Home

New Orleans District

Run scraper

Basic information

Fill out these two fields at minimum.

— or —

How Big?

Where?

Links to source documents

Raw text

You can copy from here when filling out the rest of the page.

PROPOSAL FOR SOUTH FORK COASTAL MITIGATION BANK IN CAMERON and CALCASIEU PARISHES

NAME OF APPLICANT: Delta Land Services, 1090 Cinclaire Dr., Port Allen, LA 70767

LOCATION OF WORK: Approximately 1,609 acres located 28 miles southeast of Lake Charles, Louisiana on LaBove Road in Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, (Latitude: 30.03256944˚N; Longitude: -92.83703888˚W) HUC 08080206, as shown on the attached drawings.

CHARACTER OF WORK: Deposition of approximately 115,116 cubic yards of in situ earthen material to fill 34,535 linear feet of artificial drains and return 3,450 linear feet of other waters to natural grade, to restore natural drainage on site. All fill material will be obtained from spoil banks on site. All proposed work will be done for the purpose of establishing a mitigation bank. The work would consist of the following types of restoration: Re-establishment and Rehabilitation for Coastal Prairie, Bottomland Hardwoods and Fresh Intermediate Marsh habitats.

JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE August 21, 2014 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY FUNCTIONS BRANCH P.O. BOX 60267 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70160

STATE OF LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES P.O. BOX 4313 BATON ROUGE, LA 70821-4313

STATE OF LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT P.O. BOX 44487 BATON ROUGE, LA 70804-4487

Phone (504) 862- 2595

Phone (225) 219-3225

Phone (225) 342-7940

Fax

Fax

Fax Email

(504) 862- 2574

(225) 325-8250

(225) 342-9439 jim.holcombe@la.gov

COE REVIEWER:

DEQ REVIEWER:

OCM REVIEWER:

Jacqueline Farabee

E. Johnson

Jim Holcombe

COE NUMBER:

WQC NUMBER:

CUP NUMBER:

MVN-2014-1888

140812-01

P20141035

NAME:

DELTA LAND SERVICES, LLC c/o DELTA LAND SERVICES, LLC 1090 CINCLARE DR. PORT ALLEN, LA 70757 Attn: Lee Walters

LOCATION:

Cameron Parish, LA; Lat 30º 1' 57.25" / Long 93º 9' 46.66"; Section 2,3,10 and 11, T12S-R8W; Section 26,27,34, and 35 T11S-R8W; 28 miles southeast of Lake Charles, LA on LaBove Road; HUC 08080206

DESCRIPTION: Deposition of approximately 115,116 cubic yards of in situ earthen material to fill 34,535 linear feet of artificial drains and return 3,450 linear feet of other waters to natural grade, to restore natural drainage on site. All fill material will be obtained from spoil banks on site. All proposed work will be done for the purpose of establishing the South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank. The work would consist of the following types of restoration: reestablishment and rehabilitation for coastal prairie, bottomland hardwoods and fresh/ intermediate marsh habitats; including 510.6 acres of coastal prairie, 43.4 acres of bottomland hardwoods, and 57.1 acres of fresh/intermediate marsh below the 5¿ contour within the Louisiana Coastal Zone. Dredgjng of 13.9 acres of non-wet spoil material and filling of 8.6 acres of drainage canal bottoms in the Louisiana Coastal Zone.

NOTICE the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management (OCM) has received the above application for a Coastal Use Permit (CUP) in accordance with the State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act of 1978, as amended, (Louisiana R.S. 49:214.21-214.41), and the rules and regulations of the Coastal Resources Program. Applications for the proposed work may be inspected at 617 North 3rd Street, Room 1078, Baton Rouge, LA or on the OCM web page at: http://dnr.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=pagebuilder&tmp=home&pid=591. Copies may be obtained upon payment of cost of copying. Written comments, including suggestions for modifications or objections to the proposed work and stating the reasons thereof, are being solicited from the public. Comments must be received within 25 days of the date of publication of this notice. Comments should be uploaded to our electronic record, but may be mailed, faxed or emailed to the designated OCM Reviewer. All comments must contain the appropriate application number and the commenter's full name and contact information. Application also has been made to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Environmental Services for a Water Quality Certification in accordance with La. R.S. 30.2074(A)(93), and Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (P.L. 95-217). Additional information is on file with the above office, and may be inspected at any time between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays. Copies may be obtained upon payment of cost of copying. Comments concerning the application can be filed with the Office of Environmental Services within 20 days of this notice to the following address: Office of Environmental Services, P. O. Box 4313, Baton Rouge, LA 70821-4313. The public comment period for Coastal Use Permit and Water Quality Certification applications begins on the date of publication of notice in the official journal (The Advocate), in accordance with LAC 43:I. 723(C)(5)(c). OCM will provide this date on request.

-2The comment period for the Department of the Army Permit and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality WQC will close 30 days from the date of this joint public notice. Written comments, including suggestions for modifications or objections to the proposed work, stating reasons thereof, are being solicited from anyone having interest in this permit and/or this WQC request and must be mailed so as to be received before or by the last day of the comment period. Letters concerning the Corps of Engineers permit application must reference the applicant's name and the Permit Application Number, and be mailed to the Corps of Engineers at the address above, ATTENTION: REGULATORY BRANCH. Similar letters concerning the Water Quality Certification must reference the applicant's name and the WQC Application number and be mailed to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality at the address above. The application for this proposed project is on file with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality and may be examined during weekdays between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Copies may be obtained upon payment of costs of reproduction. Corps of Engineers Permit Criteria The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects thereof; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public, federal, state, and local agencies and officials, Indian Tribes, and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to determine whether to make, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity. The New Orleans District is unaware of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places near the proposed work. The possibility exists that the proposed work may damage or destroy presently unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical, historical sites, or data. Issuance of this public notice solicits input from the State Archeologist and State Historic Preservation Officer regarding potential impacts to cultural resources. Our initial finding is that the proposed work would neither affect any species listed as endangered by the U.S. Departments of Interior or Commerce, nor affect any habitat designated as critical to the survival and recovery of any endangered species.

-3This notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The applicant's proposal would result in the destruction or alteration of N/A acre of EFH utilized by various life stages of red drum and penaeid shrimp. Our initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or federally managed fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. Our final determination relative to project impacts and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service. If the proposed work involves deposits of dredged or fill material into navigable waters, the evaluation of the probable impacts will include the application of guidelines established by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Also, a certification that the proposed activity will not violate water quality standards will be required from the Department of Environmental Quality, before a permit is issued. Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this application. Requests for public hearings shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. The applicant has certified that the proposed activity described in the application complies with and will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with the Louisiana Coastal Resources Program. The Department of the Army permit will not be issued unless the applicant received approval or a waiver of the Coastal Use Permit by the Department of Natural Resources. You are requested to communicate the information contained in this notice to any other parties whom you deem likely to have interest in the matter.

South Fork

Coastal Mitigation Bank

Mitigation Bank Prospectus in Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, Louisiana Sponsored by Delta Land Services, LLC July 18, 2014

Restore & Revitalize

Prospectus for the Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, Louisiana

July 18, 2014

Sponsor: Delta Land Services, LLC 1090 Cinclare Drive Port Allen, Louisiana 70767

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Site Location .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Ownership and Sponsorship ............................................................................. 3 1.3 Driving Directions to the Site ........................................................................... 3 2.0 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .............................................................. 3 3.0 ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY OF THE SITE .................................................... 5 3.1 Historical Ecological Characteristics of the Site ............................................... 5 3.2 Current Ecological Characteristics of the Site................................................... 5 3.2.1 Soils ........................................................................................................... 5 3.2.2

Vegetation .................................................................................................. 6

3.2.3

Hydrology .................................................................................................. 6

3.2.4

Jurisdictional Wetland Status ..................................................................... 6

3.3 General Need for the Project in this Area ......................................................... 7 3.3.1 Coastal Prairie Ecological Value ................................................................ 8 3.3.2

Tidal Fresh-intermediate Marsh Ecological Value ...................................... 9

3.3.3

Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Forest Ecological Value ........................... 10

3.4 Technical Feasibility ...................................................................................... 12 4.0 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MITIGATION BANK ......................................... 12 4.1 Site Restoration Plan ...................................................................................... 12 4.1.1 Hydrology Restoration ............................................................................. 13 4.1.2

Coastal Prairie Restoration ....................................................................... 13

4.1.3

Tidal Fresh-intermediate Marsh Restoration ............................................. 15

4.1.4

Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Forest Restoration ................................... 15

4.2 Current Site Risks .......................................................................................... 16 4.3 Mortgages, Easements, and Encumbrances .................................................... 16 4.4 Long-Term Sustainability of the Site and Water Rights .................................. 17 5.0 PROPOSED GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA ................................................. 17 6.0 OPERATION OF THE MITIGATION BANK ................................................... 18 6.1 Project Representatives .................................................................................. 18 6.2 Qualifications of the Sponsor ......................................................................... 18 6.3 Proposed Long-Term Ownership and Management Representatives ............... 19 6.4 Site Protection................................................................................................ 19 6.5 Long-Term Strategy ....................................................................................... 20 7.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 20 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A. Attachment B. Attachment C. Attachment D.

Tables and Figures Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations Hydrology Restoration Drawings Photographs

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

1.0 INTRODUCTION Delta Land Services, LLC (DLS) prepared this prospectus in accordance with 33 CFR § 332.8(d)(2)1 to establish and operate the proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank (SFCMB or Bank). The 1,609.4-acre SFCMB will provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable, permitted impacts to "Waters of the United States1." Additionally, the SFCMB may provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts to coastal wetland resources under the Louisiana Coastal Resources Program (LCRP)2 per the provisions of LAC 43:724 and RS 49:214.22 (8)3. The SFCMB is located in Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes approximately 18 miles north of the Gulf of Mexico and partially lies within the Louisiana Coastal Zone Boundary4 and the Coastal Conservation Plan Boundary5 (Attachment A: Figure 1). 1.1 Site Location The SFCMB is located in the Gulf Coast Prairies (150A) Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) within the Atlantic and Gulf Coast Lowland Forest and Crop Region (LRR T) (NRCS 2006). The Gulf Coast Prairie MLRA is north of the Gulf Coast Marsh MLRA (151) and south of the Western Gulf Coast Flatwoods MLRA (152B), which is a major migration corridor for Nearctic-Neotropical birds (Barrow et al. 2005). With regard to the Ecoregions of Louisiana, the SFCMB is located in the Northern Humid Gulf Coastal Prairies Level IV Ecoregion (34a) within the Western Gulf Coastal Plain Level III Ecoregion (34) (Daigle et. al 2006). The SFCMB is located in the Lower Calcasieu watershed as defined by the US Geological Survey (USGS) 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 08080206. 1

33 CFR § 332.8(d)(2) summarizes the information regarding a proposed mitigation bank at a sufficient level of detail to support informed public and IRT comment. Information included (but not limited too) in a prospectus are the objectives, establishment, operation, service area, general need, technical feasibility, ownership, long-term management, sponsor qualifications, ecological suitability, and water rights. 1 33 CFR § 328 defines waters of the United States as it applies to the jurisdictional limits of the authority of the Corps of Engineers under the Clean Water Act. Waters of the United States include those waters listed in 33 CFR § 328(a). The lateral limits of jurisdiction in those waters may be divided into three categories (i.e., territorial seas, tidal wasters, and non-tidal waters), which are further described in 33 CFR § 328.4 (a), (b), and (c). 2 The Office of Coastal Management (OCM) of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources (LDNR) is the agency responsible for implementing the LCRP under the authority of the Louisiana State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act of 1978, as amended (Act 361, La. R.S. 49:214.21 et seq). 3 RS 49:214.22 (8) was added by Act 548 of the 2006 Louisiana Legislative Session to "support sustainable development in the coastal zone that accounts for potential impacts from hurricanes and other natural disasters and avoids environmental degradation resulting from damage to infrastructure caused by natural disasters". 4 The Louisiana Coastal Zone Boundary is the regulatory boundary utilized by the Permits/Mitigation Division of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources for implementing the Louisiana Coastal Resources Program (LCRP) for regulating development activities and managing the resources of the Coastal Zone through the Coastal Use Permit Program (CUP) (http://dnr.louisiana.gov/). 5 The Coastal Conservation Plan Boundary is the planning boundary for the 2012 Coastal Master Plan for project development and implementation for sustaining coastal Louisiana's waterways, natural resources, culture, and wetlands (http://www.coastalmasterplan.louisiana.gov/)

1

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank The majority of the site is located within the Louisiana Coastal Zone Boundary and partially within the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation Plan (LCWCP)6 Boundary (Attachment A: Figure 1). According to Light Detection and Ranging Data (LIDAR), the site ranges from above +8 feet to -1 feet with a majority of the site being below the five-foot contour (Attachment A: Figures 2 and 3)7. The SFCMB is approximately 15 miles south-southeast of Lake Charles in Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes, Louisiana in Sections 2, 3, 10, and 11 of Township 12 South, Range 8 West and Sections 26, 27, 34, and 35 of Township 11 South, Range 8 West. The site can be found on the USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle "Lake Charles SW, Louisiana" (Attachment A: Figure 4). The approximate center of the project is located at Latitude 30.032569° North and Longitude 93.16296° West.8 Both Calcasieu and Cameron parishes have a warm, relatively humid, subtropical climate. The 30-year average annual precipitation for both parishes is approximately 52 inches (Soil Conservation Service 1988 and 1995). The 30-year average annual rainfall collected at the Lake Charles Municipal Airport (Airport) is approximately 57.2 inches (Southern Regional Climate Center 2014 [Chart 1]), which is approximately six miles north-northwest of the SFCMB. The approximate growing seasons in Calcasieu Parish and Cameron Parish are approximately 259 days and 275 days9, respectively. The elevation of Calcasieu Parish ranges from zero to 95 feet mean sea level (MSL), and the elevation of Cameron Parish ranges from sea level to 20 feet above sea level (MSL).

Rainfall (Inches)

Chart 1. 30-year Average Rainfall, Southern Regional Climate Center, Lake Charles, Louisiana, 30.12° North and 93.23° West 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

30-Yr Avg

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

5.52

3.28

3.54

3.64

6.06

6.07

5.13

4.85

5.95

3.94

4.61

4.6

6

The LCWCP program was enacted under the federal Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act (Public Law 101-646, Title III-CWPPRA) by agreement with the Federal resource agencies. The goal and requirement of the Plan is to achieve no net loss of wetland value in the coastal areas of Louisiana as a result of development activities. 7 All elevations are purported using North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD) 8 The aforementioned and all subsequent geographic coordinates are based on the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83). 9 The growing season is based on an ambient low temperature of > 28° F for 2 out of every 10 years.

2

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank 1.2

Ownership and Sponsorship

South Fork Holdings, LLC (South Fork or Owner) will be the owner the Bank. A portion of the Bank site is owned by South Fork and the remainder is currently under contract for acquisition by South Fork. DLS is the managing entity of South Fork and will serve as the Sponsor. DLS will oversee construction and establishment of the Bank and will serve as the long-term manager and steward but may appoint a long-term steward if such appointment is approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) New Orleans District (CEMVN). The anticipated long-term management will consist of monitoring, invasive species control, controlled burning, boundary maintenance, and forest management. The site will be protected by a perpetual conservation servitude, which is described in Section 6.4. 1.3

Driving Directions to the Site

From the intersection of Interstate 210 and Louisiana Highway (LA Hwy) 385 in Lake Charles, proceed south on LA 385 for 8.8 miles. Turn left onto LA Hwy 384 and travel 4.3 miles. Turn left on LaBove Rd, travel 0.3 miles into the site. 2.0 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The goal of the SFCMB is the restoration10 (i.e., re-establishment 11 and rehabilitation12) of coastal prairie meadow wetlands (CP), fresh-intermediate marsh (FIM) wetlands and bottomland hardwood gallery forest (BLH) (Attachment A: Table 1), within the Government Ditch-South Fork Black Bayou Watershed (HUC 080802060203) of the Lower Calcasieu Watershed (HUC 08080206). The restoration of CP, FIM, and BLH wetlands will provide additional wetland functions13 and values not currently realized under the existing conditions and land use (e.g., flood storage, outdoor experiences, Nearctic-Neotropical birds and other aquatic fauna habitat). Current land uses are crop and livestock production which includes improved pastures, range land, cultivated crop land and man-made drainage (Attachment A: Table 1). Localized and downstream water quality will improve by removing livestock and increasing surface-water retention time. 10

Restoration is defined in 33 CFR §332.2 as the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural/historic functions to a former or degraded aquatic resource. For the purpose of tracking net gains in aquatic resource area, restoration is divided into two categories: re-establishment and rehabilitation. 11 Re-establishment is defined in 33 CFR § 332.2 as the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural/historic functions to a former aquatic resource. Re-establishment results in rebuilding a former aquatic resource and results in a gain in aquatic resource area and functions. 12 Rehabilitate is defined in 33 CFR § 332.2 as the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing natural/historic functions to a degraded aquatic resource. Rehabilitation results in a gain in aquatic resource function, but does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area. 13 Wetland function is defined in 33 CFR § 332 as the physical (i.e., water storage [USGS 1997]), chemical (i.e., nutrient transformation [USGS 1997]), and biological processes (i.e., organic matter production [USGS 1997]) that occur in ecosystems.

3

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Wildlife habitat will improve for resident biota and Nearctic-Neotropical migrating bird species (e.g., staging, resting, feeding, escape cover, etc.) through afforestation14 with native wetland trees and shrubs or re-establishment with wet prairie herbaceous species. Specifically, the project objectives are to restore and protect the physical, chemical, and biological functions of a BLH, CP and FIM wetland ecosystem as follows: ·

re-establish historic and self-sustaining surface hydrology to restore natural drainage patterns by backfilling artificial drainages and subsoiling to reduce soil compaction and increase surface water infiltration;

·

rehabilitate 429.2 acres of CP by removing the existing invasive pasture community and restore a CP ecosystem dominated by native herbaceous species to improve plant diversity and wildlife habitat;

·

re-establish 648.6 acres of CP within non-wetland pasture habitat and restore a prairie ecosystem dominated by native herbaceous species to improve plant diversity and wildlife habitat;

·

re-establish 30.1 acres of FIM within non-wetland pasture habitat and restore FIM habitat dominated by native herbaceous species to improve plant diversity and wildlife habitat

·

rehabilitate 27.0 acres of tidal FIM through hydrology restoration, Chinese tallow (Triadica sebifera) abatement, and prescribed fire to restore a FIM habitat dominated by native herbaceous species to improve plant diversity and wildlife habitat;

·

re-establish 200.7 acres of native BLH within non-wetland pastures through afforestation of native tree and shrub species to improve plant diversity and wildlife habitat;

·

rehabilitate 234.9 acres of native BLH within wetland pastures through afforestation of native tree and shrub species to improve plant diversity and wildlife habitat;

·

ensure long-term viability and sustainability by implementing specific management strategies such as: o active and adaptive management, o establishment of financial assurances and long-term maintenance funds (i.e., construction, establishment, and long-term escrow accounts), o initial, intermediate, and long-term monitoring, o initial, intermediate, and long-term maintenance, o initial, intermediate, and long-term invasive species control, and

14

The SAF (2011) defines afforestation (afforest) as "the establishment of a forest or stand in an area where the preceding vegetation or land use was not forest whereas reforestation is the re-establishment of forest cover either naturally (by natural seeding, coppice, or root suckers) or artificially (by direct seeding or planting) --note reforestation usually maintains the same forest type and is done promptly after the previous stand or forest was removed --synonym regeneration".

4

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank o controlled burning in CP and FIM areas. ·

provide long-term land use protection through the execution of a perpetual-term conservation servitude and to insure sufficient long-term funds are available to cover annual expenditures associated with maintenance and management of the SFCMB.

3.0 ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY OF THE SITE 3.1

Historical Ecological Characteristics of the Site

The SFCMB lies within the Great Southwest Prairies region. This vast region of Louisiana was historically dominated by grasses, graminoids (e.g., grasslike, sedges and rushes), and forbs (e.g., broadleafs, composites, legumes) species. Gallery forests and marshes were integrated with the prairie, which separated the prairies into geographically separate units and subunits (coves) with unique names. Specifically, the SFCMB falls within a unit identified on historic cartographic works as the "Calcasieu Prairie" (Louisiana Natural Heritage Program [LNHP] 2009; Allen 2006, Newton 1972). Based on a review of historical aerial photographs, the site was a wetland with mima mound15 topography that was landleveled for rice (Oryza sativa)16 cultivation and production (Attachment A: Figures 5 through 12). 3.2

Current Ecological Characteristics of the Site

3.2.1 Soils Soils mapped within the project area are listed as Judice silty clay loam (Ju); Ged mucky clay (GB); Leton silt loam (Lt); Morey loam (Mr); and Mowata-Vidrine silt loam (Mt) (Natural Resource Conservation Service [NRCS] 20141,2) (Attachment A: Figure 13). The Judice series consists of very deep, poorly drained, very slowly permeable soils in broad, slightly depressional areas. The Ged series consists of very poorly drained lands. Ged series is also a hydric soil typically found in freshwater marshes that border the Gulf Coast Prairies and are frequently flooded and ponded most of the time. The Leton series is a hydric soil that consists of poorly drained, slowly permeable soils formed in loamy alluvium on large flats and along drainage ways of the Gulf Coast Prairies. The Morey series is a nonhydric soil, poorly drained, and located on broad flats. The Mowata-Vidrine association is listed as a partially hydric soil, whereas the Mowata soils are intermound soils and Vidrine soils are mound soils of the mima mound complex common in Southwest Louisiana and Gulf Coastal Plain formations. The Mowata 15

Mima mounds (mounds) are a typical, circular to elliptical landforms observed in southwest Louisiana. The mounds range from 10 feet to more than 100 feet in diameter and 2 feet in height. The geologic origin of the mounds is unknown although differential erosion wind and water action from marine influence is a plausible theory. The colloquial term for the mounds is "pimple mounds". 16 The aforementioned and all scientific plant names in this report are from Lichvar (2013) and USDA Plants Database (NRCS 2014).

5

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank series consists of very deep, poorly drained and very slowly permeable soils, which are nearly level and slopes range from 0 to 1%. Vidrine soils consist of very deep, moderately well-drained to somewhat poorly drained, and slowly permeable, which are narrow to broad mounds with slopes ranging from 0-3%. 3.2.2 Vegetation The SFCMB consists of a combination of pastures, agriculture fields, freshwater marsh, and forested/scrub wetlands (Attachment A: Figure 14). Vegetation in the pasture areas is managed to support production of livestock. Prior-converted pastures were comprised of dominant species such as yellow nut sedge (Cyperus esculentus), Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), jointed flat sedge (Cyperus articulatus), and marsh flatsedge (Cyperus pseudovegetus). The agriculture fields are currently in crop production with rice being the predominant crop. The forested/scrub wetlands on site were dominated by Chinese tallow, eastern baccharis (Baccharis halimifolia), wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), and Macartney rose (Rosa bracteata). Vegetation found in freshwater marshes consists of common rush (Juncus effusus), giant cutgrass (Zizaniopsis miliacea), marshhay cordgrass (Spartina patens), and sedges (Carex spp. and Cyperus spp.). 3.2.3 Hydrology Project hydrology is influenced by localized rainfall, hardpan17 development, and remnant depressional areas of the historic mima mound topography. MowataVidrine soils have been described as "run-on" soils due to their concave nature, meaning these soils are a source for hydrological runoff from nearby soils, which are more convex in nature18. Given this hydrological influence, "marais" (little marshes) and "platins" (ponds) were associated with the prairie ecosystem on this soil type and were similar to freshwater marshes. Natural hydrology is altered by agricultural drainage improvements and soil surface compaction. The agriculture drainage improvements prevent surface hydrological influences from the adjacent marshes and drainage canals. The overall drainage pattern is from the northeast to the southwest into South Fork Black Bayou and subsequently into Calcasieu Lake. 3.2.4 Jurisdictional Wetland Status The following Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations (PJD) are have been issued for the entire acreage described within this prospectus (Attachment B).

17

Pan as defined by the SCS (1988) is a compact dense layer in a soil that impedes the movement of water and the growth of roots (i.e., hardpan, fragipan, claypan, plowpan, and traffic pan). 18 Based on notes from Dr. Malcolm Vidrine in personal communication with Mr. Orville Touchet, former Louisiana State Soil Scientist in January 1999 and described in Vidrine 2010.

6

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank ·

·

·

On August 13, 2013, the CEMVN issued a PJD (MVN-2013-01755-SC) on a 640.8-acre tract of land located in Sections 3, 10 and 11, Township 12 South, Range 8 West, Cameron Parish, Louisiana. On October 21, 2013, the CEMVN issued a PJD (MVN-2013-02069-SR) on a 733-acre tract located in Sections 3 and 10, Township 12 South, Range 8 West, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. On July 14, 2014, the CWMVN issued a PJD (MVN-2014-00766-SR) on 980.6 acres located in Sections 34 and 35, Township 11 South, Range 8 West, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana.

3.3 General Need for the Project in this Area The primary factors for the general need of the SFCMB are listed below: ·

· ·

·

the SFCMB will reduce runoff and improve the quality of water flowing into the Calcasieu River Estuary within the Louisiana Coastal Zone Boundary; the SFCMB has documented presence of wetland indicators (i.e., hydric soils, hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation); historic aerial photography indicates the potential of a historic coastal prairie landscape with mima mound topography prior to agricultural conversion; and the restoration of BLH gallery forest, CP wetland, and tidal FIM habitat within this watershed will benefit native invertebrate and invertebrate biota, and migrating Nearctic-Neotropical migrants.

The SFCMB is within 18 miles of the Gulf of Mexico coastline, is undeveloped, and is strategically located in an area important to Nearctic-neotropical migrants. Within an 18-mile radius of the SFCMB, approximately 58% of the landscape provides little natural habitat for migrant bird staging or fallout shelter (i.e., agricultural [24.9%], open water [13.1%] and developed land [10.5%]). The remaining 42% is very important to migrant birds and is comprised of 24.7% emergent herbaceous wetlands (coastal marsh), 13.3% deciduous/woody wetlands, 9.4% evergreen forest, and 4.2% scrub-shrub (Attachment A: Figure 15). In addition, within one mile surrounding the SFCMB, 88.2% of the land use is either hay, pasture, cultivated crops or agro-forestry (e.g. eucalyptus plantations for pulp production). Approximately 7.5% is woody wetlands, emergent wetlands, herbaceous, open water, barren land, scrub-shrub or mixed forest. The remaining 4.3% is developed (Attachment A: Figure 16). Below the SFCMB, in the southern half of the 18-mile radius, is the most strategic, migration zone for Nearctic-Neotropicals. Whether staging to migrate south or recovering (fallout shelter) from the trans-Gulf migration, only 1.5% of this area provides forested-shrub habitat for migrating birds. It is estimated that 80,000 birds per mile of migration front arrive on the Louisiana coastline each day during peak spring migration, which places a tremendous strain on available food sources.

7

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank In terms of species diversity, more than half of the 160 species of North American Nearctic-Neotropicals migrate through the Louisiana Cheniers (Barrow and Fontenot 2006). Both the number of migrating birds and species diversity adds considerable value for the restoration and long-term management of the project area as BLH-shrub ecosystem (Barrow et al. 2005). The restored CP, FIM, and BLH communities will reduce surface runoff and increase soil infiltration (Richardson et al. 2001). Organic matter deposition will increase, soil bulk density will decrease, hydraulic conductivity will increase, soil saturation potential will increase, and the formation of redoximorphic features will be enhanced (Collins and Kuehl 2001). Soil organic carbon is critical to soil reduction and the formation of low chroma colors will increase as soil organic material increases from the deposition of leaf litter, coarse woody debris, and decaying root material (Collins and Kuehl 2001). Borsari and Shirley (1993) revealed noticeable increase to soil organic matter at the Cajun Prairie Restoration Project three years after restoration began. 3.3.1 Coastal Prairie Ecological Value It is estimated that as much as 2.5 million acres of coastal prairie existed in Louisiana at the time of early European settlement (USGS 2000). Much of this habitat has been converted to pasture or agriculture. With this conversion and fire abatement, less than 100 acres of remnant prairie exists and coastal prairie is listed as critically imperiled (S119) and vulnerable to extirpation within the state of Louisiana (LNHP 2009). Remnant coastal prairie acreage is limited to narrow strips of land adjacent to railroad ROWs, which have been undisturbed by agriculture, but subject to frequent burning by the railroads to keep the tracks clear of debris (Allain et al. 2000, LNHP 2009, Vidrine 2010). Today, restoration efforts have primarily been catered toward smaller projects such as the 10-acre Cajun Prairie Restoration Project in Eunice, Louisiana or to small home gardens. However, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) implemented the Duralde Prairie, a 345-acre coastal prairie restoration project located in Evangeline Parish, Louisiana. Although these efforts are important, Vidrine (2010) noted that restoration must occur on larger tracts to insure sufficient habitat for beneficial insects and pollinators. Restoration at the SFCMB will result in 1,077.8 acres of restored coastal prairie wetlands that will provide habitat for migrating Nearctic-Neotropical migrants. In particular, six (6) priority bird species will benefit from establishing the ecotone between the prairie ROW and BLH wetlands (Vermillion et al. 2008). The list consists of the Northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), Le Conte's sparrow (Ammodramus leconteii), seaside sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus), Cerulean warbler (Dendroica cerulea), golden-winged warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera), and Swainson's warblers (Limnothlypis 19

The LNHP (2009) has designated coastal prairie as S1 given five (5) or fewer extant populations are known or environmental and anthropogenic factors make this habitat especially vulnerable to extirpation.

8

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank swainsonii). The integration of forested-shrub and coastal prairie habitat will benefit other migratory species such as gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea), ruby-throated hummingbird (Archilochus colubris), and hooded warbler (Setophaga citrina) and resident bird species such as the yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens), painted bunting (Passerina ciris), orchard oriole (Icterus spurius) and eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus)20. The coastal prairie is the wintering ground for the whooping-crane (Grus americana), a federally-listed endangered species (Allain et al. 2000). Coastal prairie restoration will enhance the forage resources for nectar feeding and pollinating species. Allain (2007) catalogued 650 species of coastal prairie plants along with their conservation ranking. More than 100 species of skippers and butterflies are found in the Louisiana Prairies (Allain et al. 2000). One particular plant species, rattlesnake master (Eryngium yuccifolium) provides foraging resources for over 200 invertebrate species (Coastal Prairie Partnership 2009). Furthermore, nectarivorous, prey species (e.g., Order Diptera [flies]) provide forage for as many as 100 species of dragonfly (Order Odonata) (Allain et al. 2000). Vidrine (2010) listed over 400 invertebrates and 275 species of vertebrates known to inhabit the Cajun Prairie. The diversity of insects in these habitats provides increased pollinating opportunity as well as food sources for various wildlife species. 3.3.2 Tidal Fresh-intermediate Marsh Ecological Value Prior to the settlement of south Louisiana, the estimated acreage of fresh marsh ranged from one (1) million to two (2) million acres and fresh-intermediate marsh ranged from 100,000 to 500,000 acres (LNHP 2009). Since settlement and agricultural expansion, the acreage of fresh water marsh has been reduced by 25% to 50% and fresh-intermediate marsh has been reduced by 50% to 75%. In this region of Cameron Parish, tidal fresh-intermediate marsh is a transitional habitat between the coastal prairie and brackish tidal marshes. Due to proximity and attachment of the tidal FIM to the Calcasieu estuary, it will serve as habitat for species that often range into tidal freshwater marshes during their life cycle or utilize detritus originating from upstream freshwater sources. Examples of these species are brown shrimp (Farfantepenaeus aztecus), blue crab (Callinectes sapidus), the killifish family [Cyprinodontidae], gulf menhaden (Brevoortia patronus), striped mullet (Mugil cephalus), southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), and red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus) (USFWS 1984, USFWS 1992, Louisiana State University AgCenter 20131,2). The freshwater marsh combined with the coastal prairie restoration provides habitat for numerous waterfowl, wading birds, Nearctic-Neotropical songbirds, and pollinating insects. Allain et al. (2000) purport that these areas harbor more red-tailed hawks (Buteo

20

Personal communication between Dr. Billy DeLany of Delta Land Services and Mr. Mike Baldwin and Dr. Wylie Barrow of the USGS National Wetland Research Center, via electronic mail dated October 30, 2012

9

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank jamaicensis), northern harriers (Circus cyaneus) and white-faced ibis (Plegadis chichi) than any other ecological region in the United States. Fresh-intermediate marshes are preferred habitat for residential, non-migratory whooping cranes. The fresh-intermediate marshes of southwest Louisiana were once home to large numbers of non-migratory whooping cranes. However, throughout the first half of the 20th century, this species began to decline and by 1947, only one (1) whooping crane remained at White Lake. In 1950, it was captured and relocated to the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge in Texas. In 2011, an effort began to re-establish a Non-Essential Experimental (NEP) population of resident whooping cranes to southwest Louisiana. The goal of this effort is to establish a flock of 130 individuals and 30 nesting pairs which can survive for 10 years without restocking. To meet this goal, a cohort of 10 juvenile birds was released on February 16, 2011, at the White Lake Wetlands Conservation Areas (WLWCA) in Vermilion Parish approximately 40 to 45 miles east of the SFCMB. This was followed by the reintroduction of a cohort of 16 juveniles on December 27, 2011; a cohort of 14 juveniles on December 19, 2012; and a cohort of 10 juveniles on January 2, 2014. Of these cohorts released, 30 birds have survived to near maturity with 6 forming 3 bonded pairs with one pair producing a pair of eggs in 2014. The restoration of freshwater marsh will cumulatively work in conjunction with other restoration efforts, such as the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) to protect and restore coastal marshes to insure the viability and sustainability of whooping crane population (LDWF 20131). The mosaic of habitats restored by the SFCMB will provide a wide variety of habitats that have been observed being utilized by the released whooping cranes. King and Perkins (2013) purported that whooping cranes have been observed utilizing forested and shrub areas which had been previously undocumented. The management of the CP and FIM sections of the SFCMB as a wet area with controlled burns could potentially provide foraging habitat as whooping cranes have been known to target areas that are flooded or burned in search of acorns, snails, insects, rodents and other items (LDWF 20132, U.S. Department of Interior National Biological Service [USDOI NBS] 1996). 3.3.3 Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Forest Ecological Value The restoration of 435.6 acres of BLH gallery forest wetland habitat will benefit native wildlife, nesting bird species, and migrating Neoarctic-Neotropical birds (Barrow et al. 2005, NRCS 2005, Vermillion et al. 2008). Gautreaux (1975) and Barrow et al. (2005) define coastal forests as wooded communities within approximately 62 miles of the Gulf Coast. In addition, Barrow et al. (2005) delineated the coastline of Cameron Parish as Consistent Abundant21 habitat in the Northwest Region of the Gulf of Mexico. In the Northwest Region, several 21

Consistent Abundant as defined by Barrow et al. (2005) is an area used by large numbers of Nearctic-Neotropical migrants each year and season.

10

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank species of facultative wetland forest and shrub species are forest components between the Mississippi River and Colorado Rivers (Barrow et al. 2005). These forest and shrub species provide foraging cover (e.g., twig buds, flowering parts, hard mast, and soft mast), resting cover (e.g., understory, mid-story and evergreen canopies), and escape cover from predators (e.g., raptors and mammals). Furthermore, many of the forest-shrub species listed by Barrow et al. (2005) are recognized species used for restoring bottomland hardwood wetlands and other wetland habitats (Allen et al. 2001, LNHP 2009). LNHP (2009) purported that baygalls likely occurred in the coastal prairie system. Baygalls are typically shrubdominated or mature swamps having evergreen shrubs comprising the midstory and understory strata (LNHP 2009). Vidrine (2010) noted that the restoration of gallery forests within the prairie ecosystem may be required in prairie restoration efforts in order to create sustainable ecosystems. Fearn (1995) concluded that tree species such as those in the genus Pinus, Quercus, and Taxodium have been components of the prairie ecosystem based on pollen, phytolith, charcoal and diatom studies conducted within the coastal prairie region. From 1952 to 1974, human development in the Chenier Plain decreased the coastal forests by 17 percent and these coastal forests occupied only 6 percent of the total area (Gosselink et al. 1979). Grazing of Chenier Plain forests alters the forest structure and species composition (Barrow et al. 2000). Overall, Barrow et al. (2000) found that most en route forest-dwelling migrants tolerated some degradation of the Chenier Plain forests; however, select groups (e.g., early migrants, dead-leaf foragers, frugivores, and nectarivores) used grazed forests significantly less than undisturbed forests. The re-established forest-shrub wetland of the SFCMB will provide diverse foraging opportunities for NearcticNeotropical migrants during the winter and spring migration. The increase in forested acreage would play an important role in the strategy of establishing and protecting corridors from the coast to inland areas. Corridor conservation and restoration is identified as a strategy to facilitate wildlife and plant migration in response to transitions anticipated with predicted climate change (National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy Management Team [Strategy] 2012). For the Nearctic-Neotropical spring migration from the Cameron Parish Gulf Coast to the forests of the Calcasieu Watershed, forest-shrub cover is scattered and dominated by Chinese tallow. The SFCMB is excellently positioned along this migratory corridor to provide several cover types (e.g., resting, escape, protective) and forages (e.g., seasonally available insects, soft mast and hard mast). Barrow et al. 2005 identified several habitat variables when selecting and planning a location for creating Nearctic-Neotropical migrant cover which are considered in the restoration strategy of the SFCMB which are listed below: · ·

identifying sites within 15.5 miles to 62.1 miles from the Gulf coastline; staging areas while waiting for favorable migration weather;

11

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank · · · · ·

giving consideration to the existing landscape mosaic when selecting a site to decrease the distance between forested-shrub cover; emphasizing habitat structure and complexity of plant community design; controlling invasive exotic species; considering diverse dietary needs (e.g., insectivorous [insects], frugivorous [fruits], nectarivorous [flowers] or omnivorous [generalists]); and providing drinking water sources.

Chinese tallow is highly invasive and has naturalized from North Carolina to south Texas (Bruce et al. 1997 in Barrow et al. 2005). In the Chenier Plain and Coastal Prairie, Chinese tallow has and will continue to invade abandoned farmland, pastureland, and fencerows. Barrow and Renne (2001) determined that some migrants were more common in Chinese tallow habitat, but migrant species diversity was significantly greater in riparian forests dominated by native species. Furthermore, insect biomass was lower in Chinese tallow habitat and Lepidopteran larvae, an important food resource, were absent. The authors concluded that Chinese tallow communities may provide cover for migrants but were lacking in forage resources. Therefore, the removal and long-term control of Chinese tallow and other invasive species on the SFCMB will increase habitat quality for Nearctic-Neotropical migrants. 3.4 Technical Feasibility The construction work required to develop the SFCMB is routine and feasible. The construction work will consist of site preparation, afforestation, filling artificial drains, and re-establishing dredged, historic other waters by filling and swaling. The large project size, diversity of elevations, abundant rainfall, high ground water, adjacency to tidal waters, the documented presence of hydric soils and the diversity of soil types indicate high probability for successful restoration of a diversity of wetland habitats. 4.0 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MITIGATION BANK 4.1 Site Restoration Plan Within the 1,609.4-acre project area, 1,077.8 acres of CP, 57.1 acres of FIM, and 435.6 acres of BLH wetland will be re-established or rehabilitated (Attachment A: Table 1, Figure 17). Areas determined to be non-wetlands per the PJDs will become re-established wetlands. Areas determined to be existing wetlands per the PJDs will be rehabilitated and areas determined to be non-wetlands will be reestablished (USACE 2012). CP will be restored on the lower elevations and BLH (gallery forests) will be restored on higher elevations. FIM will be rehabilitated in the lowest elevations. LNHP (2009) noted that gallery forests tended to occupy the higher elevations within a coastal prairie community.

12

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank The SFCMB will be compatible with current land uses within the Lower Calcasieu River Watershed given that the Bank will provide additional forested, prairie, and tidal marsh habitats. The proposed mitigation plan involves the cessation of agricultural production (i.e., agronomic, cattle, and hay), the restoration of surface hydrology and native plant communities, and the implementation of effective short-term, intermediate, and long-term management strategies. All interior fences will be removed prior to site preparation activities in late summer. Drainage ditches and access roads will be filled or degraded to surface level, respectively. The drainage ditches (historic natural drainage patterns) will be filled with in situ soil material and restored to naturally occurring drainage patterns. Site preparation efforts will include the removal and control of Chinese tallow through herbicide treatments, mechanized clearing, cutting, shredding, or a combination thereof. 4.1.1 Hydrology Restoration Hydrology restoration will increase surface water retention and soil saturation, reduce nonpoint source runoff, and improve water quality through nutrient immobilization (uptake) by vegetation. DLS anticipates no long-term structural management requirements will be needed to assure sustained hydrology. To restore historic sheet flow, approximately 34,535 linear feet of artificial drains will be returned to natural grade, utilizing approximately 115,116 cubic yards of in situ earthen fill material from relict drainage ditch spoil and the existing access road (Attachment C). The access road will continue to be used as a 10-foot wide access trail for monitoring and invasive species control but will be degraded to natural level as to not impede sheet flow, and. Approximately 3,450 linear feet of Section 10 Other Waters will be returned to natural grade, utilizing approximately 20,444 cubic yards of in situ earthen fill material from relict drainage ditch spoil. To facilitate an east-west flow and aquatic organism ingress/egress throughout the FIM restoration areas, two (2) pipe-arch culverts will be installed within an existing north-south access road. These types of culverts provide for efficient hydraulic capacity at low water levels/flow. This hydraulic efficiency minimizes siltation or debris settlement within the culvert. Each culvert will have a rise of 24 inches with a span of 35 inches for a cross-sectional area of 4.5 square feet. (Attachment A: Figure 17 and Attachment C: Figure C-11). In addition, the FIM is openly connected to South Fork Black Bayou at several locations for unimpeded water flow and aquatic organism ingress and egress. 4.1.2 Coastal Prairie Restoration CP will be restored by planting marshhay cordgrass plugs and broadcast seeded with selected/available facultative (FAC) to obligate (OBL) graminoid species and forbs listed or described in published information (Allain et al. 1999, Allain et al. 2000, USGS 2000, LNHP 2009) (Attachment A: Table 2). Coastal prairie restoration activities will include site preparation, marshhay cordgrass plug planting, and seeding of facultative or wetter prairie plant species in the fall of 2015 and winter of 2016. Site preparation will include herbicide treatment,

13

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank surface tillage, and shallow ripping to remove exotic/noxious pasture grasses such as bermudagrass and woody species such as Chinese tallow and reduce compaction attributable to prior livestock usage. Light cultipacking will follow surface tillage to reduce soil runoff and provide a level platform which allows for more efficient planting operations. A selection of seeds will be distributed in a patchwork fashion throughout the site. The seed mix will consist of species discussed in Allain et al. 2000, Allain et al. 1999, USGS (2000), and LNHP (2009). Seeds potentially used for planting will be procured from seed producers and harvesters in the Gulf Coastal Plain of Louisiana and Texas. Marshhay cordgrass plugs will be planted within the restoration area in the time frame from December through April. No further soil disturbance or cultivation will be implemented after the initial planting/seeding. Fire is an integral part of maintaining coastal prairies. Fire reduces invasive species, limits woody encroachment, encourages seed germination, encourages light penetration, promotes desirable prairie species, and maintains a desirable community (Allain et al. 1999, Allain et al. 2000). Chinese tallow is a persistent invader of the coastal prairie system and can cause the collapse of such a system if left unabated. Eastern baccharis is also an aggressive woody shrub. Fire can prevent and control the spread of these species as well as undesirable native and exotic species such as Vasey grass, bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), Brazilian vervain (Verbena brasiliensis), and bull thistle (Cirsium horridulum) (Attachment A: Table 3). Fire has beneficial effects on soil nutrients as it mobilizes potassium, which enhances blooming and the movement of nitrogen and phosphorous in the soil (Grace 1998, Allain and Grace 2001, Vidrine 2010). The establishment of marshhay cordgrass is important as it adds sufficient fuels in wetter areas in order to provide a fire of sufficient heat to control Chinese tallow. Vidrine (2010) noted the lack of sufficient fuels for controlled burns did not effectively control Chinese tallow in the wetter and lower portions of the Cajun Prairie Restoration Project. In drier areas of this project, fuels were sufficient for controlled burns to control and suppress Chinese tallow. A winter burn will be conducted in the first year and may be conducted on a frequency of one to three years. Many of the controlled burns are expected to occur in the dormant season when conditions are typically more favorable to conduct such activities (i.e., favorable weather conditions, ease of smoke management, etc.). However, growing season burns will be implemented when possible as these burns can enhance species diversity (Allain et al. 1999, Allain et al. 2000). Fire breaks will be established along the perimeter and juxtaposed to the BLH gallery forest restoration to contain fires to the coastal prairie restoration area. In the event a controlled burn cannot be conducted as scheduled, the site may be mowed in the dormant season in-lieu of fire management. DLS anticipates that weedy annuals will predominate the system over the first few years; however, as succession progresses, more desirable perennial species will begin to dominate the system (Allain et al. 1999, Allain et al. 2000).

14

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank 4.1.3 Tidal Fresh-intermediate Marsh Restoration FIM will be rehabilitated by re-establishing the hydrologic connection with South Fork Black Bayou controlling, the cessation of cattle grazing, control of invasive species, and prescribed fire. Within the SFCMB, 57.1 acres of tidal FIM will be rehabilitated by restoring the hydrologic connection of the SFCMB area to South Fork Black Bayou, removal and control of Chinese tallow, and the use of prescribed fire to re-establish freshintermediate marsh plant species diversity and stability. Hydrologic barriers will be removed to reconnect the marsh to South Fork Black Bayou. Chinese tallow will be removed by herbicide application and prescribed fire. In locations to be determined (on an as-need-basis and will be reported in the as-built report), marshhay cordgrass plugs will be planted to colonize disturbed soil surfaces (hydrology restoration sites) and areas lacking of marsh plant cover. 4.1.4 Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Forest Restoration BLH gallery restoration activities will include site preparation and coincide with planting wet prairie plant species in the fall of 2015 and winter of 2016. Site preparation activities within the restoration area will be accomplished through herbicide treatments, cultivation, and ripping the soil at equidistant intervals to a depth of approximately 18 inches which will increase water infiltration (Allen et al. 2001). Afforestation activities will include the planting of native tree and shrub species during the first planting season (December 15, 2015 through March 15, 2016) following site preparation. Tree and shrub species selection will be siteappropriate in terms of habitat design and moisture regime, and upwards of 15 species may be represented in the planting assemblage to insure adequate species richness (Twedt and Best 2004). The distribution of the trees and shrubs will create a mosaic of hard mast and soft mast species that will provide seasonally available forages (Barrow et al. 2005). The potential planting list consists of species based on experience and scientific knowledge (LNH 2009, Lester et al. 2005, Burns and Honkala 1990, Barrow et al. 2005) (Attachment A: Table 4). The proposed species are OBL, FACW, and FAC per the 2012 National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar 2013). However, to increase habitat diversity for Nearctic-Neotropicals, upland species, primarily live oak (Quercus virginiana) and red mulberry (Morus rubra), may be included in the planting assemblage. Although these species are designated as FACU, they are known to exist in elevated areas within wetland habitats dominated by FAC to FACW species. Selected species will be locally produced native ecotypes that are appropriate for the restored site conditions and will provide considerable wildlife and Nearctic-Neotropical migrant habitat value. The exact species and quantities for planting will be determined by the availability of such species from commercial nurseries providing localized ecotype seedlings. Initial planting densities will be approximately 538 stems per acre. Seedlings will be mixed prior

15

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank to planting so that areas are not comprised of a single species (Twedt and Best 2004). Other species recommended for planting that are beneficial for migratory birds are sweet acacia (Acacia farnesiana), Hercules' club (Zanthoxylum clava-herculis), honeylocust (Gleditsia triacanthos), roughleaf dogwood (Cornus drummondii), stiff dogwood (Cornus foemina), and buckthorn (Frangula caroliniana). These species were not included in the planting list as the commercial availability of such species is currently unknown; however, DLS will investigate this availability further and will encourage any natural regeneration of such species should it occur. 4.2 Current Site Risks DLS does not foresee any adverse impacts to the Bank resulting from the continued existence and operation of the neighboring land uses. Land use and cover type west of the SFCMB are existing riverine and palustrine forested wetlands along the South Fork Black Bayou riparian corridor. There are no existing hydrological disturbances on the SFCMB over which DLS or Owner does not control. Adjacent landownership and management will not affect the establishment and long-term success of the SFCMB. The canal along the east boundary is not connected to the SFCMB, appears abandoned, and is not maintained for irrigation or drainage purposes. The irrigation canal is colonized primarily by Chinese tallow and giant cutgrass. The adjacent spoil of the canal is not maintained and inhabited by large diameter trees and shrubs (e.g., Chinese tallow, sugarberry (Celtis laevigata), winter willow, wax myrtle). DLS did consider the possibility of encroachment of non-native eucalyptus into the SFCMB from agro-forestry plantation within the surrounding land use. However, eucalyptus is not an opportunistic invader of disturbed site as many other invasive species such as Chinese tallow and is not very tolerable of plant competition. Eucalyptus requires intensive site cultivation, herbicide application, and fertilization in order to establish and maintain it (Louisiana State University Agricultural Center [LSU Ag Center] 2010). Therefore, the threat of potential encroachment is extremely minimal. However, DLS will monitor the site for this species as part of its invasive species monitoring of the SFCMB. 4.3 Mortgages, Easements, and Encumbrances The SFCMB is in the land survey process. Upon completion of the title report and signed survey plat will be included in the draft mitigation banking instrument. DLS knows of the existence of two pipeline rights-of-ways (ROWs) and these ROWs have been identified. These ROW are not included as mitigation credit acres but will be maintained as herbaceous plant communities. DLS intend on encumbering these ROWs with the conservation servitude so they remain part of the 1,609.4-acre SFCMB project area. Although the ROWs will not be the dominant servitude, it would become dominant should the ROW agreements

16

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank become terminated in the future. This would provide for long-term protection as it insures the ROW would never be converted to another use which may be incompatible with the SFCMB. 4.4 Long-Term Sustainability of the Site and Water Rights Long-term viability and sustainability of the SFCMB will be ensured through active and adaptive management including, but not limited to, prescribed fire, invasive species control, appropriate monitoring and long-term maintenance. No long-term structural management will be required because there are no water control structures or forced drainage ways to maintain. A long-term management plan will be included with the mitigation banking instrument (MBI), which will detail long-term management needs and costs, and identify a funding mechanism in accordance with 33 CFR § 332.7 (d). With regard to water rights, Article 490 of the Louisiana Civil Code treats water resources under the theory of absolute ownership and rule of capture provided that such capture does not result in harm to neighboring properties. The SFCMB will depend primarily on precipitation and backwater, tidal flooding. As such, longterm hydrology maintenance will not depend on the utilization of water captured from irrigation wells; therefore, sufficient water rights are ensured for such purposes. DLS does not foresee any adverse impacts on neighboring properties as a result of this project. 5.0 PROPOSED GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA Due to the unique wetland types restored within the project area, the SFCMB will provide mitigation for two service areas based on the habitat type. The primary service area for bottomland hardwood credits is the Lower Calcasieu Watershed (HUC 08080206) (Attachment A: Figure 18). The secondary service area will include the Upper Calcasieu (HUC 08080203), Whiskey Chitto [Ouiska Chitto] (HUC 08080204), and West Fork Calcasieu (HUC 08080205) watersheds. These watersheds collectively comprise the Calcasieu River Basin as defined by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ 1999). The service area for coastal prairie will use an ecoregion approach consisting of the geographical area encompassing the historic range of the coastal prairie of Louisiana also known as the "Tall Grass Prairie, Cajun Prairie, Great Southwest Prairie, Eastern Coastal Prairie, or Gulf Cordgrass Prairie" (Allain et al. 2000, Allain et al. 1999, USGS 2000, LNHP 2009). The primary service area for coastal prairie is the Lower Calcasieu Subregion (HUC 08080206) (Attachment A: Figure 19). The secondary service area consists of the watersheds contained within the Western Gulf Coastal Plain Level III (WGCP3) Ecoregion. Watersheds comprising the secondary service consists of portions of the West Fork Calcasieu (08080205), Upper Calcasieu (08080203), Mermentau Headwaters (08080201), Bayou Teche (08080102) and

17

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Vermilion (08080103) Subregions and the entirety of the Mermentau (08080202) Subregion. 6.0 OPERATION OF THE MITIGATION BANK 6.1 Project Representatives Sponsor:

Delta Land Services, LLC 1090 Cinclare Drive Port Allen, LA 70767 Attn: Daniel Bollich\ Lee Walters Phone: 225.388.5146\ 225.388.5198 Electronic Mail: daniel@deltaland-services.com\ lee@deltaland-services.com

Landowner:

South Fork Holdings, LLC c/o Delta Land Services, LLC 1090 Cinclare Drive Port Allen, LA 70767 Attn: Winship Songy Phone: 225.388.5187 Electronic Mail: winship@deltaland-services.com

6.2 Qualifications of the Sponsor DLS will serve as the Sponsor. DLS is a land management and restoration company whose technical staff includes Certified Wildlife Biologists, Professional Wetland Scientists, and Certified Foresters. In addition, DLS has construction specialists on staff experienced in wetland construction activities such as heavy equipment operation, vegetation establishment, herbicide application, and contractor management. Mr. Daniel Bollich is the lead project manager for DLS. Mr. Bollich is a certified Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS) through the Society of Wetland Scientists (SWS); a Certified Wildlife Biologist (CWB) through the Wildlife Society (TWS); and a Certified Forester through the Society of American Foresters (SAF). He has over 15 years of experience in wetlands, wildlife and forest management. This experience includes the development of over fourteen approved banks within the CEMVN, CEMVK, CESWG, CESWF, and the Little Rock District (CESWL). Dr. Bill DeLany and Mr. Lee Walters will serve as assistant managers to the project. Dr. Bill DeLany is a senior restoration ecologist for DLS and serves as an assistant manager to the project. Dr. DeLany is also a PWS with over 25 years of experience with federal resource agencies, private land holdings, academia, and environmental consulting. His experience includes employment with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Miami Corporation, and McNeese State University as well as service in the United States Marine Corps (USMC). Mr.

18

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Walters has over 11 years of experience in natural resource management and environmental consulting including wetlands, wildlife and forest management and has been involved with the development of over 10 approved mitigation banks with the CEMVN and CEMVK. The biographies of DLS personnel are available at www.deltaland-services.com. DLS currently operates eight approved wetland mitigation banks within the CEMVN, Galveston District (CESWG) and CEMVK totaling 3,918.9 acres. These are the Bayou Conway Mitigation Bank (MVN-2010-01111), Roseland Refuge Mitigation Bank (MVK-2010-01423), Oak Land Mitigation Bank (MVK2011-00308), Bayou Choupique Mitigation Bank (MVN-2011-00824), Ponderosa Ranch of Pointe Coupee Mitigation Bank (MVN-2011-03213), Moss Lake Mitigation Bank (MVN-2012-02652), Bayou Fisher Mitigation Bank (MVN2013-02342), and the Danza del Rio Mitigation Bank (SWG-2011-00566). DLS currently has 5 pending mitigation banks that are under review with the CEMVN, CEMVK, CESWG and Fort Worth District (CESWF), which total 3,026.4 acres and include approximately 47,694.0 linear feet of proposed stream restoration. These include the proposed Graham Creek Mitigation Bank (SWF-2011-00309), Little Bayou Pierre Mitigation Bank (MVK-2012-00555), Phillips Creek Mitigation Bank (SWF-2012-00417), Laurel Valley Coastal Mitigation Bank (MVN-2013-02798), and Long Island Cove Mitigation Bank (SWG-2014-00210). In addition to mitigation banking, DLS serves as the responsible party for the establishment and maintenance of 848.0 acres of approved Permittee-Responsible Mitigation (PRM) projects with another 2,392.4 acres pending review within the CEMVN. 6.3 Proposed Long-Term Ownership and Management Representatives South Fork will serve as the long-term owner and DLS will serve as the Sponsor, long-term manager, and steward of the Bank. However, DLS may appoint a longterm steward if such appointment is approved by the CEMVN. The anticipated long-term management will consist of monitoring, invasive species control, controlled burning, forest management, boundary maintenance, and site protection. 6.4 Site Protection DLS (or Long-term Steward) / Owner, or its heirs, assigns or purchasers shall be responsible for protecting lands contained within the mitigation area in perpetuity. In order to provide for such protection, the Owner shall execute a perpetual conservation servitude (pursuant to the Louisiana Conservation Servitude Act, R.S. 9:1271 et seq.) on all acreage identified as the SFCMB and record it in the Mortgage and Conveyances Records Office of Cameron and Calcasieu Parish. The conservation servitude will be held by a qualified, non-profit organization whose mission is to retain or protect the land's natural habitat, open space, scenic, educational, recreational, historical, or cultural values.

19

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank 6.5 Long-Term Strategy Long-term management will consist of monitoring, vegetation management, invasive species control, prescribed/controlled burns, boundary maintenance, site protection, and the funding of such activities. The BLH gallery forest wetland habitat will be managed to increase and maintain the biological, chemical, and physical wetland functions of the SFCMB, which will provide forested habitat capable of supporting populations for priority wildlife species (e.g., native wildlife and Nearctic-Neotropical migrants). Invasive species control will include control of nuisance invasive species such as Chinese tallow, Macartney rose, and feral hogs (Sus scrofa). A long-term management plan will be included with the mitigation banking instrument which will detail long-term management needs, costs and identify a funding mechanism in accordance with 33 CFR § 332.7 (d). DLS (or Long-term Steward) and the Owner (or its heirs, assigns or purchasers) shall be responsible protecting lands contained within the SFCMB in perpetuity. 7.0 REFERENCES Allain, L., M. Vidrine, V. Grafe, C. Allen, and S. Johnson (1999) Paradise Lost? The coastal prairie of Louisiana and Texas. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey (Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge, Lake Arthur, LA). 40 pp. Allain, L., M. Vidrine, V.Grafe, C. Allen, and S. Johnson (2000) Paradise Lost? The coastal prairie of Louisiana and Texas (2nd edition). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey (with Coastal Conservation Initiative, Texas). 40 pp. Allain, L. and J. B. Grace (2001) Changes in density and height of the shrub Baccharis halimifolia following burning in coastal tallgrass prairie. Proceedings of the 17th North American Prairie Conference, 17: 66-72. Allain, L. (2007) Coastal Prairie Restoration Information System: Version 1 (Louisiana). Data series 256. U.S. Department of the Interior: U.S. Geological Survey. CDrom. Allen, J.A., Keeland, B.D., Stanturf, J.A., Clewell, A.F., and H.E. Kennedy (2001 [rev. 2004]). A guide to bottomland hardwood restoration: US Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR-2000-0011. USDA Forest Service, Southern Forest Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-40, 132 pp. Allen, C.M, D.A. Newman, and H.H. Winters (2002) Trees, shrubs and woody vines of Louisiana. Allen's Native Ventures (Pitkin, LA). 333 pp.

20

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Allen, C.M. (2006) Creating or recreating a prairie. Cajun Prairie Habitat Preservation Society Newsletter 25: 4 page insert. Barrow, W.C. Jr., C. Chen, R.B. Hamilton, K. Ouchley, and T.J. Spengler (2000) Disruption and restoration of en route habitat, a case study: The Chenier Plain. In: F.R. Moore, editor. Stopover Ecology of Nearctic-neotropical Land bird Migrants: Habitat relations and conversion implications. Studies in Avian Biology 20: 71-87. Barrow, W.C., Jr. and I. Renne (2001) Interactions between migrant land birds and an invasive exotic plant: The Chinese Tallowtree Tree. Flyway 8:11. Barrow, W.C. Jr., L.A. Johnson Randall, M.S. Woodrey, J. Cox, E. Ruelas, I.C.M. Riley, R.B. Hamilton, and C. Eberly (2005) Coastal Forests of the Gulf of Mexico: A Description and Some Thoughts on Their Conservation. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-191. Barrow, Jr., W.C. and B. Fontenot (2006) Vanishing before our eyes: Louisiana Cheniere Woods and the birds that depend on them. The BaratariaTerrebonne National Estuary Program. Thibodeaux, Louisiana. Borsari, B. and V. Shirley (1993) Preservation of natural habitats: biodiversity and farming. IN Annual Proceedings of the American Society of Environmental Science. pp. 181-187. Bruce, K.A., G.N. Cameron, P.A. Harcombe, and G. Jubinsky (1997) Introduction, Impact on Native Habitats, and Management of a Woody Invader, the Chinese Tallow tree, Sapium Sebiferum (L.) Roxb. Natural Areas Journal. 17(3): 255-260. Burns, Russell M., and Barbara H. Honkala (1990) Silvics of North America: 1. Conifers; 2. Hardwoods. Agricultural Handbook 654. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC. Vol. 2, 877 pages. Coastal Prairie Partnership (2009) Coastal Prairie Plant Growers' Handbook. A Coastal Prairie Partnership Publication Volume 1. www.coastalprairiepartnership.org. Collins, M.E. and R.J. Kuehl (2001) Organic Matter Accumulation and Organic Soils In Richardson, J.L., and M.J. Vepraskas (eds.) Chapter 6, Wetland Soils. Genesis, Hydrology, Landscapes and Classification. pp. 137-162. Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press. Daigle, J.J., G.E. Griffith, J.M. Omernik, P.L. Falkner, R.P. McCulloh, I.R. Handley, L.M. Smith, and S.S. Chapman (2006) Ecoregions of Louisiana. Reston, Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey Map [website]. Accessed October 8, 2012.

21

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Available URL http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/la_eco.htm#Please note: Fearn, M.L. (1995) Louisiana's Cajun Prairie: Holocene History of a Southern Grassland. Ph.D. dissertation. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. ] Gautreaux, S.A. (1975) Coastal Hiatus of Spring Trans-Gulf bird migration. In: W.G. McIntire, M.J. Hershman, R.D. Adams, K.D. Midboe, and B.B. Barrett, editors. A Rationale for Determining Louisiana's Coastal Zone. Report No. 1, Coastal Zone Management Series. Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University. Pages 85-91. Gosselink, J.G., C.L. Cordes, and J.W. Parsons (1979) An Ecological Characterization Study of the Chenier Plain Ecosystem of Texas and Louisiana. FWS/OBS-78/9 through 78/11. Washington, D.C. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Interior. Grace, J.B. (1998) Can prescribed fire save the endangered coastal prairie ecosystem from Chinese tallow invasion? Endangered Species Update 15: 70-76. Lester G., S. Sorenson, P. Faulkner, C. Reid, and I. Maxit (2005) Louisiana Comprehensive Wildlife Strategy (Wildlife Action Plan). Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. Lichvar, R.W. (2013) The National Wetland Plant List: 2013 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2013-49: 1-241. Louisiana Natural Heritage Program (2009) The Natural Communities of Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. Accessed October 10, 2012. Available URL: http://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/wildlife/louisiana-naturalheritage-program Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (1999) Watershed Protection Programs: Calcasieu River Basin. Accessed June 24, 2014. Available URL: http://nonpoint.deq.state.la.us/99manplan/99calcasieu.pdf Louisiana State University Agricultural Center (20131) Biological Info: Southern Flounder. Accessed August 6, 2013. Available URL: http://www.seagrantfish.lsu.edu/biological/misc/southernflounder.htm. Louisiana State University Agricultural Center (20132) Biological Info: Red Drum. Accessed August 6, 2013. Available URL: http://www.seagrantfish.lsu.edu/biological/drum/reddrum.htm.

22

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Louisiana State University Agricultural Center (2010) Eucalyptus tree offers moneymaking opportunity for La. Landowners. LSU Ag Center Headline News Release March 31, 2010. National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy Management Team (2012) National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy. Public Review Draft, January 2012. Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] (2005) Bird Use of Restoration Sites: Influences of Location and Vertical Structure. USDA NRCS Technical Notes 190-34, December 2005. Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] (2006) Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. United States Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. 1

Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] (2014) Web Soil Survey [website]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey Staff. Accessed May 1, 2014. Available URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ 2

Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] (2014) National Hydric Soils List by State [website]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey Staff. Accessed May 1, 2014. Available URL: http:// http://soils.usda.gov/use/hydric/ Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (2014) The PLANTS Database. Available URL http://plants.usda.gov . Accessed May 28, 2014. Newton, M.B., Jr, (1972) Atlas of Louisiana: A guide for students. The School of Geoscience, Louisiana State University, Misc. Publ. 72-1. 196 pp. Richardson, J.L., J.L. Arndt, and J.A. Montgomery (2001) Hydrology of Wetland and Related Soils In Richardson, J.L. and M.J. Vespraskas (eds.) Chapter 3, Wetland Soils. Genesis, Hydrology, Landscapes and Classification. pp. 35-84. Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press. Society of American Foresters (SAF) (2011) The Dictionary of Forestry [website]. Copyright 1988 by the Society of American Foresters. Accessed December 1, 2011. Available URL: http://dictionaryofforestry.org Soil Conservation Service [SCS] (1988) Soil Survey of Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. USDA Soil Conservation Service and Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station. Soil Conservation Service [SCS] (1995) Soil Survey of Cameron Parish, Louisiana. USDA Soil Conservation Service and Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station.

23

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Southern Regional Climate Center (2014) CLIMOD. Accessed July 8, 2014. Available URL: http://www.srcc.lsu.edu/climod.html Twedt, D.J. and C. Best (2004) Restoration of floodplain forests for conservation of migratory land birds. Ecological Restoration 22 (3): 194-203. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Service [USDOI NBS] (1996) Cranes: their biology, husbandry and conservation. Ellis, D.H., G.F. Gee, and C.M. Mirande (editors). 308 p. U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] (1997) Restoration, Creation, and Recovery of Wetlands: Wetland Functions, Values, and Assessment. USGS Water Supply Paper 2425. Accessed 9 October 2012. Available URL: http://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/WSP2425/functions.html. U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] (2000) Coastal Prairie. National Wetlands Research Center. Lafayette, LA. Accessed May 1, 2013. Available URL: http://www.nwrc.usgs.gov. U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] (2013) The Coastal Prairie Region. NWRC Coastal Prairie Research Program. National Wetlands Research Center. Accessed June 26, 2013. http://www.nwrc.usgs.gov/prairie/tcpr.htm. Vermillion, W., J.W. Eley, B. Wilson, S. Heath, and M. Parr (2008) Gulf Coastal Prairie: Bird Conservation Region 37. Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan. Accessed October 11, 2012. Available URL: http://www.gcbo.org/html/CoastalPrairiesFinalCompressed.pdf. Vidrine, M.F. (2010) The Cajun Prairie: A Natural History. 314 pp.

24

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT A TABLES AND FIGURES

List of Tables Table 1. Pre-Restoration Conditions and Post-Restoration Mitigation Habitat Types at the South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank, Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes, Louisiana. Table 2. Potential Coastal Prairie Planting List for South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank, Cameron and Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. Table 3. Negative Indicator Species for Coastal Prairie Restoration Areas, Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes, Louisiana. Table 4. Potential Seedling Planting List for South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank, Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, Louisiana.

Table 1. Pre-Restoration Conditions and Post-Restoration Mitigation Habitat Types at the South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank, Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes, Louisiana. Baseline Condition

Mitigation Habitat and Type

Acres

Non-wetland Crop/Pasture

Coastal Prairie Re-establishment

648.6

Wetland Rangeland/Pasture

Coastal Prairie Rehabilitation

429.2

Wetland Rangeland/Pasture

Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Forest Rehabilitation

234.9

Non-wetland Crop/Pasture

Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Forest Re-establishment

200.7

Non-wetland Crop/Pasture

Fresh/Intermediate Marsh Re-establishment

30.1

Rangeland

Fresh/Intermediate Marsh Rehabilitation

27.0

Total Restoration and Enhancement Credit Acreage

1,570.5

Canals

Water

17.9

Access Roads/Trails

Access Roads

17.8

Crop/Rangeland/Pasture Pipeline Rights-of-way

Pipeline Rights-of-way

3.2

Total Non-mitigation Acreage

38.9

Total Conservation Servitude Acreage

1,609.4

Table 2. Potential Coastal Prairie Planting List for South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank, Cameron and Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana1. Habit

Scientific Name2

Common Name

Wetland Indicator3

Graminoid Graminoid

Agrostis hyemalis Andropogon gerardii

Winter Bent Grass Big Bluestem

FAC FAC

Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid

Andropogon glomeratus Andropogon gyrans Andropogon virginicus Aristida purpurascens Ctenium aromaticum Dichanthelium commutatum

Bushy Bluestem Elliot's Bluestem Broomsedge Three Awn Grass Toothache Grass Variable Panic Grass

FACW FAC FAC FACW FACW FAC

Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid

Dichanthelium scabriusculum Dichanthelium scoparium Eragrostis elliottii Eragrostis refracta Muhlenbergia capillaris Panicum anceps

Panic Grass Velvet Panic Grass Elliot Lovegrass Coastal Love Grass Coastal Muhly Grass Beaked Switchgrass

OBL FACW FACW FACW FAC FAC

Graminoid

Dichanthelium dichotomum

Cypress Panic Grass

FAC

Graminoid

Dichanthelium scoparium

Velvet Panic Grass

FACW

Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid Graminoid

Panicum virgatum Paspalum floridanum Paspalum plicatulum Sisyrinchium angustifolium Sisyrinchium rosulatum Tradescantia ohiensis Tridens ambiguus Tridens strictus Tripsacum dactyloides

Switchgrass Florida Paspalum Brownseed Paspalum Narrowleafed Blue-eyed Grass Spreading Blue-eyed grass Common Spiderwort Pine Barren Tridens Long-spike Tridens Eastern Gamma

FAC FACW FAC FACW FAC FAC FACW FACW FAC

Forb/Herb

Symphyotrichum dumusom

Rice Button Aster

FAC

Forb/Herb

Symphyotrichum lateriflorum

Calico Aster

FAC

Forb/Herb

Aster puniceus

Roughstem Aster

OBL

Forb/Herb

Aster praealtus

Tall Blue Aster

FACW

1 Exact species and quantities to be determined by seedling availability from commercial sources providing seedlings grown from localized ecotypes. 2 Scientific names are from USDA, NRCS. 2013. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 1 July 2013). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA. 3 Wetland plant indicator status for the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain per the 2012 National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar 2013).

Table 2. Potential Coastal Prairie Planting List for South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank, Cameron and Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana1. Habit

Scientific Name2

Common Name

Wetland Indicator3

Forb/Herb

Bidens aristosa

Beaded Beggar's Ticks

FACW

Forb/Herb

Arnoglossum ovatum

Egg-leaf Indian Plantain

FACW

Forb/Herb

Coreopsis tripteris

Tall Tickseed

FAC

Forb/Herb

Coreopsis pubescens

Star Tickseed

FAC

Forb/Herb

Coreopsis tinctoria

Plains Tickseed

FAC

Forb/Herb

Erigeron philadelphicus

Showy Daisy Fleabane

FAC

Forb/Herb

Eupatorium rotundifolium

Roundleaf Boneset

FAC2

Forb/Herb

Eupatorium perfoliatum

Boneset

FACW

Forb/Herb

Euthamia leptocephala

Flat-topped Goldenrod

FACW

Forb/Herb

Helianthus angustifolius

Narrow Leaf Sunflower

FACW

Forb/Herb

Helenium vernale

Vernal Sneezeweed

FACW

Forb/Herb

Liatris spicata

Blazing Star

FAC

Forb/Herb

Solidago rugosa

Roughleaf Goldenrod

FAC

Forb/Herb

Solidago sempervirens

Seaside Goldenrod

FACW

Forb/Herb

Vernonia gigantea

Giant Ironweed

FAC

Forb/Herb

Amsonia tabernaemontana

Eastern Bluestar

FACW

Forb/Herb

Agalinis fasciculata

Beach Purple False Foxglove

FAC

Forb/Herb

Agalinis purpurea

Purple False Foxglove

FACW

Forb/Herb

Buchnera Americana

American Blue Hearts

FAC

Forb/Herb

Chaerophyllum tainturieri

Wild Chervil

FAC

Forb/Herb

Erigeron strigosus

Fleabane

FAC

Forb/Herb

Eryngium yuccifolium

Button Snakeroot

FAC

Forb/Herb

Hibiscus moscheutos

Crimsoneyed Mallow

OBL

Forb/Herb

Lobelia puberula

Purple Dew Drop

FACW

Forb/Herb Forb/Herb

Penstemon digitalis

Smooth Beardtongue

FAC

Penstemon laxiflorus

Beardtongue

FAC

Forb/Herb

Prunella vulgaris

Common Self-heal

FAC

Forb/Herb

Psoralea simplex

Single Stem Snakeroot

FAC

Forb/Herb

Pycnanthemum albescens

Whiteleaf Mountain Mint

FAC

Forb/Herb

Pycnanthemum tenuifolium

Thin Leaf Mt. Mint

FACW

Forb/Herb

Pycnanthemum muticum

Lowland Mt. Mint

FAC

Table 3. Negative Indicator Species for Coastal Prairie Restoration Areas, Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes, Louisiana1.

1

Scientific Name2

Common Name

Cirsium horridulum

Bull Thistle

Cynodon dactylon

Bermuda Grass

Eupatorium capillifolium

Yankee Weed

Imperata cylindrical

Cogon Grass

Ligustrum sinense

Chinese Privet

Lonicera japonica

Japanese Honeysuckle

Lygodium japonicum

Japanese Climbing Fern

Panicum verrucosum

Warty Panicum

Paspalum notatum

Bahiagrass

Paspalum urvellei

Vasey's Grass

Rhyncospora inexpansa

Beakrush

Rottbellia cochinchinensis

Itch Grass

Rubus spp.

Blackberry

Solidago canadensis

Goldenrod

Sorghum halapense

Johnson Grass

Triadica sebiferum

Chinese Tallow

Verbena spp.

Vervain

List of species obtained from Lacassane Coastal Prairie Wetland Mitigation Bank Instrument signed by CEMVN on June 30, 2003. 2 Scientific names are from USDA, NRCS. 2013. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 1 July 2013). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA.

Table 4. Potential Seedling Planting List for South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank, Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, Louisiana.

Common Name

AGCP Wetland Indicator1

Planting Percentage2

Mast Availability

Quercus laurifolia

FACW

<20%

fall, winter

Quercus michauxii

FAC

<20%

fall, winter

Quercus nigra Quercus phellos Quercus texana Quercus virginiana

FAC FACW FACW FACU3

<20% <20% <20% <10%

fall, winter fall, winter fall, winter fall, winter

FAC

<10% <10% <10%

spring

Scientific Name

Hard Mast (approximately 40-60%) Laurel oak Swamp chestnut oak Water oak Willow oak Texas red oak Live oak

Soft Mast (approximately 40-60%) red maple

Acer rubrum

Sugarberry

Celtis laevigata Cephalanthus occidentalis Crataegus opaca Crataegus viridus

Buttonbush Mayhaw Green hawthorn Common persimmon Green ash Deciduous holly Yaupon

Diospyros virginiana

FACW OBL OBL FACW FAC

fall, winter spring, summer

<10% <10% <10%

spring, summer spring, summer fall, winter

Fraxinus pennsylvanica Ilex decidua Ilex vomitoria

FACW FACW FAC

<10% <10% <10%

spring, summer fall, winter fall, winter

Sweetgum Southern bayberry Swamp tupelo

Liquidambar styraciflua

FAC

fall, winter

Morella cerifera

FAC

<10% <10%

Nyssa biflora

OBL

fall, winter

Baldcypress

Taxodium distichum

OBL

<10% <10%

American elm Red mulberry

Ulmus americana Morus rubra

<10%

spring, summer spring, summer

1

FAC FACU

<10%

fall, winter

fall, winter

Indicator status from 2013 National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar 2013) Exact species and quantities to be determined by seedling availability from commercial sources providing seedlings grown from localized ecotypes. 3 Quercus virginiana and Morus rubra are designated as UPL on the 2013 National Wetland Plant List but were FAC species on the 1988 National Wetland Plant List for Region 2. These species were previously listed as FAC on the 1988 National Wetland Plants List for Region 2. Although potentially upland species, these are native to the site and will provide increased habitat value given the goals of the project. The occurrence of the species at the specified composition will not affect the targeted plant community from being classified as a hydrophytic plant community in accordance with the methodology prescribed in the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Regional Supplement (USACE 2010). 2

List of Figures Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 7. Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11. Figure 12. Figure 13. Figure 14. Figure 15. Figure 16. Figure 17. Figure 18. Figure 19.

Vicinity, Coastal Zone, and Coastal Conservation Plan Map LIDAR Elevations LIDAR Elevations Below 5-Foot Contour USGS 7.5-Minute Quadrangle 1940 Aerial Photograph 1953 Aerial Photograph 1957 Aerial Photograph 1963 Aerial Photograph 1968 Aerial Photograph 1998 Aerial Photograph 2004 Aerial Photograph 2010 Aerial Photograph Soils Existing Conditions Surrounding Land Use within 25-Mile Radius Surrounding Land Use within One Mile Radius Mitigation Features Map Bottomland Hardwood Service Area Coastal Prairie Service Area

Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank (1,609.4 Acres)

Coastal Conservation Plan Boundary Coastal Zone Boundary

4

VICINITY, COASTAL ZONE, AND COASTAL CONSERVATION PLAN MAP

I

Western Gulf Coastal Plains Ecoregion (Level III)

2

0

Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

4

Created : TSC/ArcView10 Approved : BWD Date :7/18/2014 Map # : F01_VicinityandCoastalMap.mxd

Miles

FIGURE 1

Elevation (NAVD)

FEET -2.0- -0.5 -0.5 - 0 0-1 1-2 2- 3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

LIDAR ELEVATIONS Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved : BWD Date :7/18/2014 Map # : F02_Lidar.mxd

FIGURE 2

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank LIDAR ELEVATIONS BELOW 5-FOOT CONTOUR Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I

<5 Feet NAVD >5 Feet NAVD

2,000 1,000

0 Feet

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved : BWD Date :7/18/2014 Map # : F03_Lidar_5ft.mxd

FIGURE 3

Copyright: © 2013 National Geographic Society

I

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

5,000

2,500

0 Feet

5,000

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

USGS 7.5-MINUTE QUADRANGLE Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La Created : TSC/ArcView10 Approved : BWD Date :6/18/2014 Map # : F04_QuadMap.mxd

FIGURE 4

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

1940 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F05_1940Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 5

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

1953 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F06_1953Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 6

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

1957 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F07_1957Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 7

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

1963 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F08_1963Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 8

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

1968 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F09_1968Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 9

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

1998 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F10_1998Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 10

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend

I

Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

2,000 1,000

0 Feet

2004 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F11_2004Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 11

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

2010 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 ApprovedBWD : 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F12_2010Aerial.mxd

FIGURE 12

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend

Project Area (1,609.4 ac) GB: Ged mucky clay Ju: Judice silty clay Lt: Leton silt loam Mr: Morey loam Mt: Mowata-Vidrine silt loams W: Water

I 2,000 1,000

0 Feet

SOILS MAP Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

2,000

Created : TSC/ArcView10 Approved : BWD Date :6/19/2014 Map # : F13_Soils.mxd

FIGURE 13

I 2,000 1,000

0

2,000

Feet

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac) PC Nonwetlands (713.5 Acres)

Nonwetland Spoil/Roads (21.7 Acres) PC Wetlands (20.5 Acres)

Nonwetland Pasture (139.7 Acres) Wetland (669.0 Acres)

Mima Mound Complex Nonwetland (8.8 Acres) Pipeline (3.2 Acres)

Other Waters (33.0 Acres)

EXISTING CONDITIONS Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved : BWD 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F14_ExistingConditionsl.mxd

FIGURE 14

5

2.5

0

5

Miles

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac) 18 Mile Radius Emergent Herbaceuous Wetlands (29.3%) Open Water (19.0%) Cultivated Crops (18.4%) Developed (11.9%) Hay/Pasture (11.5%)

Woody Wetlands (6.8%) Evergreen Forest (1.3%) Shrub/Scrub (0.8%) Herbaceuous (0.6%) Barren Land (0.2%) Mixed Forest (0.2%) Deciduous Forest (0.1%)

LANDCOVER / LANDUSE WITHIN 18 MILES Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

I

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved :BWD 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F15_Landuse25.mxd

FIGURE 15

I

Legend Project Area (1,609.4 ac)

Developed (4.3% )

Open Water (0.3%)

Hay/Pasture (44.7%)

Woody Wetlands (3.5%)

Barren Land (0.1%)

Cultivated Crops (36.6%)

Emergent Herbaceuous Wetlands (3.2%)

Shrub/Scrub (0.1%)

Agroforestry (6.9%)

Herbaceuous (0.3%)

Mixed Forest (>0.1% )

4,000

2,000

0 Feet

4,000

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

LANDCOVER / LANDUSE WITHIN ONE MILE Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved :BWD 7/18/2014 Date : Map # : F16_Landuse.mxd

FIGURE 16

Calcasieu Parish Cameron Parish

Mitigation Acres Below Five-Foot Contour Within Louisiana Coastal Zone Boundary Habitat Acres Coastal Prairie Re-establishment 487.5 23.1 Coastal Prairie Rehabilitation 0.1 Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Rehabilitation Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Re-establishment 43.3 Fresh/Intermediate Marsh Re-establishment 30.1 27.0 Fresh/Intermediate Marsh Rehabilitatio

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank (1,609.4 Acres) Mitigation Acres Below 5 Feet within Coastal Zone (611.1 acres) Pipe Arch Culverts to be Installed Coastal Prairie Re-establishment (648.6 Acres) Coastal Prairie Rehabilitation (429.2 Acres) Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Rehabilitation (234.9 Acres) Bottomland Hardwood Gallery Re-establishment (200.7 Acres) Fresh/Intermediate Marsh Re-establishment (30.1 Acres) Fresh/Intermediate Marsh Rehabilitation (27.0 Acres) Other Waters (17.9 Acres) Access Road (17.8 Acres) ROW (3.2 Acres)

2,000 1,000

MITIGATION FEATURES MAP Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

0 Feet

2,000

Created :LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved :DEB Date :7/31/2014 Map # :F17_MitigationFeatures.mxd

FIGURE 17

Project Area

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank Primary Service Area

BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD SERVICE AREA

I

Secondary Service Area

15

7.5

0

Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved : DEB

15

Date : 7/18/2014 Map # : F18_MitigationFeatures.mxd

Miles

FIGURE 18

Project Area

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Legend South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

I

Primary Service Area Secondary Service Area

20

10

0

COASTAL PRAIRIE AND MARSH SERVICE AREA Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La Created : LJW/ArcView10.2

20

Approved : DEB Date : 7/18/2014 Map # : F19_CPSA.mxd

Miles

FIGURE 19

ATTACHMENT B PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS

ATTACHMENT C HYDROLOGY RESTORATION DRAWINGS

I 2,000 1,000

0

2,000 A

Feet

A'

B

See Figure C-2 for more details

B'

See Figure C-3 for more details

C D

C'

D'

G H

H'G'

F

E

E'

F'

Legend South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank (1,609.4 Acres) Nonwetland Spoil Bank to Remain (7.6 Acres) Nonwetland Spoil Bank to be Degraded (44.5 Acres) Other Waters (Section 10) to Be Filled (3.1 Acres) Other Waters (Section 404) to Be Filled (14.9 Acres) Other Waters to be Avoided (15.0 Acres)

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

OVERALL PLAN VIEW Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved : 7/11/2014 Date : Map # : FC-1_OverallPlanView.mxd

Figure C-1

Other Waters to be Avoided (15.0 Acres)

Other Waters (Section 404) to Be Filled (14.9 Acres)

Nonwetland Spoil Bank to be Degraded (44.5 Acres) Other Waters (Section 10) to Be Filled (3.1 Acres)

South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank (1,609.4 Acres) Nonwetland Spoil Bank to Remain (7.6 Acres)

Legend

1,000

500

B'

B

Feet

0

I 1,000

A

DETAIL PLAN VIEW

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Figure C-2

Map # : FC-2_DetailPlanView.mxd

Approved : 7/11/2014 Date :

Created : LJW/ArcView10.2

Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La

A'

Other Waters to be Avoided

I 2,000

1,000

0

2,000

Feet

C D

Other Waters to be Filled

C' D'

Other Waters to be Avoided

Other Waters to be Filled

G H

H'

G' F E

E'

F'

Legend South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank (1,609.4 Acres) Nonwetland Spoil Bank to Remain (7.6 Acres) Nonwetland Spoil Bank to be Degraded (44.5 Acres) Other Waters (Section 10) to Be Filled (3.1 Acres) Other Waters (Section 404) to Be Filled (14.9 Acres) Other Waters to be Avoided (15.0 Acres)

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

DETAIL PLAN VIEW Cameron and Calcasieu Parishes, La Created : LJW/ArcView10.2 Approved : 7/11/2014 Date : Map # : FC-3_DetailPlanView.mxd

Figure C-3

A

A

20

60

80

20

40 FEET

60

80

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

Proposed Earthen Fill

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section A

A'

A'

SouthForkBank.dwg Dwg. No.:

Attachment C-4

LJW 7/7/14 Date:

TSC/AutoCAD Approved:

Created:

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

-2

-2

0

2

2

8 6

Existing Grade

Final Grade

Coastal Prairie Rehabilitation

6

8

Coastal Prairie Rehabilitation

Proposed Cross-Section A Coastal Prairie Re-establishment

40 FEET

-2

-2

8

2

Wet Pasture Non-wetland/ Spoil Bank

2

Existing Grade

Canal

6

0

Non-wetland / Spoil Bank

Existing Cross-Section A

6

8

Wet Pasture

Existing Cross-Section A

FEET

FEET

NAVD NAVD

40 FEET

60

Existing Grade

80

80

0 20

60

Proposed Earthen Fill

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section B

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

B'

B'

Dwg. No.:

Attachment C-5

7/3/14 SouthForkBank.dwg

Date:

TSC/AutoCAD

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA Approved:

Created:

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

-2

-2 40 FEET

2

2

6

6

Final Grade

8

8

Coastal Prairie Rehabilitation

Proposed Cross-Section B Coastal Prairie Re-establishment

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

B

20

-2

-2

0

2

2

8 6

Existing Grade

Canal

6

Existing Cross-Section B

FEET

8

Wetland Pasture

Existing Cross-Section B Non-wetland / Spoil Bank

NAVD

B

FEET

NAVD

0

Proposed Earthen Fill

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section C

-2

2

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

20 FEET

Final Grade

Proposed Cross-Section C Coastal Prairie Re-establishment

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

C

20 FEET

Existing Grade

40

C'

C'

7/7/14 SouthForkBank.dwg

Approved: Date: Dwg. No.:

Attachment C-6

TSC/AutoCAD LJW

Created:

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

40

-2

2

-2

-2

0

2

Existing Grade

Existing Cross-Section C Non-wetland pasture

2

Existing Cross-Section C

FEET

FEET

C NAVD NAVD

D

-5

5

15

0

-5

5

15

0

Final Grade

60 FEET

Proposed Cross-Section D Coastal Prairie Re-establishment

60 FEET

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

40

40

Existing Grade

Non-wetland / Spoil Bank

Existing Cross-Section D

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

Proposed Earthen Fill

20

20

Non-wetland Pasture

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section D

D

Existing Cross-Section D

FEET

FEET

Canal

80

80

120

120

-5

5

15

D'

-5

5

15

SouthForkBank.dwg Dwg. No.:

Attachment C-7

LJW 7/7/14 Date:

TSC/AutoCAD Approved:

Created:

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

100

Existing Grade

100

Non-wetland / Spoil Bank

D' NAVD NAVD

FEET

80

100

100

40 FEET

60

80

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

Proposed Earthen Fill

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section E

E'

E'

7/7/14 SouthForkBank.dwg

Approved: Date: Dwg. No.:

Attachment C-8

TSC/AutoCAD LJW

Created:

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

-5

-5 20

Existing Grade

15

5

0

Final Grade

Bottomland Hardwood Re-establishment

Proposed Cross-Section E

5

15

Existing Cross-Section E

E

FEET

60

15

-5 40

Non-wetland Pasture / Spoil Bank

-5 20

Existing Grade

Canal

5

0

Non-wetland / Spoil Bank

5

15

Non-wetland Pasture

Existing Cross-Section E

NAVD

E

FEET

NAVD

100

120

140

40

60 FEET

80

100

120

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

Proposed Earthen Fill

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section F

SouthForkBank.dwg Dwg. No.:

Attachment C-9

LJW 7/7/14 Date:

TSC/AutoCAD Approved:

Created:

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

-6

-6 140

-2

6

-2

20

Existing Grade

F'

2

0

Final Grade

Marsh Re-establishment

Proposed Cross-Section F

2

6

Existing Cross-Section F

F

FEET

80

6

-6 60

Non-wetland Pasture

-6 40

Non-wetland Pasture / Spoil Bank

-2

Canal

-2

20

Existing Grade

Non-wetland / Spoil Bank

F'

2

0

Non-wetland Pasture

Existing Cross-Section F

2

6

F

FEET

FEET

NAVD NAVD

0

20

40 FEET

60

80

15

-5

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section G

G'

G'

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

SouthForkBank.dwg Dwg. No.:

Attachment C-10

LJW 7/7/14 Date:

TSC/AutoCAD Approved:

Created:

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

Note: Earthen fill from excavation will be evenly distributed in surrounding non-wetland area.

-5 100

100

-5

Final Grade

80

5

5

0

Proposed Cross-Section G

FEET

60

Coastal Prairie Re-establishment

40

Existing Grade

15

5

15

20

Prior Converted Non-wetland

Existing Cross-Section G

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

G

-5

5

15

Existing Cross-Section G

FEET

FEET

G NAVD NAVD

40 FEET

60

0 20

30'

40 FEET

80

80

35"

Bottom of Culvert (0.0' NAVD)

24"

Top of Levee (3.2' NAVD)

Inset : Culvert Cross Section

60

Final Grade

MHWL = MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 2.9 FEET MWL = MEAN WATER LEVEL IS 2.2 FEET MLWL = MEAN LOW WATER LEVEL IS 1.7 FEET

See Inset

Access Road with Culvert

Proposed Pipe Arch Culvert

Proposed Earthen Fill

Proposed Excavation

Proposed Cross-Section H

-5

5

15

Proposed Cross-Section H Marsh Re-establishment

Note: Water level data from Calcasieu Lock-East on Intracoastal Waterway (Gage ID 76880) from 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2013

H

20

100

Non-wet / Spoil Bank

Non-Wet Pasture

120

15

120

-5

5

15

NAVD

H'

H'

Attachment C-11

SouthForkBank.dwg Dwg. No.:

LJW 7/7/14

Approved: Date:

TSC/AutoCAD Created:

CAMERON AND CALCASIEU PARISHES, LA

Existing Condition with Proposed Swale

Proposed South Fork Coastal Mitigation Bank

100

Existing Grade

-5

0

Canal

-5

Existing Grade

Non-wetland / Spoil Bank

5

Wetland Pasture

Existing Cross-Section H

5

15

Existing Cross-Section H

FEET

FEET

H

NAVD

ATTACHMENT D PHOTOGRAPHS

Typical view of agriculture field (October 22, 2012)

Typical view of herbaceous field (May 13, 2013)

Typical view of agriculture drain (September 24, 2013)

Typical view of herbaceous field (May 13, 2013)

Typical view of agriculture field (March 10, 2014)

Cattle grazing in herbaceous field (December 4, 2013)

Typical view of herbaceous field in north portion of project area (March 10, 2014)

Typical view of herbaceous field in north portion of project area (March 10, 2014)

Rough impact

We use the fields in this section to decide whether to conduct an in-depth review.

Permit Manager

Dates

Identity numbers

Permits, certifications, and locations related to this particular notice

History of edits

Data are available as CSV download in the following schemas