Easygrants ID: 18695 NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: 0603.09.018695

Easygrants ID: 18695 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: 0603.09.018695 Chesapeake Bay Small Watershed Grants 2009 - Submit Final Programmatic Report (Activities) Grantee Organization: Trout Unlimited, Inc. Project Title: Thornton River Dam Removal (VA)

Project Period 09/01/2009 - 12/31/2010 Award Amount $72,933.00 Matching Contributions $18,460.00 Project Location Description (from Proposal) The project site is approximately 1 km downstream of the confluence of the North Fork and South Fork of the Thornton River on the main stem Thornton River, in Sperryville, VA.

Project Summary (from Proposal) Removed an aging four foot high, 80 foot long dam on the Thornton River that blocks fish migration. Project allowed four species of diadromous fish that formerly migrated into the Rappahannock watershed to access 93 kilometers of high quality upstream habitat.

Summary of Accomplishments Trout Unlimited has met all objectives stated for the Thornton River Dam Removal Project. In December 2009, the dam was removed from the Thornton River by contractors using heavy equipment. The old dam material was buried offsite in the floodplain and incorporated into the two constructed floodplains that were made. Two large rock vanes using quarry stone were constructed as designed spanning the river channel and both active floodplains. Woody debris was incorporated into the rock vanes, which were tied into the floodplain elevation. The old mill raceway located between the dam and the old Fletcher’s Mill was blocked with large rock and material to eliminate the threat of a channel avulsion. A constructed wetland was created on the east margin on the upstream constructed floodplain. All disturbed areas were seeded and mulched, and live willow stakes were incorporated into the rock vane structures.

In May 2010, TU staff organized a native tree and shrub planting throughout the project reach with project partners Earth Sangha, a native plants group based in Arlington, Virginia, the Piedmont Environmental Council, RappFLOW (Friends and Lovers of the Rappahannock Watershed), the Rapidan Chapter of Trout Unlimited, and the Turkey Mountain Flyfishing Club. 52 volunteers participated in the planting of 230 native trees ands shrubs cultivated by Earth Sangha’s native plant nursery, and installation of deer fencing to protect saplings.

Lessons Learned Follow-up inspection of the area upstream of the project site is required to document return of migratory fish. Professional and volunteer partners (e.g. National Park Service, Turkey Mountain Flyfishing Club) can assist with this.

Routine inspection and maintenance of new plantings is required to ensure their success, particularly in an active floodplain.

Conservation Activities Removal of 4' high, 80' dam on Thortnon River Progress Measures Linear feet of upstream channel opened to fish passage Value at Grant Completion 306240 Conservation Activities Riparian buffer planting Progress Measures # of participants/volunteers in project Value at Grant Completion 52 Conservation Activities Removal of dam; riparian buffer planting Progress Measures # of landowners targeted by program Value at Grant Completion 1 Conservation Activities Riparian buffer planting Progress Measures Linear feet of riparian buffer restored with at least a 35-foot buffer Value at Grant Completion 1350 Conservation Activities Post-dam removal stabilization and live stake planting Progress Measures Linear feet of streambank/shoreline stabilized Value at Grant Completion 200

THORNTON RIVER DAM REMOVAL AT FLETCHER’S MILL, SPERRYVILLE, VA NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2009.

Fletcher’s Mill Dam at Thornton River, March 2009 Looking downstream at old mill race on right bank.

Removal of 4’ high dam begins, November 2009 Some of rock used to build vanes to stabilize channel.

Contractors moving island upstream of dam to rebuild floodplain benches on both sides of constructed channel. THORNTON RIVER DAM REMOVAL AT FLETCHER’S MILL, SPERRYVILLE, VA NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2009.

Building upper cross vane with rock and logs and reconstructing floodplains where island and 2 channels were.

A view across Thornton River at former dam location Looking downstream over lower cross vane, Dec. 2009

A view upstream at the completed rock vane and pool, and then downstream at the former dam site, Dec. 2009. The project has successfully removed barriers for resident fish and migratory fish traveling from the Chesapeake Bay via the Rappahannock and Hazel Rivers downstream to more than 18 miles of main stem rivers and over 30 miles of tributaries upstream, the majority of which are located in Shenandoah National Park.

Thornton River, Rappahannock County Mill Dam Removal / Fish Passage

Final 100% Restoration Design

FREDERICK, SEIBERT & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

Thornton River Dam Removal / Fish Passage Final 100% Restoration Design Plan

Prepared by Environmental Services, Inc.

Environmental Services, Inc. has prepared a final restoration design that includes:

1. an cover sheet with a location map of project and title blocks identifying participants, 2. a topographic survey of existing conditions 3. a plan and profile for proposed structures, 4. plan details and existing cross sections.

The final design is provided for review by all stakeholders. Review comments will be considered and, where appropriate, incorporated into the final design.

I. INTRODUCTION

Trout Unlimited (TU) and National Fish & Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) and with the endorsement of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF), have partnered to implement a dam removal fish passage project on Thornton River near Sperryville, Virginia.

Site

II. PROJECT BACKGROUND

Thornton River located in Rappahannock County and is a tributary to the Hazel River. Thornton River originates in the highlands of the Blue Ridge Mountains in the Shenandoah National Park and has a 32 square mile drainage area. It drops from the highlands and flows south/east through the Thornton Gap down to the town of Sperryville. The dam is located approximately 1 ¼ miles downstream of Sperryville and about 0.6 miles downstream on the confluence with the North Fork.

III. EXISTING CONDITIONS

The dam, which spans the entire channel and a side channel, is both reducing the slope of the stream and limiting the natural mobility of gravel and cobble downstream. There is a mid-channel bar, which accumulates debris during high flows. Also, with a width/depth ratio of 33, sediment deposits are evident behind the dam. The widening of the stream is causing bank erosion on both the right and left bank. Downstream of the dam, scouring has occurred which is causing more of an elevation change and prohibits fish from migrating up stream. Removing the dam will allow the gravel and cobble currently behind the dam to mobilize during high flow events and be redistributed appropriately downstream to rebuild riffles and provide habitat.

Existing dam is a low head dam that is preventing fish from migrating upstream

III. DESIGN OBJECTIVES

The following are the project objectives:

• The fish passage design should follow the natural channel design methodology.

• The fish passage structures should allow passage for American eel, trout and forage fish species.

• The fish passage structures should pool water at the upstream end of the structures to provide fish habitat

• Maintain stream flow across all structures during low flow conditions

IV. RESTORATION APPROACH OBJECTIVES

Assessment of the existing condition has revealed that the reach immediately above the dam is in an unstable form. Adjustment of the channel dimension and profile is proposed by installing two step pool structures above the dam in order to restore the channel to a stable form. Once the dam is removed, step pool structure #2 will be installed at a set elevation near the invert of the dam to utilize the existing scour pool. Dimensions of this structure will be adjusted during construction in order to meet stream channel features.

Dam removal will be performed while flow continues down stream to maintain the aquatic habitat. Once dam structure is removed, construction of in-stream structures may proceed. The materials from the removal of the dam will be used for upstream backfill behind the vane arms, side channel and scoured areas. Concrete from the top section of the spillway will be broken into cobble sized material. This material will be used for fill below finished grade of structures and in existing side channel. If reinforcement wire or rebar is embedded in concrete, the separated metal would be removed from site by the contractor.

Fish Passage:

Removing the dam would restore upstream access to 18 miles of American eel nursery habitat. At this time there is no known river flow blockage from this point downstream to the month of the Rappahannock River at the Chesapeake Bay. Additional, by removing the dam it would provide passage and habitat for additional forage fish species.

V. SUMMARY

The Thornton River Mill Dam project will meet the requirements of the USACE – Norfolk District and both the Virginia Marine Resources Commission Habitat Management Division and Virginia Department of Game & Inland Fisheries for fish passage, which will enhance fish habitat and migration.

L. Preston Bryant, Jr. Joseph H. Maroon Secretary of Natural Resources Director

217 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219-2010 (804) 786-7951 FAX (804) 371-2674 August 12, 2009

Nathaniel Gillespie Trout Unlimited 1300 N. 17th Street, Suite 500 Arlington, VA 22209

Re: Proposed Thornton River Dam Removal Project

Dear Mr. Gillespie:

The Department of Conservation and Recreation's Division of Natural Heritage (DCR) has searched its Biotics Data System for occurrences of natural heritage resources from the area outlined on the submitted map. Natural heritage resources are defined as the habitat of rare, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species, unique or exemplary natural communities, and significant geologic formations.

According to the information currently in our files, natural heritage resources have not been documented in the project area. The absence of data may indicate that the project area has not been surveyed, rather than confirm that the area lacks natural heritage resources.

Our files do not indicate the presence of any State Natural Area Preserves under DCR’s jurisdiction in the project vicinity.

Under a Memorandum of Agreement established between the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), DCR represents VDACS in comments regarding potential impacts on state-listed threatened and endangered plant and insect species. The current activity will not affect any documented state-listed plants or insects.

New and updated information is continually added to Biotics. Please contact DCR for an update on this natural heritage information if a significant amount of time passes before it is utilized.

The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries maintains a database of wildlife locations, including threatened and endangered species, trout streams, and anadromous fish waters that may contain information not documented in this letter. Their database may be accessed from http://vafwis.org/fwis/ or contact Shirl Dressler at (804) 367-6913.

Should you have any questions or concerns, feel free to contact me at 804-371-2708. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project.

State Parks • Soil and Water Conservation • Natural Heritage • Outdoor Recreation Planning Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance • Dam Safety and Floodplain Management • Land Conservation Sincerely,

S. Rene’ Hypes Project Review Coordinator

APPENDIX A

DATA COLLECTION AND SITE SURVEY

Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) and Frederick, Seibert & Associates (FSA) have developed a baseline data set for Thornton River from a reach of stream immediately upstream of the dam pool. The area surveyed was a riffle cross section, pool cross section, and a longitudinal profile. Data collection consisted of pebble count of two riffles and one pool, additionally, floodplain, regional curves, drainage area and other morphological features were documented. The channel sinuosity is low with a width/depth ratio of 13. The stream classifies as a Rosgen Stream B3c stream type. Type B3c are moderately entrenched with a channel gradient of less than 0.02 with a width/depth ratio more than 12 and a sinuosity of more than 1.2. The channel materials consist predominantly of cobble with lesser percentages of boulders, gravel and sand. The D50 was measured to be 107mm and the D84 was 166mm (see attached sheets).

The site of the proposed dam removal is located in the Upper Piedmont hydro- physiographic province. Valley type for a B3c stream type would be Type II valley, which is characterized by moderately steep to gentle sloping side slopes.

Surveyed cross-section upstream of impounded area.

To obtain additional bankfull hydraulic geometry reference, a survey was conducted of up and downstream conditions which are not influenced by the impoundment area. Bankfull geomorphic indicators where identified and cross-sections were surveyed. Two pools and one riffle cross-section were used as a reference. The bankfull width of the riffle matches the upstream reference reach area.

DATA Existing Proposed Regional Curve

Width (ft) 55 54 46.7-57.7 Mean Depth (ft) 3.45 3.5 3.87 Area (sf) 190 sq. ft. 192.5 sq. ft. 222.7 sq. ft. Wetted Perimeter (ft) 58.21 ft. 57.0 ft. N/A Dmax 5.2 5.2 5.41 Entrenchment 2.18 2.0 N/A Estimated Velocity (ft/sec) 7.31 f/s 7.3 f/s N/A Manning’s “n” .044 .044 N/A Estimated Bankfull 1390.0 cfs 1300.0cfs 1200.13 cfs Discharge (cfs) Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) .0087 .0087 N/A Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) .0080 .0080 N/A

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY

------River Name: Thornton River Reach Name: Reach 1 Sample Name: Riffle 1 Survey Date: 03/31/2009 ------Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM % ------0 - 0.062 0 0.00 0.00 0.062 - 0.125 0 0.00 0.00 0.125 - 0.25 0 0.00 0.00 0.25 - 0.50 0 0.00 0.00 0.50 - 1.0 0 0.00 0.00 1.0 - 2.0 0 0.00 0.00 2.0 - 4.0 0 0.00 0.00 4.0 - 5.7 0 0.00 0.00 5.7 - 8.0 0 0.00 0.00 8.0 - 11.3 1 1.00 1.00 11.3 - 16.0 0 0.00 1.00 16.0 - 22.6 0 0.00 1.00 22.6 - 32.0 2 2.00 3.00 32 - 45 0 0.00 3.00 45 - 64 9 9.00 12.00 64 - 90 17 17.00 29.00 90 - 128 24 24.00 53.00 128 - 180 32 32.00 85.00 180 - 256 10 10.00 95.00 256 - 362 3 3.00 98.00 362 - 512 1 1.00 99.00 512 - 1024 1 1.00 100.00 1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00 Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00

D16 (mm) 70.12 D35 (mm) 99.5 D50 (mm) 123.25 D84 (mm) 178.38 D95 (mm) 256 D100 (mm) 1023.95 Silt/Clay (%) 0 Sand (%) 0 Gravel (%) 12 Cobble (%) 83 Boulder (%) 5 Bedrock (%) 0

Total Particles = 100. RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY ------River Name: Thornton River Reach Name: Reach 1 Sample Name: Riffle 2 Survey Date: 03/31/2009 ------Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM % ------0 - 0.062 0 0.00 0.00 0.062 - 0.125 0 0.00 0.00 0.125 - 0.25 0 0.00 0.00 0.25 - 0.50 0 0.00 0.00 0.50 - 1.0 0 0.00 0.00 1.0 - 2.0 0 0.00 0.00 2.0 - 4.0 0 0.00 0.00 4.0 - 5.7 1 1.00 1.00 5.7 - 8.0 0 0.00 1.00 8.0 - 11.3 0 0.00 1.00 11.3 - 16.0 1 1.00 2.00 16.0 - 22.6 0 0.00 2.00 22.6 - 32.0 1 1.00 3.00 32 - 45 4 4.00 7.00 45 - 64 16 16.00 23.00 64 - 90 27 27.00 50.00 90 - 128 24 24.00 74.00 128 - 180 20 20.00 94.00 180 - 256 5 5.00 99.00 256 - 362 0 0.00 99.00 362 - 512 1 1.00 100.00 512 - 1024 0 0.00 100.00 1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00 Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00

D16 (mm) 55.69 D35 (mm) 75.56 D50 (mm) 90 D84 (mm) 154 D95 (mm) 195.2 D100 (mm) 511.98 Silt/Clay (%) 0 Sand (%) 0 Gravel (%) 23 Cobble (%) 76 Boulder (%) 1 Bedrock (%) 0

Total Particles = 100.

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY ------River Name: Thornton River Reach Name: Reach 1 Sample Name: Pool Survey Date: 03/31/2009 ------Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM % ------0 - 0.062 5 5.00 5.00 0.062 - 0.125 0 0.00 5.00 0.125 - 0.25 0 0.00 5.00 0.25 - 0.50 3 3.00 8.00 0.50 - 1.0 20 20.00 28.00 1.0 - 2.0 2 2.00 30.00 2.0 - 4.0 0 0.00 30.00 4.0 - 5.7 0 0.00 30.00 5.7 - 8.0 0 0.00 30.00 8.0 - 11.3 0 0.00 30.00 11.3 - 16.0 1 1.00 31.00 16.0 - 22.6 5 5.00 36.00 22.6 - 32.0 2 2.00 38.00 32 - 45 3 3.00 41.00 45 - 64 9 9.00 50.00 64 - 90 8 8.00 58.00 90 - 128 11 11.00 69.00 128 - 180 13 13.00 82.00 180 - 256 4 4.00 86.00 256 - 362 10 10.00 96.00 362 - 512 3 3.00 99.00 512 - 1024 1 1.00 100.00 1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00 Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00

D16 (mm) 0.7 D35 (mm) 21.28 D50 (mm) 64 D84 (mm) 218 D95 (mm) 351.4 D100 (mm) 1023.95 Silt/Clay (%) 5 Sand (%) 25 Gravel (%) 20 Cobble (%) 36 Boulder (%) 14 Bedrock (%) 0

Total Particles = 100.

APPENDIX B Watershed Analysis

Prepared in cooperation with West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highways; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service; and Canaan Valley Institute

Development and Analysis of Regional Curves for Streams in the Non-Urban Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province, Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia

Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5076

U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey 14 Development and Analysis of Regional Curves for Streams in the Non-Urban Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province

��

� ��

��

Figure 3. Regional curve relating bankfull cross-sectional area (CSA) to drainage area (DA) in the non-urban Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province in Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia.

��

� ��

Figure 4. Regional curve relating bankfull width (W) to drainage area (DA) in the non-urban Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province in Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia. Analysis of Regional Curves 15

��

� ��

��

Figure 5. Regional curve relating bankfull mean depth (D) to drainage area (DA) in the non-urban Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province in Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia.

��

� ��

Figure 6. Regional curve relating estimated bankfull discharge (Q) to drainage area (DA) in the non-urban Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province in Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia. Physiographic Provinces of Virginia

Source: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Scale: 1:10,787 Legend

38-39-40 N 38-39-30 N 38-39-20 N 38-39-10 N 38-39-0 N 78-12-20 W 78-12-20 W Map center: 38° 39' 19" N, 78° 12' 43" W 78-12-40 W 78-12-40 W 78-13-0 W 78-13-0 W

5753 Thornton River 5753

38-39-0 N 38-39-0 38-39-10 N 38-39-10 38-39-20 N 38-39-20 38-39-30 N 38-39-30 38-39-40 N 38-39-40 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION.

12000' 8000' 4000' 0'

Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Final Programmatic Report Narrative

Instructions: Save this document on your computer and complete the narrative in the format provided. The final narrative should not exceed ten (10) pages; do not delete the text provided below. Once complete, upload this document into the on-line final programmatic report task as instructed.

1. Project Description. Briefly describe your project, including a description of the problem your project is trying to address, the project’s objectives and strategies, as well as the project location, and a characterization of the watershed and the relevant characteristics of the community’s natural resources, population, and economy.

The Thornton River Dam Removal Project’s objectives were to: a. Restore a total of 93 kilometers (58 miles) of high quality main stem stream and tributary habitat to diadromous fish currently utilizing the Rappahannock, Hazel and lower Thornton Rivers. b. Restore diadromous fish passage to Shenandoah National Park waters and resident fish connectivity between Shenandoah National Park and the Thornton River. c. Restore stream stability and aquatic habitat within the project reach.

Trout Unlimited met these objectives. In December 2009, the dam was removed from the Thornton River by contractors using heavy equipment. The old dam material was buried offsite in the floodplain and incorporated into the two constructed floodplains that were made. Two large rock vanes using quarry stone were constructed as designed spanning the river channel and both active floodplains. Woody debris was incorporated into the rock vanes, which were tied into the floodplain elevation. The old mill raceway located between the dam and the old Fletcher’s Mill was blocked with large rock and material to eliminate the threat of a channel avulsion. A constructed wetland was created on the east margin on the upstream constructed floodplain. All disturbed areas were seeded and mulched, and live willow stakes were incorporated into the rock vane structures.

The subwatershed containing the Thornton River and its tributaries (Rappahannock County, Virginia) was identified by Trout Unlimited as a state priority for protection and restoration for eastern brook trout by our GIS-based Conservation Success Index, due its high brook trout population integrity score, its relatively high habitat integrity score, and its moderately high future security score. The Nature Conservancy has identified the entire Thornton River as an “aquatic portfolio” designation, identifying the river as a priority for a species, community or ecosystem of concern. As part of TU’s Eastern Lands Protection Project, TU staff determined that the reconnection of the Thornton River with its headwater tributaries protected by Shenandoah National Park would perform two important biological objectives: the project would help restore biological diversity and nutrient cycling to the headwaters by allowing diadromous fish to return to this high quality headwater habitat, and the project would allow the potential extension of native brook trout populations located in the headwaters to access the Thornton River and other larger habitats in seasons where water temperatures were suitable. The extension of habitat downstream from the mountains to the valley is a fundamental strategy for preparing native trout populations for stresses associated with climate change.

Rappahannock County is a rural county; agriculture is its predominant land use. Shenandoah National Park occupies a large portion of the County in the west. Multiple farms and other private landholdings are permanently protected with conservation easements held by private land trusts, including the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC). PEC staff directed TU staff to the project site landowner, who has his entire 800 acre property protected by permanent conservation easement, and who has over 200 acres enrolled in the USDA Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). The project was born from that initial meeting.

2. Summary of Accomplishments In four to five sentences, provide a brief summary of the project’s key accomplishments and outcomes that were observed or measured.

The projects key accomplishments and outcomes include: removal of a 4-foot high, 80-foot wide dam, which opened 93 kilometers of upstream channel to fish passage; two new rock vane structures installed in place of the dam, which stabilized adjacent stream banks and facilitated the establishment of additional habitat for resident fish species; and the planting of riparian buffers composed of native species at the project site and equipment access sites.

Two days after project completion, a large storm swept through the valley and delivered a flood that inundated the floodplain and measured as a 1 in 20 year return interval on the USGS gage on the Hazel River downstream. Huge quantities of bedload, sand, gravel and cobble were mobilized throughout the project site. The result observed the next spring was the scouring out of 3 large pools in the project reach, including a 5 foot deep, bedrock-lined pool at the top end of the project site 300 feet upstream of the former dam site. The rock vane structures held well and performed as designed. Stream bank erosion was non-existent in the project reach. Sand and fine sediment were deposited on the newly sculpted floodplain. Woody debris accumulated on the river bank margins and in the channel throughout the project reach. The old mill race channel accumulated sediment and carried overflow flood waters as designed.

TU staff observed migratory Atlantic Sea Lamprey redds (nests) in the project site upstream, at the former dam area, and downstream of the dam. In total, over 20 lamprey redds where documented in the project reach. In addition, National Park Service fish biologists confirmed a dead adult sea lamprey in the South Fork of the Thornton River in the spring 2010 within the Shenandoah National Park boundary some 3 to 4 miles upstream of the project site. This confirms that migratory fish passage has been returned to the Thornton River, and to Shenandoah National Park.

TU staff has supplied the Turkey Mountain Flyfishing Club members with information on identifying diadromous migratory fish, and native brook trout in the Thornton River. Please see the attached file for project pictures and educational material.

3. Project Activities & Outcomes

Activities  Describe and quantify (using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement) the primary activities conducted during this grant.  Briefly explain discrepancies between the activities conducted during the grant and the activities agreed upon in your grant agreement. a. Remove a 4 foot high, 80 foot wide dam completely blocking upstream fish passage on the Thornton River. Removal completed on time and in accordance with project design. No activity discrepancies. b. Restore channel dimensions upstream of old mill dam for 300 feet to a stable form. Channel restored as planned. Native riparian buffer planting completed to restore project site post-construction. No activity discrepancies.

Outcomes  Describe and quantify progress towards achieving the project outcomes described in your grant agreement. (Quantify using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement or by using more relevant metrics not included in the application.)  Briefly explain discrepancies between what actually happened compared to what was anticipated to happen.  Provide any further information (such as unexpected outcomes) important for understanding project activities and outcome results. a. Remove a 4-foot high, 80-foot wide dam completely blocking upstream fish passage on the Thornton River. i. Successful reconnection of 93 km of high quality headwater habitat in the upstream watershed including the South Fork Thornton, North Fork Thornton, and Piney Rivers and their various tributaries to the lower 18 km of the Thornton River and the Hazel and Rappahannock rivers downstream. One species of diadromous fish observed above project site. We envisioned identfying two such species within 5 years of project completion. Partners are still seeking observation of a second species. ii. Successful reconnection of the main stem Thornton River with strong eastern brook trout populations in Shenandoah National Park. Brook trout have yet to be documented in the main stem of the Thornton River, as was hoped would occur within 5 years, though partners are still actively looking. b. Restore channel dimensions upstream of old mill dam for 300 feet to a stable form. Successful restoration of river channel dimensions to a stable condition determined by reference conditions of a bankfull width of 55 feet and a width/depth ratio of 11.5. Successful restoration of an average slope of 0.66% throughout the project reach. Associated activities and metrics supporting this channel restoration activity include roughly 1,350 linear feet of riparian buffer planting; volunteer participation (52) in riparian buffer planting; and at least 200 linear feet of streambank stabilization adjacent to the new rock vanes installed in the project reach.

4. Challenges and Lessons Learned Describe any specific challenges that have arisen during the course of the project and how they have been addressed. Also describe the key lessons learned from this project, such as the least and most effective conservation practices or notable aspects of the project’s methods, monitoring, or results. How could other conservation organizations adapt their projects to build upon some of these key lessons about what worked best and what did not?

Follow-up inspection of the area upstream of the project site is required to document return of migratory fish. Professional and volunteer partners (e.g. National Park Service, Turkey Mountain Flyfishing Club) can assist with this.

Routine inspection and maintenance of new plantings is required to ensure their success, particularly in an active floodplain.

5. Dissemination Briefly identify any dissemination of lessons learned or other project results to external audiences, such as the public or other conservation organizations.

A tour was conducted for the general public as part of the Rappahannock County Farm Tour in September 2010, an event attended by several thousand visitors. The project is and will continue to be featured in Trout Unlimited communications concerning its Chesapeake Bay Land Protection Project. The project site will continue to be available to PECVA for landowner outreach and education purposes.

6. Project Documents Include in your final programmatic report, via the Uploads section of this task, the following:

 2-10 representative photos from the project. Photos need to have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi;  report publications, GIS data, brochures, videos, outreach tools, press releases, media coverage;  any project deliverables per the terms of your grant agreement.

POSTING OF FINAL REPORT: This report and attached project documents may be shared by the Foundation and any Funding Source for the Project via their respective websites. In the event that the Recipient intends to claim that its final report or project documents contains material that does not have to be posted on such websites because it is protected from disclosure by statutory or regulatory provisions, the Recipient shall clearly mark all such potentially protected materials as “PROTECTED” and provide an explanation and complete citation to the statutory or regulatory source for such protection.