Black Branch 2

Small perennial stream in agricultural/rural residential landscape. Elevated turbidity and sedimentation suggest impairment. Narrow channel approaching road culvert crossing. Stream appears incised with limited floodplain access.

Channel shows evidence of incision and is approaching a concrete box culvert road crossing. The culvert represents a significant channel alteration point. Upstream the channel appears relatively natural but incised. Some bank erosion and downcutting evident. The channel is not extensively armored but the culvert influence is notable.

Channel appears moderately incised with banks 3-6ft high. The culvert road crossing and incision limit floodplain connectivity. The stream is unlikely to access its floodplain during typical annual flood events. Agricultural land use in the watershed likely contributes to flashy hydrology and increased peak flows.

The pool upstream of the culvert appears to have significant fine sediment deposition. The brown turbid water prevents assessment of bottom conditions, but the uniform flat pool bottom and turbidity suggest substantial silt/mud accumulation. Estimated 30-50% of visible channel bottom affected by sediment deposition.

Only two velocity/depth regimes are apparent. The pool upstream of the culvert is slow-deep, while the upstream reach visible in the back view shows slow-shallow conditions over bedrock. No fast-deep or fast-shallow regimes observed. The culvert likely backs up water creating the uniform pool.

Water fills most of the channel width at the pool near the culvert. Upstream, the channel narrows and becomes shallower but still has flowing water. Overall approximately 75-90% of the channel cross-section contains water.

No riffles visible in this reach. The view shows a pool backed up behind the culvert and shallow run conditions upstream. Flat water dominates. The bedrock exposure upstream may create occasional shallow riffles but none are clearly visible from this position.

This appears to be a Rosgen F-type stream - entrenched with high bank erosion potential and a low sinuosity. The channel is incised below its floodplain with moderate banks that show erosion. The fine-grained bed material (silt/mud) and low gradient are consistent with an F6 subtype. The culvert creates a local base level that pools water upstream. The bedrock exposure upstream suggests the stream may be a transitional type where erosion has exposed the underlying bedrock.

The left bank shows moderate stability with some vine and herbaceous cover providing root reinforcement. The bank is moderate height (3-6ft) and shows some erosion but is not actively failing. The vegetation buffer, while narrow, provides some stabilization. The upstream portion visible in back view shows more bare soil and erosion on what appears to be the left bank.

Approximately 50-70% of the left bank is covered with vegetation. Dense vine growth and herbaceous plants are present in some areas (visible in left face), but the upstream portions show more bare soil. Trees are present but leafless, reducing current bank protection. Some potential invasive vine species are providing coverage.

Left bank has narrow riparian buffer with agricultural field beyond. Vine growth (possibly invasive Japanese honeysuckle) provides some bank cover. Moderate erosion upstream. The culvert wingwall provides localized bank stability at the road crossing.

Right bank shows moderate stability with grassy cover and scattered trees. The bank slope is more gradual than the left bank. Some bare soil and erosion are evident near the waterline. The bank near the culvert is stabilized by the concrete wingwall structure. Root exposure is minor to moderate on some trees near the bank edge.

Right bank has approximately 50-70% vegetation coverage. Grass is green in patches but bare soil areas are visible, especially near the waterline. Trees are present but leafless. The coverage is moderate but disrupted in places. The upper bank has better grass coverage than the lower bank near the waterline.

Right bank is more accessible and open with grass and scattered trees. Moderate erosion near waterline. Concrete culvert wingwall provides stability at the road crossing. Some debris accumulation near the culvert entrance.

The left riparian buffer is narrow, estimated at 10-25ft of mixed trees, shrubs, and vines before transitioning to agricultural field. For a channel approximately 8-10ft wide, this represents roughly 1-2x channel width but the vegetation quality is poor with invasive dominance and the buffer is narrow relative to TDEC standards. The narrow buffer compromises filtering function.

The right riparian buffer consists of scattered trees and grass with an open, lawn-like character. The buffer appears narrow (10-25ft) before transitioning to open grass/pasture areas. Some structures are visible in the background suggesting nearby residential use. The buffer lacks dense native vegetation and is more open/park-like than a functional riparian corridor.

The floodplain vegetation is marginal. Most mature trees are absent, replaced by scattered saplings and young trees. The right bank is primarily grass/lawn. The left bank has vine-dominated understory with few trees. The riparian corridor is thin and fragmented, transitioning quickly to agricultural use or managed grass. The ecosystem filtering and habitat functions are significantly compromised.

Currently in winter with bare deciduous trees, shade is minimal (<25%). Even in full leaf conditions, the scattered tree coverage and thin buffer would likely provide only 25-50% shade. The right bank is very open with few trees. The left bank has somewhat denser tree coverage but still inadequate for full canopy closure over the channel.

Both banks fail to meet TDEC MS4 permit section 4.2.5.4 buffer requirements. Agricultural use encroaches within the buffer zone on the left bank. Mowed grass/lawn maintenance encroaches on the right bank. High potential for buffer restoration through native tree and shrub planting on both sides, particularly the right bank which has open ground available.

Limited favorable substrate is present. Some woody debris and root wads are visible near the left bank upstream of the culvert. The pool has a soft silt/mud bottom with little hard substrate for colonization. The bedrock exposure upstream provides some habitat. Undercut banks may be present. Overall approximately 20-40% of substrate is favorable, with much of the reach dominated by fine sediment.

The pool area appears to be dominated by mud and silt. The turbid brown water obscures the bottom but the soft, featureless bottom visible near the banks suggests heavy fine sediment accumulation. The upstream bedrock exposure provides some hard substrate but is limited in extent. Embeddedness of any gravel present appears high.

One notable pool is present immediately upstream of the culvert, likely created by the culvert backing up water. This pool appears to be 1-3ft deep based on the turbidity obscuring the bottom. Pool habitat is present but is likely a backwater/impoundment pool rather than natural scour pool. Pool depth is moderate but pool frequency appears low in the reach.

Four cover types are visible: woody debris/logs near the culvert, the deep pool backed up by the culvert, overhanging branches from riparian trees, and some potential undercut banks. Missing are boulders/cobble, macrophyte beds, riffles, and diverse backwater areas. The cover diversity is moderate but limited by the homogeneous pool habitat.

The concrete box culvert represents a potential fish passage barrier. The culvert appears to be at approximately grade level with no significant drop at the outlet. However, during low flow the water depth through the culvert may be insufficient for fish passage. The culvert appears to be a box type which generally provides better passage than round pipes. Score of 5 reflects a culvert within the reach with minimal drop but potential passage concerns during low flow.

Sparse large woody debris is present. One debris jam is visible on the left bank near the culvert entrance, consisting of mostly small to medium-sized branches and brush. No large logs or rootwads are forming pools or spanning the channel. The woody debris appears to be accumulated at the culvert rather than naturally placed for habitat function. Limited LWD recruitment potential given the sparse riparian trees.

Three types of invertebrate habitat are present: fine woody debris in the debris jam near the culvert, leaf packs accumulated in the pool, and potential undercut banks. The soft silt/mud bottom provides limited colonization opportunity. The bedrock upstream may support some invertebrates. However, the fine sediment deposition, turbidity, and limited substrate diversity reduce overall habitat quality. Score between 3 and 7 criteria.

Score of 6 reflects habitat that could support Group II facultative organisms but the fine sediment dominance and limited habitat diversity suggest a mix of tolerant and facultative species would be expected. Direct sampling would be needed to confirm.

No macroinvertebrates directly observed from the panoramic images. Habitat assessment only. The presence of some woody debris and leaf packs suggests potential for Group II organisms (damselflies, dragonflies, crayfish). The soft sediment and turbid conditions favor Group III tolerant taxa. Score based on habitat potential rather than direct observation.

Nesting: Evidence present

Suitable Habitat: No

The degraded habitat conditions, agricultural surroundings, and limited riparian buffer reduce the likelihood of supporting rare or sensitive species. The small stream size and turbid conditions are not favorable for rare aquatic species. A bird nest is visible in the canopy (up face) but species cannot be determined.

A bird nest is visible in the bare canopy overhead but no birds or other wildlife were directly observed. The debris jam near the culvert could provide cover for small animals. The agricultural/rural residential setting limits wildlife corridor function.

Water is brown and turbid with visibility estimated at 0.5-1ft based on the inability to see the bottom in the pool. This could be influenced by recent precipitation. No algal mats, sheens, or scum visible. The turbidity appears to be primarily from suspended sediment rather than algal growth. Score of 4 reflects considerable cloudiness that may be partly storm-related but suggests chronic sediment issues.

No significant algae blooms or macrophyte growth visible. The brown color appears to be from suspended sediment rather than algal growth. No green coloration or algal mats. Winter conditions may limit algal growth, so summer assessment would be needed for full evaluation. Score of 7 reflects minimal visible nutrient enrichment indicators.

No direct evidence of manure or livestock waste in the stream. However, agricultural fields are immediately adjacent on the left bank with a minimal buffer. No livestock are currently visible but the potential for agricultural runoff (including fertilizer) exists. Score of 7 reflects no direct evidence but proximity to agriculture.

This is a warmwater stream in an agricultural/rural residential setting. Current winter conditions mean minimal shade is needed. During summer, the sparse tree canopy and thin riparian buffer will provide inadequate shade, particularly on the right bank which is very open. The road surface at the culvert crossing is a minor impervious surface but not large enough for significant thermal impact. Riparian buffer restoration with native trees would improve summer shading and reduce thermal stress during warm months.

No active construction or recent disturbance observed. The existing culvert and road crossing are established infrastructure. The main compliance concern relates to the inadequate riparian buffer rather than recent disturbance.

Terrestrial Invasives Assessment

Aquatic Invasives Assessment

Green vine growth visible on the left bank in winter (left face image) is strongly suggestive of Japanese honeysuckle, which remains semi-evergreen. The tangled vine and shrub growth along both banks includes what appears to be multiflora rose and possibly bush honeysuckle based on growth habit, though positive identification is difficult in bare winter conditions. Confidence is medium due to leafless season limiting identification. The invasive vine coverage appears common on the left bank riparian zone, estimated at 11-25% of the total riparian area.