cultural resources within the Property. The DHR Coordination Package is included as Attachment I.

3. GOAL

The goal of the proposed Mitigation Site is to establish a permanently protected and functioning stream and wetland system that will serve to replace the functional values of permitted stream and wetland impacts within the service area through livestock exclusion, stream restoration, wetland restoration/creation, wetland enhancement, stream preservation, and buffer restoration and preservation. In doing so, the Mitigation Site is expected to satisfy the existing mitigation needs and a portion of the future mitigation needs within the authorized service area. These restoration activities are proposed to generate approximately 13.65 non-tidal wetland and 7,830 stream credits which will be used to satisfy existing liabilities in the New River Basin.

4. MITIGATION WORK PLAN

A. The Conservancy has an approved In-Lieu Fee Program Instrument developed in accorance with the “Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources: Final Rule, 33 CFR 332”. Complete information regarding the Program Instrument and supporting documents can be found at www.nature.org/vartf. B. This project is submitted as an additional mitigation site under that existing Program Instrument. Terms and specifics related to Program operation are outlined in the Program Instrument. This proposal will only address site specific details. C. Mitigation Activities Description. Mitigation activities conducted within the Mitigation Site will include removal of livestock, stream restoration, stream preservation, wetland restoration/creation, wetland enhancement, stream and wetland buffer restoration, and stream and wetland buffer preservation. These activities will improve water quality and aquatic and riparian habitat. Buffer restoration and preservation activities will provide for a forested buffer up to 800 feet wide on the restored, enhanced, and preserved wetlands and streams. The proposed mitigation activities are shown in Attachment C – Map 4 and Map 5. Photographs are included in Attachment F. Approximately 4,172 linear feet of streams will be restored using natural channel design techniques to re-establish an appropriate and stable dimension, pattern, and profile. Instream structures will be incorporated to improve channel stability and enhance aquatic habitat features. Following grading, the banks will be stabilized with erosion control matting and temporary seeding. The banks will

http://www.nature.org/vartf


also be stabilized with live stakes where appropriate. Approximately 2,008 lf of a high quality tributary with a mature forested buffer would be preserved. Approximately 7.4 acres of existing wetlands will be enhanced by removal of livestock and restoring native vegetation by eliminating invasive species and re-vegetating the wetland area with native species. Wetland restoration/creation activities will be conducted outside of the existing wetlands as appropriate, and will include restoring the available surface hydrology by re-grading of the side/drainage channels and removing berms, and restoring native vegetation. This project is also expected to protect and possibly expand habitat for the bog turtle. The Conservancy has been in discussion with the agencies and a site visit was conducted in October 2015 to discuss the potential for wetland mitigation activities in conjunction with protection of bog turtle habitat. The Conservancy anticipates the site has potential for up to 9 acres of wetland restoration/creation. A bog turtle survey will be conducted following acquisition of the site, anticipated in spring 2016, and further discussions will be held with the agencies during design development to refine the limits of wetland restoration/creation activities and ensure any impacts to the habitat are minimized. Approximately 20% of the wetland restoration/creation and enhancement areas will be planted with alder or similar species to provide suitable hibernation sites for the bog turtle. The wetlands will be maintained as emergent/scrub-shrub wetlands in an effort to create optimal habitat for the turtle. All aspects of the wetland restoration, creation, enhancement and management will be designed and conducted to restore, protect and improve bog turtle habitat, if applicable. The existing pasture in the buffer area will be restored to a native forested buffer. The Mitigation Site would provide for a buffer up to 800 feet wide on the stream and wetland areas, and extends to the property limits to ensure complete protection and appropriate management. The buffer restoration areas will be planted with bare root seedlings at a density of 680 trees/acre, for a total of approximately 17,000 stems, unless modified to suit bog turtle habitat specifications. Planting will occur in the dormant season. The plantings used will be native species common to the area, which are suitable for growth in local riparian conditions and from areas within the same or adjacent USDA Plant Hardiness Zone or NRCS Land Resource Region as the project site. Bare root seedlings will be at least 18 inches tall. In order to control the invasive field grasses in the pasture, a treatment plan will be implemented. Prior to planting, the pasture will be treated with a cool season grass specific herbicide. Following planting, invasive grass species will be chemically treated and overseeded with a native herbaceous seed mix as needed. All buffer restoration and management activities will be designed and conducted to restore, protect and improve bog turtle habitat, if applicable.

5. DETERMINATION OF CREDITS. A. Stream mitigation activities will include livestock exclusion along 4,209 linear feet of stream, restoration of approximately 4,172 linear feet of stream, preservation of approximately 2,008 linear feet of stream, re-establishment of approximately 5.5 acres of riparian buffer, and preservation of approximately 15.2 acres of buffer. Utilizing the Virginia Unified Stream Methodology (USM), 7,830 credits are estimated for these activities. B. Wetland mitigation activities will include up to 9 acres of wetland restoration/creation, 7.4 acres of wetland enhancement, 19.4 acres of buffer restoration, and 4.8 acres of buffer preservation. Utilizing the approved wetland credit calculator, these activities are estimated to generate approximately 13.65 NTW credits. C. The tables below indicate the estimated compensation credit potential for this project. Wetland acreages and stream lengths are based on a delineation conducted in October 2015, which will be confirmed following a boundary survey of the Mitigation Site. All buffer widths were

estimated with Arcview GIS. Values will be finalized during confirmation of the delineation and development of the design and may be revised during final delineation of the site following Year 10 monitoring. USM forms are included in Attachment D. ESTIMATED WETLAND MITIGATION CREDIT POTENTIAL

Project ID Project Name

Proposed Mitigation Activity Acres Ratio Multiplier Credits


Nontidal Wetland Restoration/Creation 9 1:1 1 9.00

Nontidal Wetland Enhancement 7.4 3:1 0.33 2.47

Nontidal Upland Buffer Restoration 19.4 15:1 0.07 1.29

Nontidal Upland Buffer Preservation 4.8 20:1 0.05 0.24

Conservation Easement Bonus (5%) 0.65

Project Total 40.6 13.65 Percent of credits involving restoration or creation

and directly addressing NNL 69% ESTIMATED STREAM MITIGATION CREDIT POTENTIAL

Project ID Project Name Proposed Mitigation Activity Linear

Feet/Acres Proposed

Credit


Riparian Areas – Preservation (LF or Ac) 15.2 acres 350

Riparian Areas – Planting/Re-Establishment (Ac) 5.5 acres 421

Stream Restoration 4,172 lf 4172 Livestock Exclusion 4,209 lf 1263 RTE Species 4,172 lf 1252 Conservation Easement Bonus (5%) 373

Project Total 7,830 Percent of credits involving preservation only 7%

D. Existing Watershed Liability. This project addresses existing and future mitigation needs within the New River Basin. At present, the VARTF has a total mitigation liability for non-tidal wetlands of 6.92 credits with 5.04 acres of restoration needed to meet no net loss. This is the second project proposed for wetland mitigation in the New River Basin. The first project proposed for wetland mitigation in the basin, NW-2, did not proceed because the Conservancy was unable to come to agreeable terms with the landowner. The currently proposed project is expected to meet or exceed both no net loss and total wetland mitigation liability for the basin. At present, VARTF has a total mitigation liability for streams of 5,089 USM credits. One project has been approved to address this liability – NW-1. NW-1 is a stream and buffer enhancement and preservation project expected to yield approximately 1,900 USM credits, leaving a remaining liability of approximately 3,189 credits to be addressed by the proposed NW-3 project. Considering the credits and activities associated with this proposed project, the resulting USM credit composition for the basin is 91% restoration/enhancement and 9% preservation.

6. GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA

The proposed geographic service area for this mitigation site shall be consistent with Federal Banking Guidance and the Code of Virginia. For purposes of this site, the proposed service area includes the primary HUC 05050001 (Grayson County, City of Galax, City of Radford and portions of Carroll, Floyd, Montgomery, Pulaski, Smyth, and Wythe counties) and the adjoining HUC 05050002 (portions of Craig, Bland, Giles, Pulaski, and Tazewell counties). The service area is shown in Attachment E – Map 4.

7. USE/TRACKING OF MITIGATION SITE CREDITS

A. Decisions related to applicability, in-kind vs. out-of-kind mitigation, and compensation requirements will be made as part of individual permit decisions.

B. Decisions related to credit purchase from the mitigation site will be made in accordance with the Federal Banking Guidance and the existing Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust Fund Banking Instrument. Availability will be determined by achievement of goals and objectives of the mitigation site.

i. Stream credits will be determined using the USM, and will be released through the

schedule of credit availability outlined in the mitigation bank instrument template. ii. Wetland credits will be determined using the wetland credit calculator and will be released

through the schedule of credit availability outlined in the mitigation bank instrument template.

iii. Limited use of the mitigation site for impacts outside of the service area will be considered and may be approved by the IRT on individual case-by-case basis.

C. Tracking of credits released, withdrawn, and available will be provided on a mitigation site ledger, available for review on RIBITS. Project-specific summaries will be provided in the Trust Fund Annual Report and on the Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust Fund website (www.nature.org/vartf).

8. SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT The 61-acre Mitigation Site, which is owned by , will be acquired by the Conservancy. Following completion of the restoration activities, the Conservancy will pursue transfer of the property to the National Park Service to be added to the Blue Ridge Parkway National Park. The property would be transferred subject to a deed restriction, conservation easement, or other approved protection mechanism, which contains restrictions to protect the Mitigation Site in accordance with mitigation standards.

9. MAINTENANCE PLAN

The Conservancy will inspect the streams, wetlands, plantings, and fencing during each monitoring event to assess whether corrective action is needed to ensure achievement of success criteria. The Conservancy will describe any corrective actions required or implemented in each year’s monitoring report.

10. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS


Performance standards will be detailed in the site development plan, will generally follow the standards outlined in the MBI template and will be subject to approval by the IRT.

11. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

The site will be monitored for up to 10 years to ensure success of the restoration activities. Monitoring requirements will be detailed in the site development plan, will generally follow the standards outlined in the MBI template and will be subject to approval by the IRT.

12. LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Conservancy, or an approved third party, will serve as the long-term steward for this mitigation site. The Long-Term Management Plan will be detailed in the site development plan, will generally follow the standards outlined in the MBI template, and will be subject to approval by the IRT.

13. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN TNC will work with the Corps, DEQ, and the IRT to determine if modifications are necessary should unforeseen circumstances arise that impact the site.

14. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES

A. The Conservancy has included 20% of the restoration and planting costs and additional funds for invasive species management to be used as contingency funds for this project to ensure the success of the restoration and planting activities. B. The Conservancy has also included financial assurances for long-term management, stewardship of the land protection document, and catastrophic events.

ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A. Map 1 – Property Vicinity Map of Protected Lands and Natural Heritage Attachment B. Map 2 – Aerial Photo Map 3 – Topographic Map Attachment C. Map 4 – Mitigation Area – Aerial View

Map 5 – Mitigation Area – Topographic View Attachment D. USM Forms Attachment E. Map 5 – Service Area Attachment F. Property Photographs Attachment G. VARTF Offsite Mitigation Checklist Attachment H. Norfolk District Prospectus Checklist Attachment I. DHR Coordination Package Attachment J. T/E Coordination Package

Attachment A. Map 1 – Property Vicinity Map of Protected Lands and Natural Heritage

Blue Ridge Parkway

National Park

NW-3 Mitigation Site

Reed Island Creek

Blue Ridge

Doe Highlands

Blue

Rid

ge

Carroll

Patrick


Stream (NHD)

TNC Stream Reach Portfolio

Natural Heritage Screening CoverageConservation Site

General Location

Stream Conservation Unit

Element Occurrence

Impaired River/StreamOther streams where Water Quality Standard is not attained

303(d) list

Protected LandsFederal Lands

State Lands

Local Park

Military Lands

Miscellaneous Private

VOF Easement

Other Conservation Easement

Major Roads

County Boundary ¯0 0.8 1.60.4 Miles


Attachment A. Map 1 - Protected Lands and Natural Heritage

Attachment B. Map 2 –Aerial Photo

NW-3 Mitigation Site (61 ac)

¯0 150 30075 Feet

NW-3 Reed Island Creek (Webb)Attachment B. Map 2 - Aerial

Attachment B. Map 3 –Topographic Map

NW-3 Mitigation Site (61 ac)

¯0 150 30075 Feet

NW-3 Reed Island Creek (Webb)Attachment B. Map 3 - Topo Map

Attachment C. Map 4 – Mitigation Area – Aerial View

Trib 1

Trib 5Trib 7

Trib 4

Trib 6

Trib 2

Trib 3

Trib 1

Trib 4


Stream Restoration (4,172 lf)

Stream Preservation (2,008 lf)

Hydric Soils

Wetland Enhancement (7.4 ac)

Wetland Restoration/Creation (9 ac)

200' Wetland BufferRestoration (19.4 ac)

Preservation (4.8 ac)

Stream BufferRestoration (5.5 ac)

Preservation (15.2 ac) ¯0 250 500125 Feet

NW-3 Reed Island Creek (Webb)Attachment C. Map 4 - Mitigation Area - Aerial View

Attachment C. Map 5 – Mitigation Area – Topographic View

Trib 1

Trib 5Trib 7

Trib 4

Trib 6

Trib 2

Trib 3

Trib 1

Trib 4


Stream Restoration (4,172 lf)

Stream Preservation (2,008 lf)

Hydric Soils

Wetland Enhancement (7.4 ac)

Wetland Restoration/Creation (9 ac)

200' Wetland BufferRestoration (19.4 ac)

Preservation (4.8 ac)

Stream BufferRestoration (5.5 ac)

Preservation (15.2 ac) ¯0 250 500125 Feet

NW-3 Reed Island Creek (Webb)Attachment C. Map 5 - Mitigation Area - Topo View

Attachment D. USM Forms

1 of 2

Project # Locality Cowardin Class. HUC Date SAR # Impact/SAR

lengthImpact Factor

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 1 2994

CI

Score 1.0

NOTES>>

High Suboptimal: Riparian areas

with tree stratum (dbh > 3 inches)

present, with 30% to 60% tree

canopy cover and containing both herbaceous and shrub layers or a non-maintained

understory.

Low Suboptimal: Riparian areas

with tree stratum (dbh > 3 inches) present, with >

30% tree canopy cover and a maintained understory.

Recent cutover (dense

vegetation).

High Marginal: Non-maintained,

dense herbaceous vegetation with either a shrub layer or a tree layer (dbh > 3

inches) present, with <30% tree canopy cover.

Low Marginal: Non-maintained,

dense herbaceous vegetation,

riparian areas lacking shrub and tree stratum, hay

production, ponds, open water. If present, tree

stratum (dbh >3 inches) present, with <30% tree

canopy cover with maintained understory

High Poor: Lawns, mowed, and maintained areas, nurseries; no-till cropland; actively grazed

pasture, sparsely vegetated non-

maintained area, recently seeded and stabilized, or other comparable

condition.

Low Poor: Impervious

surfaces, mine spoil lands,

denuded surfaces, row crops, active feed lots, trails, or other comparable

conditions.

High Low High Low High LowCondition

Scores 1.2 1.1 0.85 0.75 0.6 0.5

% Riparian Area> 25% 70% 95%Score > 1.2 0.6

% Riparian Area> 100% 100% Rt Bank CI > 0.72 CIScore > 0.6 Lt Bank CI > 0.60 0.66

CIScore 0.50

Stream Assessment Form (Form 1)Unified Stream Methodology for use in Virginia

Deeply incised (or excavated), vertical/lateral instability. Severe incision, flow contained within the banks. Streambed below average

rooting depth, majority of banks vertical/undercut. Vegetative

protection present on less than 20% of banks, is not preventing erosion. Obvious bank sloughing present. Erosion/raw banks on 80-100%.

AND/OR Aggrading channel. Greater than 80% of stream bed is covered by deposition, contributing to instability.

Multiple thread channels and/or subterranean flow.

Very little incision or active erosion; 80-100% stable banks. Vegetative

surface protection or natural rock, prominent (80-100%). AND/OR Stable

point bars/bankfull benches are present. Access to their original

floodplain or fully developed wide bankfull benches. Mid-channel bars, and transverse bars few. Transient

sediment deposition covers less than 10% of bottom.

3. Enter the % Riparian Area and Score for each riparian category in the blocks below.

NOTES>>

NOTES>>

0.5

2. Determine square footage for each by measuring or estimating length and width. Calculators are provided for you below.

1.2

1. Delineate riparian areas along each stream bank into Condition Categories and Condition Scores using the descriptors.

Stream Name and Information

SuboptimalConditional Category

Slightly incised, few areas of active erosion or unprotected banks. Majority

of banks are stable (60-80%). Vegetative protection or natural rock

prominent (60-80%) AND/OR Depositional features contribute to stability. The bankfull and low flow channels are well defined. Stream

likely has access to bankfull benches, or newly developed floodplains along

portions of the reach. Transient sediment covers 10-40% of the stream

bottom.

1.6

Name(s) of Evaluator(s)

Project Name

Reed Island Creek (Webb)

Instream Habitat/

Available Cover

Poor

Stable habitat elements are typically present in 30-50% of the reach and are adequate for maintenance of

populations.


populations.

Habitat elements listed above are lacking or are unstable. Habitat

elements are typically present in less than 10% of the reach.

Overwidened/incised. Vertically/laterally unstable. Likely to widen further. Majority of both banks are near vertical. Erosion present on

60-80% of banks. Vegetative protection present on 20-40% of

banks, and is insufficient to prevent erosion. AND/OR 60-80% of the stream is covered by sediment.

Sediment is temporary/transient in nature, and contributing to instability.

AND/OR V-shaped channels have vegetative protection is present on >

40% of the banks and stable sediment deposition is absent.

Tributary 1

For use in wadeable channels classified as intermittent or perennial

Optimal

Riparian Buffers

Diane Frisbee

Conditional Category

Suboptimal MarginalOptimal

Optimal

Channel Condition

Marginal

2. RIPARIAN BUFFERS: Assess both bank's 100 foot riparian areas along the entire SAR. (rough measurements of length & width may be acceptable)

Ensure the sums

2.4

Poor

0.9

3. INSTREAM HABITAT: Varied substrate sizes, water velocity and depths; woody and leafy debris; stable substrate; low embededness; shade; undercut banks; root mats; SAV; riffle poole complexes, stable features.

Left Bank

PoorMarginal


of % Riparian

Blocks equal 100

2 1

Habitat elements are typically present in greater than 50% of the reach.

Right Bank

1.5

1. Channel Condition: Assess the cross-section of the stream and prevailing condition (erosion, aggradation)

Tree stratum (dbh > 3 inches) present, with > 60% tree canopy cover and a

non-maintained understory. Wetlands located within the riparian areas.

1.5

CI= (Sum % RA * Scores*0.01)/2

Suboptimal

Often incised, but less than Severe or Poor. Banks more stable than Severe

or Poor due to lower bank slopes. Erosion may be present on 40-60% of both banks. Vegetative protection on 40-60% of banks. Streambanks may bevertical or undercut. AND/OR 40-

60% of stream is covered by sediment. Sediment may be

temporary/transient, contribute instability. Deposition that contribute to

stability, may be forming/present. AND/OR V-shaped channels have

vegetative protection on > 40% of the banks and depositional features which

Severe

3

2 of 2

Project # Locality Cowardin Class. HUC Date Data Point SAR length Impact Factor

500 1

SCORE 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.50

NOTE: The CIs and RCI should be rounded to 2 decimal places. The CR should be rounded to a whole number. 0.53

0

INSERT PHOTOS:

DESCRIBE PROPOSED IMPACT:

NOTES>>

Severe

0.5

Less than 20% of the stream reach

is disrupted by any of the channel

alterations listed in the parameter

guidelines.

40 - 60% of reach is disrupted by any

of the channel alterations listed in

the parameter guidelines. If

stream has been channelized, normal stable

stream meander pattern has not

20-40% of the stream reach is disrupted by any of the channel


guidelines.

CR = RCI X LF X IFCOMPENSATION REQUIREMENT (CR) >>

THE REACH CONDITION INDEX (RCI) >> RCI= (Sum of all CI's)/5

4. CHANNEL ALTERATION: Stream crossings, riprap, concrete, gabions, or concrete blocks, straightening of channel, channelization, embankments, spoil piles, constrictions, livestock

Channelization, dredging, alteration, or hardening absent. Stream has an

unaltered pattern or has naturalized.

1.5

Minor

Greater than 80% of reach is disrupted by any of the channel alterations listed in the parameter guidelines AND/OR

80% of banks shored with gabion, riprap, or cement.







Applicant

Stream Impact Assessment Form Page 2

Moderate

Channel Alteration

restoration

Negligible

REACH CONDITION INDEX and STREAM CONDITION UNITS FOR THIS REACH

Existing Stream Existing Stream


3 of 2


lengthImpact Factor

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 2 118

CI

Score 1.0

NOTES>>





understory.





vegetation).













condition.




conditions.


Scores 1.2 1.1 0.85 0.75 0.6 0.5

% Riparian Area> 100% 100%Score > 0.6


CIScore 0.50



Project Name

Reed Island Creek (Webb)Name(s) of Evaluator(s) Stream Name and Information

Diane Frisbee Tributary 2

1. Channel Condition: Assess the cross-section of the stream and prevailing condition (erosion, aggradation)Conditional Category

Channel Condition

Optimal Suboptimal Marginal Poor Severe











bottom.


















3 2.4 2 1.6 1


Conditional Category NOTES>>

Riparian Buffers

Optimal Suboptimal Marginal Poor



1.5

1. Delineate riparian areas along each stream bank into Condition Categories and Condition Scores using the descriptors. Ensure the sums

2. Determine square footage for each by measuring or estimating length and width. Calculators are provided for you below. of % Riparian

3. Enter the % Riparian Area and Score for each riparian category in the blocks below. Blocks equal 100

Right Bank


Left Bank


NOTES>>

Instream Habitat/

Available Cover

Conditional CategoryOptimal Suboptimal Marginal Poor



populations.


populations.



1.5 1.2 0.9 0.5

4 of 2


500 1

SCORE 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.50


0

INSERT PHOTOS:


Stream Impact Assessment Form Page 2Applicant


NOTES>>

Channel Alteration

Conditional CategoryNegligible Minor Moderate Severe






guidelines.



guidelines.













CR = RCI X LF X IF

restoration

1.5 0.5

REACH CONDITION INDEX and STREAM CONDITION UNITS FOR THIS REACH THE REACH CONDITION INDEX (RCI) >>

RCI= (Sum of all CI's)/5COMPENSATION REQUIREMENT (CR) >>

5 of 2


lengthImpact Factor

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 3 101

CI

Score 2.0

NOTES>>





understory.





vegetation).













condition.




conditions.


Scores 1.2 1.1 0.85 0.75 0.6 0.5



CIScore 0.50


populations.



1.5 1.2 0.9 0.5


NOTES>>

Instream Habitat/

Available Cover




populations.


Right Bank


Left Bank

1.5





Riparian Buffers




3 2.4 2 1.6 1

Severe











bottom.




















Channel Condition




Project Name


6 of 2


500 1

SCORE 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.50


0

INSERT PHOTOS:


CR = RCI X LF X IF

restoration

1.5 0.5



Severe






guidelines.



guidelines.















NOTES>>

Channel Alteration

Conditional CategoryNegligible Minor Moderate

7 of 2


lengthImpact Factor

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 4 959

CI

Score 2.0

NOTES>>





understory.





vegetation).













condition.




conditions.


Scores 1.2 1.1 0.85 0.75 0.6 0.5



CIScore 0.50


populations.



1.5 1.2 0.9 0.5


NOTES>>

Instream Habitat/

Available Cover




populations.


Right Bank


Left Bank

1.5





Riparian Buffers




3 2.4 2 1.6 1

Severe











bottom.




















Channel Condition




Project Name


8 of 2


500 1

SCORE 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.50


0

INSERT PHOTOS:


CR = RCI X LF X IF

restoration

1.5 0.5



Severe






guidelines.



guidelines.















NOTES>>

Channel Alteration


9 of 2


lengthImpact Factor

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 5 1019

CI

Score 3.0

NOTES>>





understory.





vegetation).













condition.




conditions.


Scores 1.2 1.1 0.85 0.75 0.6 0.5


% Riparian Area> 98% 2% 100% Rt Bank CI > 1.50 CIScore > 1.5 0.6 Lt Bank CI > 1.48 1.49

CIScore 1.50


populations.



1.5 1.2 0.9 0.5


NOTES>>

Instream Habitat/

Available Cover




populations.


Right Bank


Left Bank

1.5





Riparian Buffers




3 2.4 2 1.6 1

Severe











bottom.




















Channel Condition




Project Name


10 of 2


500 1

SCORE 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 1.50


0

INSERT PHOTOS:


CR = RCI X LF X IF

restoration

1.5 0.5



Severe






guidelines.



guidelines.















NOTES>>

Channel Alteration


11 of 2


lengthImpact Factor

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 6 203

CI

Score 3.0

NOTES>>





understory.





vegetation).













condition.




conditions.


Scores 1.2 1.1 0.85 0.75 0.6 0.5



CIScore 1.50


populations.



1.5 1.2 0.9 0.5


NOTES>>

Instream Habitat/

Available Cover




populations.


Right Bank


Left Bank

1.5





Riparian Buffers




3 2.4 2 1.6 1

Severe











bottom.




















Channel Condition




Project Name


12 of 2


500 1

SCORE 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 1.50


0

INSERT PHOTOS:


CR = RCI X LF X IF

Preservation

1.5 0.5



Severe






guidelines.



guidelines.















NOTES>>

Channel Alteration


13 of 2


lengthImpact Factor

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 7 786

CI

Score 3.0

NOTES>>





understory.





vegetation).













condition.




conditions.


Scores 1.2 1.1 0.85 0.75 0.6 0.5



CIScore 1.50


populations.



1.5 1.2 0.9 0.5


NOTES>>

Instream Habitat/

Available Cover




populations.


Right Bank


Left Bank

1.5





Riparian Buffers




3 2.4 2 1.6 1

Severe











bottom.




















Channel Condition




Project Name


14 of 2


500 1

SCORE 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 1.50


0

INSERT PHOTOS:


CR = RCI X LF X IF

Preservation

1.5 0.5



Severe






guidelines.



guidelines.















NOTES>>

Channel Alteration


Project # Locality Cowardin Class. HUC Date Reach #

NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 1

Project Credits

Restoration: Includes Priority 1, 2, and 3 restoration activities. Does not include buffer width. Credit per foot 2994List Reaches that will receive full Restoration: Total length of Full Restoration 2994 1

Credit per foot

Discuss Length Affected by Instream Structures (justify length): Length Affected by Instream Structures 0.3 0

Activities

Credit per foot per

bank

Length 0Credit>

Length 0 Rt Bank > 0.00 CreditCredit > Lt Bank > 0.00 SUM of banks 0

ActivitiesPreservation High Quality, Restoration,

Enhancement

Preservation Low Quality

Credit for 0'-100' 0.14 0.07Credit for

beyond 100'

299,400 square feet

Subtract 0.03Subtract 0.06

Area # 1 2Sq, Footage 66211 60113

% Area 22% 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 42%Credit> 0.4 0.14

Area #Sq, Footage 4356

% Area 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Rt Bank > 0.12 CreditCredit> 0.4 0.14 Lt Bank > 0.01 0.07 210

Σ(% Area X Credit) for all areas (banks done separately)AVE of credit for banks X length of project


Area #Sq, Footage 69260 355885

% Area 23% 119% 0% 0% 0% 0% 142%Credit> 0.2 0.07

Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0% Rt Bank > 0.13 CreditCredit > 0.2 Lt Bank > 0.00 0.07 209.58


Credit> Credits > 1796

5210

0.3 0.3Credits are cumulative and can apply to more than one reach. Each reach can have more than one Adjustment Factors ΣLength X Credit) for all areas

Total Compensation Credit Provided by Project

Credit 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3Stream Length Affected 2994 2994

Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS

Adjustment Factors: These factors are applied as a multiplier to length of a reach for which they apply Record AF length /credit beneath the AF activity. Provide a

narrative explanation of the applicable site conditions that

warrant an adjustment and justify the AF credit chosen.

Adjustment Factor Categories

ActivityRare, Threatened, or

Endangered Species or Communities

Livestock Exclusion Watershed Preservation

Left BankCREDITS

Outside First 100' - Mitigation CategoriesOne vegetative community maintained Ensure the sums of % Riparian Blocks

equal 100Two vegetative communities maintained

Calculation of "Goal" riparian buffer for each side (SAR length times 100') >>>>

WITHIN FIRST 100' - Mitigation CategoriesOne vegetative community maintained Ensure the sums of % Riparian Blocks


Right Bank

0.4 0.38 0.29 0

0.2 0.19 0.15 0.07 0

Right Bank

CREDITS

Left Bank

Σ(Length X Credit) for all areas (banks done separately)

Riparian Areas: Assess the proposed 100 foot buffer on both banks based on the activity proposed. Enter the percentage of area and the credit below. (Widths of buffer above 100' will be determined below)

Buffer Re-establishment

(removal of invasives) Buffer Planting - Heavy Buffer Planting - Light

Buffer area not within preservation

width

0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.09

Credit Per Length Pick One Per Length May Be Cumulative Per Length

Habitat Structures Create Bankfull Bench Lay Back Banks Bio-Remediation Techniques Stream Bank Plantings

Credits = Stream Length X 0.3

Enhancement: Addressing Streambank Stability, Entrenchment Ratios, Access to FloodplainMitigation Categories

Mechanical Bank Work Biological Bank Work

Name(s) of Evaluator(s) Stream Name and Information



Enhancement With Instream Structures: Addressing Streambank Stability, Grade Control (Vanes, Weirs, Step-Pools), Constructed Riffles

Compensation Crediting Form (Form 3)Unified Stream Methodology for use in Virginia

Project Name Reach Length

Reed Island Creek (Webb) 2994


NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 2

Project Credits


Credit per foot


Activities

Credit per foot per

bank

Length 0Credit>



Enhancement



beyond 100'

11,800 square feet


Area # 1 2Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Credit>

Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Rt Bank > 0.00 CreditCredit> Lt Bank > 0.00 0.00 0



Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Credit>

Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0% Rt Bank > 0.00 CreditCredit > Lt Bank > 0.00 0.00 0



189




Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS








Left BankCREDITS






Right Bank

0.4 0.38 0.29 0

0.2 0.19 0.15 0.07 0

Right Bank

CREDITS

Left Bank






width

0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.09














NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 3

Project Credits


Credit per foot


Activities

Credit per foot per

bank

Length 0Credit>



Enhancement



beyond 100'

10,100 square feet


Area # 1Sq, Footage 26136

% Area 259% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 259%Credit> 0.4

Area #Sq, Footage





% Area 125% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 125%Credit> 0.2

Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0% Rt Bank > 0.25 CreditCredit > Lt Bank > 0.00 0.13 13.13



228




Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS








Left BankCREDITS






Right Bank

0.4 0.38 0.29 0

0.2 0.19 0.15 0.07 0

Right Bank

CREDITS

Left Bank






width

0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.09














NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 4

Project Credits


Credit per foot


Activities

Credit per foot per

bank

Length 0Credit>



Enhancement



beyond 100'

95,900 square feet


Area # 1 2Sq, Footage 9583 39204

% Area 10% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51%Credit> 0.4 0.14


% Area 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 37% Rt Bank > 0.10 CreditCredit> 0.4 Lt Bank > 0.15 0.13 125




% Area 29% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 29%Credit> 0.07


% Area 18% 0 0 0 0 0 18% Rt Bank > 0.02 CreditCredit > 0.2 Lt Bank > 0.04 0.03 28.77



1688




Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS








Left BankCREDITS






Right Bank

0.4 0.38 0.29 0

0.2 0.19 0.15 0.07 0

Right Bank

CREDITS

Left Bank






width

0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.09














NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 5

Project Credits

Restoration: Includes Priority 1, 2, and 3 restoration activities. Does not include buffer width. Credit per foot 0List Reaches that will receive full Restoration: Total length of Full Restoration 1

Credit per foot


Activities

Credit per foot per

bank

Length 0Credit>



Enhancement



beyond 100'

101,900 square feet


Area # 1 2Sq, Footage 71438

% Area 70% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 70%Credit> 0.14


% Area 60% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 60% Rt Bank > 0.10 CreditCredit> 0.14 Lt Bank > 0.08 0.09 92



Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Credit>

Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0% Rt Bank > 0.00 CreditCredit > Lt Bank > 0.00 0.00 0



103

0.3Credits are cumulative and can apply to more than one reach. Each reach can have more than one Adjustment Factors ΣLength X Credit) for all areas


Credit 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3Stream Length Affected 37

Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS








Left BankCREDITS






Right Bank

0.4 0.38 0.29 0

0.2 0.19 0.15 0.07 0

Right Bank

CREDITS

Left Bank






width

0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.09














NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 6

Project Credits


Credit per foot


Activities

Credit per foot per

bank

Length 0Credit>



Enhancement



beyond 100'

20,300 square feet



% Area 51% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51%Credit> 0.14

Area #Sq, Footage




Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Credit>

Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0 0 0 0 0% Rt Bank > 0.00 CreditCredit > Lt Bank > 0.00 0.00 0


Credit> Credits > 0

8

Credits are cumulative and can apply to more than one reach. Each reach can have more than one Adjustment Factors ΣLength X Credit) for all areas


Credit 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3Stream Length Affected

Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS








Left BankCREDITS






Right Bank

0.4 0.38 0.29 0

0.2 0.19 0.15 0.07 0

Right Bank

CREDITS

Left Bank






width

0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.09














NW-3 Carroll Co. 05050001 12/3/15 7

Project Credits


Credit per foot


Activities

Credit per foot per

bank

Length 0Credit>



Enhancement



beyond 100'

78,600 square feet



% Area 48% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 48%Credit> 0.14

Area #Sq, Footage




Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Credit>

Area #Sq, Footage

% Area 0% 0% 0 0 0 0 0% Rt Bank > 0.00 CreditCredit > Lt Bank > 0.00 0.00 0


Credit> Credits > 0

31



Reed Island Creek (Webb) 786Name(s) of Evaluator(s) Stream Name and Information






Mechanical Bank Work Biological Bank WorkCredit Per Length Pick One Per Length May Be Cumulative Per Length


0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.09

Right Bank

CREDITS

Left Bank






width

0.4 0.38 0.29 0

0.2 0.19 0.15 0.07 0




Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS



Right Bank

Left BankCREDITS








Credit 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.3Stream Length Affected

Credits are cumulative and can apply to more than one reach. Each reach can have more than one Adjustment Factors ΣLength X Credit) for all areas


Totals 6180 7830

Note: Round all feet & CC's to the nearest whole number.

Conservation Easement Bonus (5%) 373

Tributary 7 7 786 31

Tributary 5 5 1019 103Tributary 6 6 203 8



Diane Frisbee 5050001 Carroll Co.

Stream Name Rea

ch ID

Comp. Length (Lc) (feet)

Total Compensation Credit (Total CC) (From Form 3)

NW-3 VARTF 12/3/2015Evaluators HUC Locality

Compensation Summary Form (Form 4)Unified Stream Methodology

for use in Virginia

Project # Applicant Date

Attachment E. Map 5 – Service Area

^

NW-3 Mitigation Site05050001

03040101

05050002

03010103

05050003

02080201

03010101

05070201

06010102

06010101

06010205

05070202

Wythe

Carroll

Patrick

Giles

Floyd

Smyth

Bland

Craig

Tazewell

Grayson

Pulaski

Montgomery

Alleghany

Franklin

Roanoke

HenryWashington

Botetourt

Radford City

Galax City

Bath

Botetourt

Roanoke City

0 10 205 Miles4


NW-3 Service Area

National Watershed Boundary Dataset

8-digit Hydrologic Unit

New River Basin

River

Water

County Boundary

Virginia State Boundary


Attachment E. Map 5 - Service Area

^

Attachment F. Property Photographs

NW-3 Reed Island Creek (Webb) Photos

New River Basin Fancy Gap, VA

May 2015


Existing Riparian Area Existing Stream

Existing Stream Site Overview



Existing High Quality Stream Existing Riparian Area

Attachment G. VARTF Offsite Mitigation Checklist

1

Attachment G VARTF Off-site Mitigation Location Guidelines Checklist

A. General regulatory requirements and practices:

1. Mitigation Project within same 8 digit HUC as impact: Yes __x__ No ____N/A____

2. Mitigation Project within same physiographic province as impact: Yes __x___ No _____ N/A____

3. Mitigation Project within an adjoining HUC in same river basin Yes __x__ No ____ N/A____ 4. Mitigation Project outside of this area Yes ___ No __x__ N/A____ (If “Yes” then provide

documentation that no suitable Sites are available in area) 5. Mitigation is in-kind: Yes _x___ No ____ N/A____

B. Evaluate & document whether Mitigation Project meets the following criteria:

1. Wetland Restoration: Yes __x__ No ____

2. Wetland Creation: Yes __x__ No ____

3. Wetland Preservation Yes ___ No _x_ Is the preservation area exemplary and/or under threat? Yes ____ No ___

4. Stream Restoration/Enhancement: Yes _x__ No ____

5. Stream Preservation: Yes _x__ No ___ Is the Preservation area exemplary and/or under

threat? Yes ___ No _x__

6. Mitigation Sites contiguous or connected to other aquatic areas Yes _x__ No ___

7. Current, planned, or foreseeable activities upstream or upgradient of the Mitigation Project that may adversely affect the Mitigation Project: Yes ____ No _x___ Uncertain ____

8. Is there an existing or proposed development upstream of, upslope of, or adjacent to the

Mitigation Project? Yes ___ No _x__ Uncertain ____

9. Are there areas upstream of, upslope of, or adjacent to the Mitigation Project that are zoned or identified for future development in the comprehensive plan, long-range plan, or zoning overlay? Yes ___ No _x__

10. Does proposed riparian Buffer protection provide greater protection than state or local

requirements? Yes _x__ No ___ Is proposed riparian Buffer a minimum of 100 feet wide on each side of the channel? Yes _x__ No ___

11. Are there any easements, liens, rights of way, reserved timber or mineral rights on the

Mitigation Site or adjoining lands? Yes __x__ No ___ If Yes, describe.

2

There is an overhead powerline located on the mitigation site. Keno Road also bisects the mitigation site.

12. Is Mitigation Site consistent with local planning requirements? Yes _x__ No ___ Describe

The property is zoned as Agricultural Land. The 2030 Carroll County Comprehensive Plan states “The County and its citizens recognize the importance of preserving and maintaining agriculture’s role in the overall economy and life of the County and of preserving natural resources for the future residents of the communities in the County.” Per the plan, Carroll County has been divided into three tiers, which allow similar policies and programs to be used in similar areas while distinguishing different areas and using special policies to address their growth. The Mitigation Site is within the Agricultural Protection Tier, which is “intended to support ongoing agricultural operations and preserve valuable natural resources. Policies within this tier allow sparse residential development to minimize negative impacts on agricultural operations and to minimize the demand for public services and infrastructure. Commercial uses are limited to agricultural related services and limited retail. The County also recognizes the importance of the Agriculture Protection Tier to protect farms, residents and lifestyles in the most rural areas of the County. The County’s policies are designed to retain this agricultural character rather than support encroachments of urban or suburban development in these very rural areas. Some agriculture-related or service commercial uses to meet the needs of local residents may be appropriate, including some home occupations and home industry. The Agriculture Tier offers the opportunity to preserve agriculture and open space while still allowing some development through the use of conservation subdivisions and conservation easements.” The plan also identifies areas discouraged for development, including lands within 500 feet of protected land. The Mitigation Site is adjacent to the Blue Ridge Parkway National Park.

13. Describe order(s) of streams on the Mitigation Site

The Mitigation Site contains unnamed 1st and 2nd order streams.

14. Is recordation of a third party conservation easement proposed for the project? Yes ____ No

__x__ If No, please explain _________________

The 61-acre property will be acquired by the Conservancy. Following completion of the restoration activities, the Conservancy hopes to transfer the property to the National Park Service to be added to the Blue Ridge Parkway National Park. The property will be transferred subject to a deed restriction, which will include restrictions to protect the mitigation site in accordance with mitigation standards.

C. Does the Mitigation Project satisfy one or more of the following criteria? If the answer is “Yes”

then describe.

1. Does it abut or adjoin an existing reserve or conservation area or create or contribute to a corridor linking existing reserves, conservation areas, or large aquatic systems? Yes __x__ No ___ Describe:

3

The project is immediately adjacent to the Blue Ridge Parkway National Park.

2. Does it conserve or restore habitat for one or more state or federal-listed species, including critical habitat or Threatened/Endangered Species Waters? Yes __x__ No ____ Describe:

A review of databases maintained by DCR, DGIF, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) indicates that 4 species listed as endangered or threatened are known to occur in proximity to the Site (2-mile radius for DCR and DGIF). These species include Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii), Indiana bat (Myotis sodalist), Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), and bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii). The property is also adjacent to an element occurrence of bog-willow herb (Epilobium leptophyllum, G5/S2), located on Blue Ridge Parkway National Park lands. Restoration of the ecological functions on the property could provide resources required by these species.

3. Does it conserve or restore habitat for species identified as rare by DCR- Division of Natural Heritage or Species of Greatest Conservation Need in the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan? Yes __x__ No ____ Describe ______________________

Based on a DNH database search within a 2-mile radius of the property, the following species occur in the vicinity and are listed as Species of Greatest Conservation Need in the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan:

4. Does it conserve or restore aquatic resources or Buffers areas identified by DCR- Division of Natural Heritage as rare or imperiled natural communities? Yes __x___ No ____ Describe:

Natural Heritage resources located about 0.8 miles from the site include the Wards Gap – Piney Creek Wetlands Conservation Site, ranked B4 (moderate), which contains an elemental occurrences of bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii). From the Department of Natural Heritage: “This site includes a mosaic of wetland, upland, and pasture/meadow.” The current conditions of the property likely do not provide suitable habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species. Restoration of stream and riparian ecosystems could benefit these species. This project is also expected to protect and possibly expand habitat for the bog turtle. The Conservancy has been in discussion with the agencies and a site visit was conducted in October 2015 to discuss the potential for bog turtle habitat. A bog turtle survey will be conducted in spring 2016. The wetlands will be maintained as emergent/scrub-shrub wetlands in an effort to create optimal habitat for the turtle.

Tier 1

Bog turtle Glyptemys muhlenbergii

Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly

Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis

4

5. Does it contribute to improved water quality for identified/designated impaired waters? Yes

__x__ No ____ Describe __________

The Property contains tributaries to Grassy Creek, which drains into Reed Island Creek. Reed Island Creek is listed on DEQ’s 303d list as impaired for not meeting water quality standards for aquatic life and recreation, due to E. coli.

6. Does it remove barriers to fish passage in areas identified by VDGIF as meriting

improvement? Yes ____ No __x__ Describe __________

7. Does it restore, enhance, preserve aquatic resources and/or riparian areas identified as meriting conservation in an approved watershed management plan or conservation plan? Yes __x__ No ____ Describe:

The Property contains tributaries to Grassy Creek, which drains into Reed Island Creek, a TNC aquatic portfolio stream. Incompatible agriculture and grazing practices have been identified as threats to the health of these systems. Livestock exclusion and restoration activities on this site will help reduce sediment and nutrient loadings to this important system. These priority areas are identified in “The Nature Conservancy’s Watershed Approach to Compensation Planning for the Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust Fund” – Exhibit A of the Program Instrument (www.nature.org/vartf).

8. Does it conserve/restore the entire watershed upstream of the Mitigation Site? Yes ____ No __x__ Describe:

9. Does it remediate inputs of substantial amounts of sediments or remove other pollutants to

downstream waters? Yes __x__ No ____ Describe: The Property has been in agricultural use for many years and is currently used to pasture cattle. The cattle have unrestricted access to all waterways on the Property. The streams on the Property exhibit significant streambank erosion and instability, an inappropriate and unstable pattern, and a lack of suitable habitat features and riffle-pool complexes. The floodplain consists of heavily grazed pasture with minimal woody vegetation. No NWI wetlands are mapped on the Property. However several wetland areas have developed along the streams. Side channels and seeps at the toe of slope provide surface water to these wetland areas. Some of these channels show evidence of channelization/ditching to de-water the floodplain for cattle. Some berms are also currently present from previous grading activities used to move water off of the pasture. The compaction of the soil due to decades of grazing cattle is likely also contributing to the perching of surface water and rain fall, allowing for extended periods of saturation in these areas. The majority of the buffer area is in open heavily grazed pasture use. Invasive species management (primarily invasive field grasses) and planting would provide for a significant buffer on the stream and wetland areas. These restoration activities would improve water quality by reducing inputs of sediment and E.coli to the waterways onsite and downstream.

10. Does it conserve or restore areas designated by VDGIF as wild trout streams or Anadromous

Fish Use Areas? Yes ____ No __x__ Describe_____


5

11. Does it follow the objectives and prioritization strategy of the The Nature Conservancy’s

Watershed Approach to Compensation Planning Framework? Yes _x___ No ____ Describe: See pages 68-72 of “The Nature Conservancy’s Watershed Approach to Compensation Planning for the Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust Fund” – Exhibit A of the Program Instrument (www.nature.org/vartf).


Attachment H. Norfolk District Prospectus Checklist

proposal to request funding from the virginia aquatic

Documents