NEWPORT — State Rep. Celeste C. Cairns, R-Carteret and Craven, members of the Carteret County Board of Commissioners, county staff, area town officials and project partners broke ground Friday for a new public boat launch in the growing western part of Carteret County.

The ceremonial groundbreaking for the Western Carteret County Boat Launch Facility at 4411 N.C. Highway 24, Newport, has been in the making for a long time, said Commissioner Mark Mansfield, the county board’s vice chairman, at the event. “As you can see, the western part of the county has been deficient in access to the water for quite some time, and this will hopefully enable us, with all the growth that’s going into the western end of the county, provide access to the waterways, which actually helps with the tax base and the property values in this area”

Former Commissioner Robin Comer, who was in office years ago when the project was conceived, was also on hand for the ceremony. He said the launch site is on one of the last available parcels that would facilitate the kind of facility needed in this part of the county where residential development has been rapid.

“This project became so popular — and when I say popular everywhere — everywhere we went to try to round up money for this thing, everybody was on board,” said Comer during his remarks.

Comer said the state provided money, as did the federal government using funding from a Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point program to buffer its nearby auxiliary airfield from residential encroachment. “And everybody wound up, everybody we asked, wound up putting money, time and effort in this thing.”

He said that Emerald Isle businessman Ronnie Watson represented the site’s then-landowner, Steven Stroud.

“If anybody knows Steve, he’s a tough businessman, so a lot of appreciation goes there to (Watson),” said Comer.

Cairns, in her remarks, credited her predecessor, former Rep. Pat McElraft, who served eight consecutive terms ending Jan. 1, 2023, for providing the initial momentum that made the project possible.

“I’m here to celebrate this occasion, that it has finally come to fruition with all the hard work that your county commissioners and my predecessor and others have put into it,” Cairns said. “It’s a wonderful opportunity for folks on the western end of the county to be able to get access to the water. A wonderful collaboration with the Coastal Federation conservation folks. It’s just beautiful all the way around this great project. And I’m just honored, as I can be, to be a part of it today.”

The North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review, is developing an abutting parcel for its new Center for Coastal Protection and Restoration being built on Bogue Sound. Construction on that project began in late 2024 and is anticipated to wrap up later this year. The center will share access with the county facility through a common driveway.

County Commissioner David Quinn, who represents the Newport area, expressed how meaningful the boating access is to residents here.

“If you’ve lived in Carteret County, you know that the water isn’t just scenery, it’s part of our daily life. It’s how we relax, it’s how we work, it’s how we make memories with our families,” Quinn said. “Bogue Sound has always been central to who we are, and having safe, dependable access to it matters. That’s exactly what this facility is going to provide for folks who live here year-round and for visitors who come to enjoy the coast. This gives people a safe, convenient place to get on the water. It also helps take pressure off of other boat ramps that have been overcrowded for years.”

Quinn said that with six launch ramps and a transient floating dock, boaters will be able to get in and out more efficiently with less waiting and less congestion, especially during peak season.

“That makes a real difference for families, makes a real difference for fishermen, makes a real difference for anyone that’s trying to enjoy a day out on Bogue Sound without frustration,” he said. “But in Carteret County, access alone isn’t enough. We also understand, if we don’t take care of the waters, then the waters will not take care of us. This project was built with that in mind.”

He explained that the 159-space trailer and vehicle parking lot will help keep vehicles out of sensitive areas. A channel connecting to the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway was designed to minimize the environmental impact while still proving easy for navigators.

“One of the most important features is the living shoreline,” Quinn noted. “Instead of concrete walls, we’re using natural systems that protect marshes, reduce erosion and preserve submerged vegetation that helps improve water quality and it keeps it healthy for a long time for fishing, for boating and, more importantly, for future generations. This site isn’t just about boats, the nature trails connecting Bogue Sound to the Croatan National Forest will give people another way to experience our outdoors, whether that’s a quiet walk, learning about the marsh, or just slowing down and enjoying where we live.”

He said the partnership with the Coastal Federation was important.

“It shows what can happen when public access and environmental stewardship work together instead of against each other. That kind of cooperation reflects Carteret County values: It’s practical, responsible and rooted in long-term thinking,” Quinn said.

Quinn said that in addition to the expected economic benefits of the facility, the project strengthens our connection to the water and to each other.

“It’s a place where kids learn to fish, neighbors cross paths, families spend time together, making memories together, the same way generations did before us,” said Quinn. “Found here in this body of water is the mind-clearing quiet of nature, and the small sounds of its islands are stark and healing, the squeaky flap of a cormorant’s wings overhead, the sizzle of salt foam over broken shells in a backwashing wave, the clicking of sandfiddler claws as they scuffle in the mud, and the splash of a jumping mullet breaking that flat water.

“My granddaddy was a commercial fisherman on these waters. My daddy was born here. I was raised on Bogue Sound. It isn’t just a place that I love, it’s who I am. I want to see my sons and future generations of Carteret County citizens to enjoy, to protect and to appreciate this beautiful place we call home.”

Featured Image

A small gathering watches 2025’s final sunset Wednesday over Taylors Creek from the wooden deck at Harborside Park at 322 Front St. in Beaufort. Here are some of Coastal Review’s most-read stories of the year. We thank you for reading. Photo: Mark Hibbs

Featured Image

A Venus flytrap shows off its perhaps little-appreciated blooms, which are often overlooked, as compared with the other, better-known, insect-trapping attributes of this carnivorous plant that’s native only to a roughly 90-mile stretch of the North Carolina coast between Wilmington and Morehead City. Photo: Mark Hibbs

Featured Image

A gull keeps watch from atop the North Carolina Department of Transportation Ferry Division’s vehicle ferry Kinnakeet as it plies the Neuse River between Minnesott Beach and Cherry Branch. Photo: Mark Hibbs

Snapped an image of the North Carolina coast worth sharing? Submit your photo.

Featured Image

Fingerstyle guitarist and vocalist Noah Cobb, 18, of Greenville, performs Saturday at the New Village Brewery in Oriental as part of the Pamlico County village’s two-day Ol’ Front Porch Music Festival, which was free to attend and brought together folk, Americana, bluegrass, country, gospel, blues and jazz performers on numerous stages sited within walking distance of one another. Photo: Mark Hibbs

THE EDGE of the sea is a strange and beautiful place. All through the long history of Earth it has been an area of unrest where waves have broken heavily against the land, where the tides have pressed forward over the continents, receded, and then returned. For no two successive days is the shore line precisely the same.

From “The Edge of the Sea” by Rachel Carson.

Countless reviewers and critics have noted through the decades how Rachel Carson’s words above, first published in 1955, were written from the point of view of a scientifically sophisticated observer.

Carson had the knack for describing the various aspects, patterns and lifeforms — many invisible or unknown to all but the most familiar – found on the world’s three types of ocean shore, all three of which, she noted, are found along the East Coast.

Reared in Springdale, Pennsylvania, just northeast of Pittsburgh, the scientist and writer is best known for her 1962 book, “Silent Spring,” which stirred controversy and raised awareness about pesticides’ harmful effects when used indiscriminately. Her book is often credited as the spark that ignited the environmental movement.

In the years just prior, Carson, a marine biologist with a long career in federal service, had written a trio of bestselling, highly praised books about seashores and sea life, culminating in 1955 with “The Edge of the Sea.”

“Miss Carson, thanks to her remarkable knack for taking dull scientific facts and translating them into poetical and lyrical prose that enchanted the lay public, had a substantial public image before she rocked the American public and much of the world with ‘Silent Spring,’” according to Jonathan Norton Leonard’s report of her death as published April 15, 1964, in the New York Times.

Carson was 56 when she died.

Among the many still enchanted with Carson are Bland Simpson, a distinguished professor of English and creative writing at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, songwriter and pianist for The Red Clay Ramblers; Jim Wann, a theatrical writer, musician and leading man; and Don Dixon, a highly regarded record producer, songwriter and musician.

Together, these three form the Coastal Cohorts, whose collaborative comedic musical, “King Mackerel and the Blues Are Running; Songs and Stories of the Carolina Coast,” is now in its 40^th year.

Tickets are on sale for this year’s performances Oct. 24-25 in Morehead City. The scheduled shows were announced earlier this spring.

The musical presents aspects of coastal life through song and onstage hilarity, but also conveys, more subtly, environmental themes, without lecturing or moralizing. The loose plot involves our fishing-buddy “Cohorts” who set out to help save their favorite destination and its proprietor from the wrecking ball as wielded by prospective condo developers.

The production debuted Dec. 8, 1985, at Rhythm Alley in Chapel Hill. While much of that original performance remains part of the show, the Cohorts have continued over the years to write and perform new songs, weaving them into the show. This most recent song, a reverent homage to Carson, “Edge of the Sea,” that took two decades to develop, may work best as an epilogue, according to the Cohorts.

The song was inspired in particular by Carson’s research in North Carolina in the late 1930s and 1940s, Simpson recently told Coastal Review. That research informed her book “The Edge of the Sea” and its chapter about Bird Shoal in what is now the Rachel Carson Reserve just south of Beaufort.

“We just happened to have pulled it together when one of the very things that Rachel Carson caused to come into being, the Environmental Protection Agency and the laws that it worked under, when those things are being just taken part,” Simpson said.

The song’s development began with a staging of “King Mack” at East Carolina University, Simpson explained during a recent video call with Dixon, Wann and Coastal Review.

“Well, Don and I were playing ‘King Mackerel’ in East Carolina on one of those literary homecomings that (distinguished ECU English professor) Margaret Bauer was sponsoring every year for about 10 or 12 years,” said Simpson. “And there was a little workshop, and they asked us to maybe bring in something new we were working on. And I don’t know how we determined Rachel Carson, but we each brought in a verse. It wasn’t a complete song.”

Wann was unable to be at that particular event, but when he was told about the project, he let his fellow Cohorts know that he had already begun working on his own song about Rachel Carson.

“Jim kind of took the lead, and it grew over some time,” Simpson said.

And grow it did. The song clocks in at 8 minutes, 29 seconds, commencing with ocean sounds and a lush choir of female voices. Those are the voices of Dixon’s wife Marti Jones, as well as Rebecca Newton of North Carolina’s own Rebecca & the Hi-Tones, Durham educator Pattie Le Sueur, and Simpson’s fall 2024 songwriting students at Carolina, Madeline Lai and Maggie Thornton. The Cohorts provide the rest, including lead vocals, with Dixon on bass and guitar, Simpson on piano, and Wann on guitar.

“We went up to Chapel Hill where we were in a studio with those women singers Bland had recruited from his class, and then Rebecca and Pattie, who I knew, and Don was mentoring us from Ohio, through the magic of modern technology,” said Wann. “It was very much a stage-by-stage process to arrive at what we’ve got now.”

In its early development, Wann’s working title was “Kayaking with Rachel,” because, he said, “I read that she used to kayak, you know, when she was in her time around the North Carolina shores. And I thought that was interesting, because that was before — the song says, ‘She was kayaking before kayaking was cool,’ and that kind of was my jumpstart into the song.”

Dixon, at some point, had noted the need for an intro to set up the rest of the song, specifically referencing Carson’s own words: “The edge of the sea is a strange and beautiful place,” said Wann.

“And you just kind of tossed that out,” Wann said to Dixon, “So I just adapted some of her phrases, those words, and that’s how that came into being.”

The song elevates her words “in this kind of Greek chorus sort of thing,” which is the way Dixon, the track’s arranger and producer, said he was hearing it.

And the story contained in the song is one of triumph over challenges, also reflective of Carson’s life. She was a hero, “not just of environmentalism, but the history of humanity,” Simpson said.

“She was a saint and really gave her life,” Simpson continued. “She was dying of cancer when she went to Congress and was put upon, pushed upon. She did not give — she didn’t give an inch.”

Wann said those aspects of her personality, her history and her quiet, solitary life are woven into the song’s first chorus. “That was kind of the first stage,” he said.

“This is creation, don’t let indifference take it away from you
This is your water, don’t let complacency take it away from you.”

— “Edge of the Sea” by the Coastal Cohorts, © 2025 Wann/Dixon/Simpson

Simpson said the above chorus is a call to action. There will always be forces working against the clean and the pure, he said.

Beloved, smeared

In 1962, when Carson’s “Silent Spring” was published, chemical and pesticide manufacturers attacked her, funded disinformation campaigns and labeled her a likely communist. But Carson’s books had already endeared her to the public.

“That book ‘Silent Spring,’ and even her first ocean books sold in the millions,” Dixon said. “She was beloved by certain people; she was just vilified by industry. It was definitely a smear campaign.”

Those trying to smear Carson may, to many, resemble the evil Greed Heads threatening the coastal environment and culture in the “King Mack” storyline.

Wann noted that some in Congress tried to dismissed her, as well.

“They just said that her science was wrong and that she wasn’t telling the truth,” Wann said. “The truth did prevail.”

In 1963, when Carson went before Congress to advocate for federal controls on pesticide use during hearings on pollution, she explained how chemical poisons had contaminated the environment humans depend on — water, soil, air and vegetation.

“It has even penetrated that internal environment within the bodies of animals and of men,” Carson said in her remarks on June 4 that year. She cited numerous sources: radioactive waste and waste from laboratories and hospitals, fallout from nuclear explosions, municipal wastewater and chemical waste from homes and industry.

“When we review the history of mankind in relation to the Earth we cannot help feeling somewhat discouraged, for that history is for the most part that of the blind or short-sighted despoiling of the soil, forests, waters and all the rest of the Earth’s resources. We have acquired technical skills on a scale undreamed of even a generation ago. We can do dramatic things and we can do them quickly; by the time damaging side effects are apparent it is often too late, or impossible, to reverse our actions,” Carson told Congress. “I have pointed out before, and I shall repeat now, that the problem of pesticides can be properly understood only in context, as part of the general introduction of harmful substances into the environment.”

Simpson noted that there are echoes of those times in the current political environment, in which “radical capitalism” is threatening to undo regulations that were based in science.

“It’s an irony, a terrific irony, that the Environmental Protection Agency having been created in no small part because of the wisdom and intelligence that ‘Silent Spring’ brought forth, that the EPA is now, under the new administration, is now being run by undoers, deregulators and representatives of the chemical industry and so forth, and so we’ve sort of come full circle and back to status quo, antebellum and before Rachel’s work helped cause the EPA,” Simpson said.

But, Simpson added, the new song is as uplifting as Carson’s writings.

“Rachel Carson’s spirit is anything but depressing,” Simpson said. “She found miracles in every speck of anything she ever picked up on the beach. And that’s why we love her so, because her heart informed her science about the value and the interconnectedness of all these things. ‘One creature tied to another,’ I think, is Jim’s lyric.”

Wann said he didn’t recall “making anything up” in writing the song, aside from minor paraphrasing of Carson’s words.

“Pretty much all those words are in the preface of ‘Edge of the Sea,’ the very first few pages of the book,” Dixon said.

Dixon acknowledged the song is a celebration of Carson, but is also it’s “sort of a cautionary tale,” especially for those unfamiliar with her work, the fragility of fish and wildlife, and how her advocacy led to a ban on the pesticide DDT.

“They don’t realize she spawned the environmental movement as we know it today,” Dixon said. “And it really was kind of just her doing. I mean, she was very solitary. She was not part of a big group of people working on this problem that she recognized.”

Carolina connections

Carson’s connections to coastal North Carolina were made when the region looked quite different. In 1947, during her tenure with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, she was tasked with writing a visitor brochure for Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge in Hyde County. Simpson said it was “very unlike the standard flat, elemental tour guide.”

It reflected the way she saw the world. “She clearly devoted herself to science writing and everything she did,” he said.

“When we first wrote the show, I don’t think we fully appreciated the light touch as far as environmental matters,” Simpson explained. “In terms of culture, we were looking at our memories of, you know, the old-style hotels and everybody eats at a long table. It wasn’t a world of high-rises and condos and all that.”

“King Mackerel” follows the Cohorts’ efforts to preserve that era and help their fictional friend, Miss Mattie, save her beachfront hotel and pier. The conflict is outlined in “Corncake Inlet Inn” from the original soundtrack.

“We put the contrast in the lyrics: ‘Greed Head sees a barrel of bucks … Cohort sees the geese and the ducks that won’t come back in the fall,’ the change of environment. That’s all true,” Simpson said.

It’s a contrast that’s meaningful to two area nonprofit organizations that have for decades hosted the Cohorts’ performances in Carteret County.

Todd Miller, who in 1982 founded the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review, understood that meaning early on – perhaps, according to Simpson, before the Cohorts had fully grasped it themselves. The Coastal Federation works to protect, restore and preserve coastal water quality and habitats, which are critical to the way of life here.

“Their music and stories are beautifully aligned with our mission — capturing why people love and cherish our coast, even as that love can sometimes lead to its overuse and degradation,” Miller said. “They first performed for the Coastal Federation in the mid-1980s, and since then, we’ve all together become part of a larger coastal cohort. Their appeal runs deep, touching the hearts and minds of people from all walks of life — those of us whose lives are enriched by a coast that is a wonderful place to live, visit, work, and play.”

It’s all those things and a deep culture going back centuries, said Karen Willis Amspacher, director of the Core Sound Museum and Heritage Center on Harkers Island.

“It’s everything we stand for,” Amspacher said. “Corncake Inn is all about place and tradition and memories and holding on to youth and the beach and the wildness of it all.”

She said the connections ring even truer now than years ago.

“The Greed Heads have multiplied,” she said.

Wann said he was recently thinking back on the Cohorts’ 40-year journey, the connections made and the introduction of new songs along the way.

“It’s been just really especially rewarding that there’s still this growth element to it,” Wann said. “Even doing the show, it doesn’t feel tired or old, because partly, I think we’ve heard so many times that someone will come up and say to us, some young person will say, ‘We used to listen to your music on the way to the beach. It was the only music that my parents and us kids could agree to listen to.’ Now we’ve met the third generation, parents and grandparents who know about ‘King Mackerel’ and at some point, someone said to us, ‘You know, you started out singing about the culture here, and now you’re part of the culture.’”

Updated to correct the name of Miss Mattie’s Fish Camp.

Part of a series about the effects federal budget and staff cuts and the cancellations of programs and services are having in coastal North Carolina.

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency, speaking Wednesday during a Senate budget hearing in Washington, D.C., dismissed reports that the agency was weakening standards on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also called “forever chemicals.”

During questioning by the chair and ranking member, respectively, Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin told the Senate Appropriations Committee that news reports about the EPA weakening PFAS were inaccurate and that the standards could instead get tougher. Zeldin said expected job cuts at the agency would not impact its work.

The senators said they were concerned about the EPA’s reductions in force, or RIFs, and its ability to meet commitments made earlier this year about tackling the compounds in soils and waters.

Related: Proposed state rules on discharges defanged as EPA retreats

Murkowski noted that the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, which oversees EPA funding, frequently discusses PFAS.

“Last month, you announced that EPA will, quote, ‘tackle PFAS from all of EPA’s program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable and providing certainty for passive receivers. You said this was just the beginning of the work that EPA is going to do to tackle PFAs,” she said.

She asked Zeldin whether the EPA’s operating plan budget requests “actually reflect this kind of full-forward push on PFAS and whether it includes the $10 billion that the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding provided to take on PFAS contamination.”

Zeldin replied that the EPA was “actually adding people” to its Office of Water, which he said does much of the agency’s work on PFAS. But Murkowski pressed further on the announced RIFs deferred resignations and how they would affect EPA’s ability to execute the plan.

“When I was in Congress, I was a member of the PFAS Task Force. I had voted for the PFAS Action Act. When I was a member of the House, I represented the district that had all sorts of different PFAS contamination issues,” said Zeldin.

Merkley did not appear swayed. He said rough counts showed EPA had lost about 400 people, who were fired within their first year, 560 in the first round of deferred resignations, 180  in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility jobs who were RIF’ed. Another 1,129 exited via second round of deferred resignations, with 1,800 of opt-ins.

“Now we’re up to almost 3,000,” Merkley said. “Office of R and D, it’s rumored that would reduce to 500 positions, which would be a loss of 1,300 additional — now we’re at 4,300. I’ll just point out that for two decades, the level of employment at EPA was about 17,000. Right now, it’s about 14,000, so subtracting the numbers I just shared, we’re talking about more than 4,000 reduction from that.”

He said cutting further to the expected number of 10,000 employees “raises doubts” the agency can meet its own goals.

“It sounds like it’s at odds with your commitment to tackling PFAS and I’m concerned about the numbers,” Merkley said to Zeldin.

Zeldin responded that it was apparent that the question was in response to a news story.

“It might not come as a shock to you, but sometimes the news says stuff that’s not accurate,” Zeldin said. “That is not what the agency announced. As it relates to PFOA and PFAS, you said that we were weakening the standards, and that’s actually the opposite of what the agency actually announced.”

Zeldin said “there was an issue” pertaining to four compounds, “and that’s something that we are going to be going through a process, but that doesn’t mean that the that it gets weaker. The (maximum concentration) might end up getting lower, not higher.”

Merkley entered for the record the Washington Post story with the headline: “EPA plans to weaken rule curbing forever chemicals in drinking water.”

Zeldin said he would “encourage the committee to look at the actual announcement from EPA, as opposed to the Washington Post.”

Featured Image

Daddy longlegs, scientifically speaking, a member of the Leiobunum genus, stretches its legs recently on the leaf of a sweetbay magnolia, or Magnolia virginiana, a native species on the North Carolina coast. Often called harvestmen — there are at least 6,600 suborders of the species — and mistakenly identified as spiders, the insect is an arachnid that has been found everywhere on Earth except Antarctica. Photo: Mark Hibbs

Featured Image

An angler recently tries his luck from beneath the Scuppernong River Bridge on the the Scuppernong River Boardwalk at the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge visitor center in Columbia, in Tyrrell County. Money from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was appropriated to replace the boardwalk, a project that was announced to take place in fiscal 2026. Congress directly appropriated $455 million to the refuge over five years for programs related to the previous administration’s America the Beautiful initiative announced in 2021. The nonprofit National Wildlife Refuge Association has said that continuing resolutions, such as the emergency funding bill signed into law last week, throw refuges into chaos and uncertainty and can prevent new project starts. Photo: Mark Hibbs

From the editor:

Sunday is World Wetlands Day.

The United Nations in 2021 adopted a resolution to commemorate annually on Feb. 2 the adoption of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, an international treaty signed in 1971. The observance actually dates back to 1997.

Wetlands across the state serve important roles, and especially here on the North Carolina coast, they surround us. They help provide the quality of life and desirability that lure so many. They buffer us from tropical cyclones and flooding. They help sequester carbon making them critical for mitigating the effects of climate change and to biodiversity and human health. They are nurseries and habitat for countless marine and bird species.

To many regular Coastal Review readers, these points may seem obvious, but they are also key messages behind the recognition of World Wetlands Day, and our wetlands are increasingly imperiled.

The Ramsar Convention defines numerous distinct types of wetlands, organized into three main categories: marine/coastal wetlands, inland wetlands and human-made wetlands. Included among inland wetlands are intermittent or seasonal pools, streams, lakes and rivers.

Article 1 of the UN treaty more broadly defines wetlands as “areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres.”

That’s about 20 feet deep for the metrically challenged. It’s also distant from the U.S. Supreme Court’s myopic, unscientific definition set forth in its 2023 Sackett decision. The ruling found that only wetlands with “a continuous surface connection to” water bodies that are “‘waters of the United States’ in their own right,” those to which we so often refer as “WOTUS,” so that they are “indistinguishable” from those waters, are protected under the Clean Water Act.

The decision was merely the first ominous domino to fall for North Carolina’s wetlands.

“In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett v. EPA, the only thing now protecting many North Carolina communities from being flooded in the coming years is the state’s existing ban on paving over wetlands without a permit,” Grady McCallie, policy director with the North Carolina Conservation Network, said at the time, noting that state law was all that was left, “literally protecting lives and property.”

But later that same year, the North Carolina General Assembly saw fit to narrow protections that were tailored to our specific vulnerabilities as a region, placing isolated wetlands outside both state and federal jurisdictions and, therefore, more likely subject to development or degradation.

At the time, state environmental staff estimated that, as a result of both the Supreme Court decision and state legislative action, around 2.5 million acres, or about half of North Carolina’s wetlands and more than 7% of the state’s total landmass, were left unprotected.

Wetlands are too critically important to endanger in this way. The point of World Wetlands Day is to each year raise awareness of this key fact so conveniently disregarded by those wielding power. For 2025, the theme for the day is “Protecting Wetlands for Our Common Future.”

Another definition: A “common future” is one we all share.

“Life thrives in wetlands, and human life depends on them,” said Secretary General of the Convention on Wetlands Dr. Musonda Mumba in a statement marking World Wetlands Day 2025. “Wetlands provide the home or breeding ground of many endangered and threatened species and a multitude of endemic plants and animals can only survive in certain wetland locations. Beyond the clean water and food that wetlands provide, they help protect against natural disasters by mitigating the impact of storm surges, floods and droughts.”

Now, with a new administration in Washington rapidly acting on its explicitly stated intent to eliminate or at least further diminish federal water quality, air quality and other environmental safeguards — while also dismantling from within the agencies that enforce regulations and stripping away any environmental justice and civil rights responsibilities in their purview — it’s imperative to recognize how important wetlands are to our coastal way of life. The challenge to maintain and preserve coastal protections throughout the coming deregulatory onslaught has never been more daunting, nor more critical.

The North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review, has over the course of its four-decade history often phrased the message in pure bumper-sticker simplicity, “No Wetlands, No Seafood.” That’s because it’s a message that resonates.

The nonprofit’s more complete, updated message is to “protect and restore coastal water quality and habitats throughout the North Carolina coast by collaborating with and engaging people from all walks of life who are committed to preserving the coast for now and the future.” Far from simple, it’s hard work that already requires many hands.

Coastal Review strives to always present unbiased reporting on just these issues, encompassing science, energy, government, education, laws, history and culture. Our journalists work to provide all relevant perspectives in our environmental reporting – not the least of which are economic factors. And we will continue this important work, bringing you, our valued readers, the most complete and timely information possible, so that you can better understand and then decide. Of course, as a nonprofit organization, your financial support can help us serve you better in this regard.

Eastern North Carolina’s economy and well-being and those of our nation depend on clean water and healthy wetlands. The people of this region demand it, despite whatever their predominant voter registrations or candidate preferences may indicate, because nobody voted for environmental destruction, endangering public health or imperiling our coastal way of life.

Views expressed herein are solely those of the editor.

Featured Image

A tiny Z-scale model train operated by Mike Basher of Basher and Sons Hobbies rounds the bend during an appearance earlier this month at the 30th annual John Costlow Train Show at the North Carolina Maritime Museum Harvey W. Smith Watercraft Center in Beaufort. The three-day show included model train layouts of various scales, including working antiques.

This model transported a yellow rubber ducky on a flatcar.

Basher said the Z-scale, a ratio to actual size of 1:220, is his scale of choice due to its diminutive size and a lack of space at home.

“My permanent layout at home consists of a Z-scale layout inside a glass-top coffee table that sits inconspicuously in our living room, ready to be operated at a moment’s notice,” he told Coastal Review.

But Z is not the smallest model railroad scale — there’s at least one smaller: the T-gauge, a scale of 1:450, or about half the size of Z-scale models.

Featured Image

A rainbow reaches skyward from the Newport River as viewed from the marsh at Radio Island following Sunday showers. The island was formed by the placement of dredge spoils from an early channel-deepening project at the Morehead City port in the 1930s and takes its name from Carteret Broadcasting Co.’s WMBL, which began broadcasting in 1947 at 740 kHz. Photo: Mark Hibbs

Former Pine Knoll Shores resident Walt Zaenker authored a 2015 blog post about how Radio Island got its name.

Featured Image

Webs around a vent in the tiled storefront wall of the old, now vacant, M. Mann’s & Sons building in Newport create a ghostly appearance peering out slightly menacingly at passersby from the longtime home of the former C.M. Hill Hardware, where Chatham, East Chatham and Market streets all converge with the North Carolina Railroad Co. line and East and West Railroad boulevards. Photo: Mark Hibbs

Featured Image

The faint tail of Comet Tsuchinshan-ATLAS pointing away from the setting sun is visible Sunday evening over Taylors Creek in Beaufort. NASA says the “dirty snowball’s” appearance is “a once-in-80,000-years sight.” The comet believed to be from the Oort Cloud at the edge of our Solar System was expected to swing close by at about 44 million miles from Earth — its closest pass — on Saturday. Discovered in 2023, it is named for both China’s Tsuchinshan, or Purple Mountain, Observatory and an Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System, or ATLAS, telescope in South Africa. Photo: Mark Hibbs

BEAUFORT – A united town board on Thursday agreed to extend its lease with the longtime operator of the Beaufort docks for another year and prepare to release all records pertaining to its previous search for a new concessioner.

The records are to be released electronically to the public once scanned and uploaded. The board also unanimously agreed to formally terminate all pending requests for proposals and reject all proposals received for future dock operations.

The actions came after the board reconvened its meeting from the Monday session in which it had voted 3-2 to halt efforts to secure “the company of interest” in line to take over management of the Beaufort Docks. The actions were also a bit of housekeeping needed to clarify and solidify the vote taken during the previous session.

Mayor Sharon Harker, during Thursday’s meeting, appointed Commissioners Sarah Spiegler and Paula Gillikin to chair and vice-chair, respectively, a new Beaufort Waterfront Operations and Finance Committee to pick up the work done by a previous panel.

“This committee will review the recommendations from the Harbor and Waterways Advisory Committee, assess the feasibility and practicality of these recommendations and update the vision and objectives to align with our financial goals and expectations for the docks,” Harker said at the well-attended daytime meeting.

The new committee has no time to spare. The mayor set a Dec. 31 deadline for its report.

Attendees again, as during the meeting Monday, broke into applause numerous times in response to the board’s 180-degree turnaround. But previous tensions and opposing viewpoints among commissioners still simmered, as evidenced in a few exchanges.

Commissioner Dr. John LoPiccolo noted how the action Monday had created costs for the town. He asked how the board could ensure confidence in the process going forward.

“We spent a lot of money on attorneys,” LoPiccolo said. “We spent a lot of money on engineers. There is quite a bit of loss to this process that the taxpayers, they did have to pay for that. And I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. I just want to make sure that we don’t get into that same situation again.”

Valid points, said Gillikin, who had offered the motion Monday to terminate the letter of intent to “the company of interest” – until this week, the board’s chosen name for Safe Harbor Marinas, which had taken on Voldemort-like status among town officials despite being well known among residents.

“I think some of those monies that we spent with our discussions with Safe Harbor, I think there’s things that came out in those discussions that we can use in the new discussions. Not all is lost there,” Gillikin said.

She said it was important to look at the town’s objectives in the new search, because the goal in the original request for proposals, whether stated or unstated, was “to maximize super- and mega-yachts and look at the greatest profit, which is a great way to look at things, if that’s the objective.

“But I’m not sure that that is our current objective,” Gillikin said, adding that preserving the town’s character, views and the type of vessels most suitable to Beaufort were clearly tantamount to residents.

Commissioner Bucky Oliver, who like LoPiccolo, had opposed the action taken Monday to “reset” the process, said he was on board with the new direction.

“I’m very comfortable where we are, but I think that we need to, as a board, if you would, I think we need to recognize the importance now to support this effort and to solely look in the windshield and not look in the mirror,” Oliver said. “And I would ask our board to think about that on a personal basis, and I’d ask our community to look at it on that basis. I’d ask people in the audience to look at it on that basis, because that’s where we are.”

BEAUFORT – A split board of commissioners on Monday heeded the public’s increasingly vocal demands to slow down the process of selecting a new concessioner to operate the town docks.

Beaufort commissioners voted 3-2, with commissioners Charles “Bucky” Oliver and Dr. John LoPiccolo opposed, to terminate all discussions and rescind a letter of intent that was written to “the company of interest as it relates to future management of the Beaufort Docks.”

That was how Commissioner Paula Gillikin worded her two-part motion. The second part of her motion was to direct the town manager and/or the assistant town manager to work with Beaufort Waterfront Enterprises, the current and longtime operator of the docks, on a 12-month lease extension to be approved by commissioners no later than Sept. 9.

Related: Beaufort residents blast dock operator selection process

The action was in response to public demands for transparency in the selection process, which had been moved behind closed doors with town officials deeming it an “economic development” matter and therefore confidential.

Folks here found that specious, especially given the prominence of the town waterfront. The move was also in response to objections to apparent conflicts and legal cases in other coastal communities involving the “company of interest.” Despite the cloak of closed sessions, that company’s name — Safe Harbor Marinas — has for weeks been the worst-kept secret in Beaufort.

With a pouring rain outside, the meeting space, the old depot on Broad Street, was filled with residents and still more in a separate, overflow room with closed-circuit TVs, opposed to how officials had handled the process. After commissioners cast their votes, the raucous applause that erupted in the main meeting room was echoed after a slight lag by more cheering in the overflow room.

Gillikin’s motion followed Mayor Sharon Harker’s opening of a “general discussion of the steps going forward” with regard to the docks. Harker said it was time for “a fresh dialogue” to answer the public’s questions.

Some information was publicly available, and it was troubling to folks at the meeting.

Safe Harbor Marinas is a $2 billion company purchased in 2020 by Sun Communities Inc. Sun Communities is a Michigan-based real estate investment trust with about $17.4 billion in assets.

Gillikin said she had done “a deep dive” researching the firm’s operations elsewhere and concluded that the company’s philosophy “may not be the best match” for the town.

“And it was in my investigations and interviewing people and sitting down with coffee with people and visiting marinas and digging deeper into the philosophy behind the company of interest that led me to this conclusion,” Gillikin said to more applause.

Beaufort residents and business owners have told Coastal Review that their concerns with Safe Harbor were largely based on the corporate ownership and control that would be more focused on shareholder returns than Beaufort’s character and economy. They have worried that the fix was in for Safe Harbor from the start because the company had already purchased Jarret Bay Boatworks and the surrounding complex. Some speculated that the corporation had its eyes on the waterfront as a staging area for large yachts to be serviced at Safe Harbor Jarret Bay, which lacks sufficient marina space.

People have said they are worried about the further gentrification of Beaufort and how the business base of locally owned shops and restaurants may not appeal to those who arrive aboard the kinds of “superyachts” that Safe Harbor caters to in other locations.

Speakers who went to the podium during the lengthy public comment portion of the meeting Monday echoed these concerns. Commissioner Melvin Cooper said he had heard them, too. Cooper said he “fully supported” Gillikin’s motion to “terminate” the letter of intent.

“I know that Commissioner Oliver would love to see us carry on the discussion with the third party,” Cooper said, adding that there had been a push to “move along, move along” with the process when there was time to make a more careful and open choice. “Townspeople, who we represent, is asking us to back off of this, and I think we need to listen to them.”

Oliver said he strongly supported extending the lease but he saw no advantage to terminating the letter of intent. He urged Gillikin to amend that portion of her motion, which she refused.

“You may never get anywhere,” Oliver said in his plea to Gillikin. “I’m not promising anything, but I see no reason to shut off the consideration of it based on what I’ve heard. I can’t find a factual reason to do that, and I think it might potentially be, terminating that, it might potentially be detrimental to us, depending upon how the continued negotiations, which are ongoing, might turn out.”

During the public comment portion of the meeting, Barry Slade of Beaufort said his career was in marina and slip management, and waterfront development. He said the situation here was familiar to him. He told the board that marina operators come in all shapes and sizes and tend to specialize in what they do best, and the town should select one appropriate to its needs. But he worried Beaufort hadn’t cast far enough with its request for proposals to bring in the right operator.

“Remember, Beaufort doesn’t have a downtown marina,” Slade said. “What we have is a priceless downtown waterfront, which is the heart and soul of our town.”

He said that in reaching out to people in the industry, “It didn’t take many phone calls to find that some did not even know about Beaufort’s RFP and never received a bid package. These same companies, given the chance, would be happy to submit a proposal if that opportunity were presented. Many of these firms are flush with cash, are actively looking for projects and put a strong emphasis on relationships, not just the bottom line.”

‘Keep Our Docks Public’

Signs reading “Keep Our Docks Public!” and “Keep Beaufort Docks Public!” pepper lawns all over town.

Commissioner LoPiccolo during the meeting took issue with the signage, calling it a “misrepresentation” because the docks have been private for more than 40 years.

“We have had someone manage those docks who has been kind enough to let day boaters come into those docks, but I do want to make sure that the town does understand that those docks have been private,” LoPiccolo said.

LoPiccolo said his due diligence on the matter convinced him that a third-party concessioner was necessary because of the substantial improvements needed on the waterfront, an estimated $13 or so million, which a well-heeled company could finance rather than the town.

The town’s financial adviser, David Cheatwood, spent a chunk of meeting time early in the evening giving his rationale for opposing town-financed improvements through the various mechanisms available.

Mayor Harker had invited Cheatwood, managing director of First Tryon Advisors of Charlotte, to discuss the financing options in the public setting. Cheatwood explained that North Carolina has three basic types: general obligation bonds, limited obligation bonds and revenue bonds, all of which he advised against because of the financial peril to the town for this type of project.

“Looking ahead and kind of knowing what you have on the horizon, I think that is a lot of risk for the town to take when you have some other more traditional projects to fund that are more essential service type,” Cheatwood said.

Oliver said that people in attendance had not had the benefit of hearing the financing information before. He thanked the mayor for having the information presented to the public, because the commissioners felt the townsfolk’s lack of awareness was “giving us fits” as a board.

“When I can’t get information, I get frustrated too,” Oliver said.

LoPiccolo said the board had spent “countless hours in closed session, going over minute detail,” and nothing had raised suspicion.

“This is not being done by some dark hand managing all this. It’s not being done by some forces that we know the town is not aware of that’s pushing this along. These are the commissioners here that are leading the charge. So I would hope that you would trust in us, that we can make the right decisions for this town, and we do hear you,” he said, drawing applause.

Cooper said during the meeting that the closed meetings were not an attempt to hide anything, but rather based on North Carolina general statute.

“It did become apparent that we were in these closed sessions far too long without the community hearing from its commissioners,” Cooper said. “Citizens can be assured that whenever the decision is made, it will be made in a public meeting and with full disclosure.”

A days-old member of a herd of wild horses familiar to those who often gaze across Taylor’s Creek in Beaufort was removed from the Rachel Carson Reserve and taken to the state veterinary college hospital this week after she was observed showing signs of extreme illness.

North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve Central Sites Manager Paula Gillikin told Coastal Review Tuesday that the young filly had improved overnight after being transported Monday to the North Carolina State College of Veterinary Medicine in Raleigh.

Gillikin had observed and examined the female foal at the Rachel Carson Reserve. A consultation with the reserve’s local equine veterinarian convinced the staff to remove the horse for further examination and treatment.

“She wouldn’t have survived,” Gillikin said Tuesday. “And she was living in a family of horses that is always out on the waterfront. So, everybody was seeing her, and everybody knew she was already there. So, we had to do something quick.”

As of Tuesday, the young horse was still receiving plasma, fluids and antibiotics, “and she’s progressing as well as she can,” Gillikin said, adding that her hospital stay will probably last about four more days. “The vet at the vet school said that she has a good chance of surviving and making a recovery.”

But the foal will not be returned to the herd. Her exposure to humans and other factors rule out that option.

“Even if we put her back out there, which wouldn’t really be fair, after she experiences the cushy life, even if we tried to, her mother was not producing enough milk,” Gillikin explained.

And word of the opportunity to adopt has already been spread among those potentially in the know.

“We have already put some feelers out through the vet school,” Gillikin said. “They’re circulating the word throughout the vet-med folks at the equine hospital. And then I’m going to start calling a couple folks.”

Meanwhile, vets are working to determine the causes of the filly’s distress, emergency care is being administered, and treatment options are being considered, the Division of Coastal Management said in a press release.

The division also extended its gratitude to the Cape Lookout National Seashore and the Town of Beaufort Police Department for their assistance with assessment and transport of the foal.

The wild horses at the reserve were brought here in the 1940s and eventually became wild, according to the division.

“The horses are valued by locals and tourists alike as a cultural resource and symbol of wildness and freedom,” according to the press release, which noted that the herd subsists primarily on saltmarsh cordgrass and digs for fresh water. “The wild horse herd is continually monitored by Reserve staff and volunteers with minimal management to maintain the wildness of the herd. The Division intervened in this case because of the extreme signs of distress and the very young age of the foal.”

Officials also asked the public to help protect the horses and their safety by maintaining a distance of at least 50 feet, or about the size of a large bus. A much larger distance is recommended for viewing the horses’ natural behaviors and protecting them from disturbance.

BEAUFORT – Residents here are outraged that town officials are negotiating behind closed doors a possibly decades-long contract to operate the town-owned docks that many say is already decided in favor of a giant conglomerate with operations already in Beaufort and in coastal South Carolina.

But the number of marina operators available with the needed expertise and financial heft to invest what Beaufort officials say would be $10-15 million in a needed rehabilitation of the town’s “iconic boardwalk” is likely finite. And, town officials say, grant funding could likely only result in about $3 million for the project.

Beaufort Waterfront Enterprises Inc. is the current operator of the Beaufort waterfront marina and has been for 46 years. Haywood Weeks, the corporation’s president, has told the town he no longer wishes to continue operating the docks after Dec. 31 when the current agreement expires.

The town has been planning for this inevitability for at least three years. Beaufort Waterfront Enterprises is a small corporation formed in 1979 with Weeks and Secretary Joseph “Jeb” Breary as the only agents on file with the state. A study committee was appointed in July 2021, but town residents say they’re not getting much information on such a high-profile, potentially environmentally sensitive deal that they worry will change Beaufort but not for the better. The entire waterfront infrastructure, including the boardwalk and fuel storage, are at the end of their useful life, with eyesores and environmental risks, according to the town.

Breary told Coastal Review Tuesday that Beaufort Waterfront Enterprises knows nothing about any negotiations because the town has essentially shut him and Weeks out of the deal, even in an advisory capacity.

“Nobody’s talking to nobody,” Breary said. “All we hear is what we’re hearing from the people who are screaming.”

Numerous townsfolk have told Coastal Review that the little they have been able to glean about the deal in the works, an apparent 50-year contract with a 50-year extension option, is deeply concerning because it has huge potential ramifications for Beaufort’s future.

Some have accused the town’s board of commissioners, which has put out a request for proposals and received responses, of using the cover of confidential “economic development” discussions to skirt public records law and advance their own personal business interests, rather than the town’s best interests. They say the fix is already in for Beaufort to contract with a company called Safe Harbor.

Town officials recently attempted to address those concerns in a detailed press release, saying they were “cognizant of the issues” and “taking into consideration the use of taxpayer dollars.”

The release noted the town’s financial position and the importance of considering “the level of service delivered” by whomever is selected as the contracted operator of the docks.

“Additionally, the character and charm of Beaufort must be preserved while meeting the public’s expectation to ensure the existing vistas of Rachel Carson Reserve. As a functional consideration, the Town must consider the availability of dock space for day boaters, the continuance of existing commercial activities, and the creation of mooring space in the harbor. Each of these issues is being considered by the Board of Commissioners along with the public feedback received throughout the process including the charrette conducted in May of this year. This is not an easy decision.”

But the announcement from the town doesn’t satisfy the Beaufort residents who have contacted Coastal Review in the past two weeks.

“It’s not a conspiracy theory to say downtown Beaufort will be different,” a town resident who wished to remain unnamed told Coastal Review last week.

Safe Harbor

Several Coastal Review readers have shared news reports from South Carolina, where Safe Harbor has operations and has made decisions that didn’t sit well with the folks in coastal towns down there.

Earlier this year, the Beaufort, South Carolina, City Council told Safe Harbor it wasn’t interested in the corporation’s proposed $27 million dock expansion.

“All the council members agreed that they think that expanding the dock will not only obstruct the view of the water that is so important to many who live in the city, but it will change the charm and feel that makes the city of Beaufort special,” reported the Island News of Beaufort, South Carolina, on April 4.

In February, the Hilton Head Island Packet reported that Safe Harbor Marina was “on the verge of beginning construction of what was originally billed as a megayacht marina” at its 317-acre site on Battery Creek in Port Royal, South Carolina. While the definition of a megayacht varies, the Island Packet report defined it as being between 130 and 590 feet in length. Residents here say it’s generally any vessel longer than 200 feet, and that worries them.

Breary, the dockmaster here, said the longest vessel capable of docking at the Beaufort waterfront is about 250 feet, essentially a mini-megayacht, he said. But the constant shoaling and necessary dredging required to keep the entrance channel to Beaufort Harbor clear is enough to likely keep the largest yachts away.

“A 250-foot boat doesn’t need to stop here unless something bad has happened,” Breary said, adding that the channel sometimes shoals to as shallow as 7 to 8 feet.

Breary also noted how Weeks had been instrumental over the years in raising and providing local funding to bring in the Army Corps of Engineers for periodic dredging.

In March, Port Royal took legal action to stop Safe Harbor from using part of the property there for dock manufacturing, allegedly for use at a different Safe Harbor property.

Safe Harbor Marinas was a limited liability company purchased in 2020 by Michigan-based Sun Communities Inc. As part of that roughly $2 billion deal, Sun acquired 99 marinas owned and operated by Safe Harbor and eight marinas Safe Harbor manages on behalf of third parties.

In 2022, Sun purchased Beaufort-based Jarrett Bay Boatworks — the entire 175-acre enchilada: manufacturing, marina, business park and all — for $51 million. Randy Ramsey, founder and then-president of Jarrett Bay Boatworks, has been vice president of operations with Safe Harbor Marinas since February 2022, according to his LinkedIn profile.

Ramsey, who was until recently also chairman of the University of North Carolina System Board of Governors, did not respond to Coastal Review’s request for comment on Beaufort’s pending decision.

Marina expansion worries

Obstructed views of Taylors Creek and the Rachel Carson Reserve, and expansion of the marina here are among the concerns from outspoken residents who have reached out to Coastal Review. But the secrecy is perhaps a chief concern, along with what they say is the town’s handling of contracts in the past.

No one in attendance spoke favorably of the alleged lack of transparency during the public comment portion of the July 22 Beaufort Board of Commissioners’ work session. As seen in the video of the meeting, Beaufort resident Robert Harper said the town has a sorry track record in holding its contractors accountable.

“The history of this town in enforcing its contracts is abysmal,” Harper told the board during his allotted three minutes. “And if you want an example of that I can give you plenty.”

He said the town had not litigated contractual shortcomings or enforced its rules or ordinances in the past. He asked for assurances that residents get to review any finalized contract before it’s executed and that it would be enforced once it’s in effect.

“If you can assure us that you will stand up and you will enforce the agreement that you hammer out, then we’ll feel a lot better about that, but we have no information. It’s all a void. There’s this mysterious black box where all this conversation is going on, but the public has no idea, and what we are afraid of is that you guys will come out one day and say, ‘Well, this is our decision, vote, done,’ and we will have no recourse.”

Harper also reminded the board of its accountability to voters.

“After all, y’all represent us. You’re not there for your own good. You’re there for us. We put you there for that reason so we would like to see what you’re doing on our behalf,” he said.

Others in town have echoed concerns about the lack of transparency or questioned the apparent urgency. They’ve asked, why not temporarily extend the contract with the current operator to allow a more public process? Others have asked, why, if the town cannot afford the needed dock upgrades, were grants and other funding opportunities not pursued more diligently? Still others have said it appeared the board was secretly selling out the town in a way that will drastically change its character.

Resident J.P. Gooch, during the public comment portion of the meeting, said two of three residents he’d spoken with knew nothing of what the board was deciding. He called for a more public process and more examination of public funding options. He said it appeared the commissioners were pressing “the easy button” by bringing in Safe Harbor, a publicly traded corporation.

“I don’t even know if it’s Safe Harbor that you’re talking to because there’s a lack of transparency,” said Gooch, who added that because the firm is publicly traded, “They’re beholden to their stockholders. They’re not interested in what Beaufort has to say.”

Resident Dr. Jud Kenworthy said the board had simply failed to ask the public what it wanted for the waterfront, “a valuable asset,” he said. “I’m a biologist so I look through the lens of biology when I look at things like this, and what I see here is a classic predator-prey relationship, and what we are, the town of Beaufort, what you are as our representatives, you know what the entire community is, it is the prey.”

Mayor Sharon Harker, during the meeting, offered assurances that the board would not approve a contract behind closed doors, which would be counter to open meeting laws. Harker is a board member with the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review.

“This board would not make any decisions to sign any contract behind closed doors. I don’t even know why we’d even think that,” said Harker during the meeting, referring to the town board. “And yes, it will come to public light, and then yes, you will be able to have your opportunity to talk about it. So, I want you to take that to the streets.”

With that, the mayor then asked for a motion to enter into closed session. But before that happened, Commissioner Bucky Oliver, owner of the Beaufort Hotel, said he was confident that the board was doing right by the town. He said the board was listening and had already considered and was still considering many of the concerns expressed.

“I have to step back and reflect on the fact of where we are in our country and in our times, and we are in uncertain times, and we are anxious, and I am,” Oliver said. “And I’m not speaking about national issues, and I’m not speaking about dock issues. This is something that is right here in the midst of our thing, and our goal is to try to do the best job we can for the town of Beaufort. And I’m comfortable in looking anybody in the face, and I can tell you that I feel that confidence across this commission.”

Study committee recommendations

The town-appointed Harbor & Waterways Master Planning Advisory Committee began its work in summer 2021, “to evaluate needed improvements” to the docks, according to a town news release dated July 22. “After considerable review,” the committee presented its recommendations in September 2022.

“Armed with these recommendations, the Board decided to investigate whether a private market exists for a third-party operator with sufficient capital to invest in and manage the Town’s docks. Consequently, the Town set forth to explore these questions in the context of a long-term lease or in the form of a public-private partnership,” according to the news release.

The recommendations include $9.8 million in necessary improvements to the bulkhead, boardwalk and dock infrastructure and $4.1 million in “desired improvements, such as extending the boardwalk, a mooring field, replacing vessel fueling and storage tanks, creating more aesthetic and pedestrian-friendly features and adding other amenities.

Town officials determined that a private market does exist, but the town was “not financially positioned to invest $10-15 million in the rehabilitation of the waterfront.”

“With this understanding, the town investigated the possibility of financing the improvements through commercial lending as an alternative to a third party,” the town said in the release. “In consultation with First Tryon Advisors, the Town’s financial consultant, it was determined that commercial lending would be very difficult given collateral required for a loan requires the pledge of Town-owned assets other than the waterfront assets themselves. As such, a comprehensive review was conducted to determine what other fixed assets of the Town could be used as collateral. Unfortunately, the fixed assets that have an appreciable value are obligated. As such, they represent encumbrances and therefore cannot be used as collateral for a loan to improve the docks.”

Town officials said they also considered a bond referendum. “This option, if approved by the voters, requires an increase in property tax rates to satisfy the associated debt service. The Board has not expressed an interest in pursuing this alternative as the tax burden for improvements would be distributed to all property owners, and not just those who use and/or enjoy the docks.”

Featured Image

An agile, busy and well-laden pollinator nearly blends into the yellow of a sunflower recently in a barely maintained part of a garden near Morehead City. Photo: Mark Hibbs

North Carolina environmental organizations are celebrating a recent decision in a coastal North Carolina man’s challenge to remaining federal wetland protections under the Clean Water Act.

The case is ongoing.

Robert White of Pasquotank County, who operates various businesses in area, brought the case in March, challenging what he contends are illegal provisions in Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers rulings and seeking “to restore his own right to make use of his own land.” White seeks to operate a sand mine adjacent to Big Flatty Creek and near the Pasquotank River.

The Southern Environmental Law Center intervened in the case on behalf of the National Wildlife Federation and the North Carolina Wildlife Federation. Those nonprofit groups say White seeks to virtually eliminate federal protection of wetlands, after the U.S. Supreme Court nearly gutted existing protections last year in its Sackett v. EPA decision.

In January 2023, the EPA brought a civil enforcement action against White after he allegedly discharged pollutants into jurisdictional waters without a permit when he built and filled bulkheads in open water and wetlands, both marsh and forested, at his parcels on the Pasquotank River and Big Flatty Creek. This enforcement action is ongoing. Last fall, White asked the court to stay an enforcement action pending against him. When that failed, White turned from defense to offense, as Boyle noted in his ruling.

White in April asked the court to preliminary enjoin federal agencies from enforcing Clean Water Act regulations as they pertain to him and his properties.

Related: Wildlife groups seek to intervene in Pasquotank man’s case

But Judge Terrence W. Boyle on June 17 issued a scathing decision for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina denying White’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

“White has failed to show that he is likely to succeed on the merits of either of his claims,” Boyle ruled.

“We are disappointed with the court’s ruling,” said Paige Gilliard, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, which is representing White in the case . “The Supreme Court was clear in Sackett that federal jurisdiction over wetlands requires both a continuous surface connection and indistinguishability from jurisdictional waters. The CWA regulates navigable waters, not land, so indistinguishability is a critical part of the Sackett test. The Amended Rule’s lip service to continuous surface connection is not enough under Sackett.”

The Pacific Legal Foundation represents challengers to environmental laws free of charge and “defends Americans’ liberties when threatened by government overreach and abuse,” according to its website.

White had alleged that the “adjacent” wetlands provision in the new federal rule is inconsistent with the Sackett test for jurisdiction over wetlands. He asked the court to find the new rule unlawful and set it aside as “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion.” White contended for those same reasons that the new regulations exceeded the agencies’ statutory authority and must be set aside.

Boyle ruled that White failed to show that he was likely to suffer irreparable harm without a preliminary injunction, “that the balance of the equities tip in his favor; and that an injunction would be in the public interest. Boyle called that failure “fatal to his motion.”

Boyle ruled that “White’s challenge to the waters of the United States, or WOTUS, rule that resulted from the Sackett decision, “smacks up against the Rule’s fidelity to ‘waters of the United States’ and Sackett’s test to determine when an adjacent wetland meets that definition.”

White faltered, Boyle ruled, by isolating a phrase in the Sackett decision “from its logical connection to the remainder of the opinion.” Boyle referenced the words of former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., applying his “familiar admonition to a different context: White is thinking words not things. The thing that makes a wetland practically indistinguishable from an adjacent ‘water of the United States’ is the presence of a continuous surface connection. Thus, the Amended Rule faithfully conforms to the definition of ‘waters of the United States’ as interpreted by Sackett.”

Michael and Chantell Sackett, the people behind the case name, had purchased property in Idaho and began backfilling their lot so they could build a house. The EPA informed the Sacketts that their property included wetlands and they needed a permit because they were discharging pollutants into “waters of the United States.” The Sacketts sued, and after nearly 15 years their case made it to the U.S. Supreme Court, where they prevailed.

In its 5-4 decision, the nation’s highest court ruled that “waters of the United States,” pertains to only wetlands that have “continuous surface connection.”

Advocates said the revised rule leaves water quality in North Carolina unprotected and increases the chance of flooding.

The North Carolina League of Conservation Voters said in May that White’s case “could finish killing off federal rules protecting wetlands.”

The University of North Carolina Wilmington said Wednesday that its monthly measure of ocean-related economic activities rose 10.11% in May.

Colin Waltsak, a research assistant in the UNCW Economics and Finance Department, told Coastal Review Friday that the UNC Wilmington Blue Economy Index was originally developed in 2018 but officially launched in February of this year.

The index is published on Bloomberg (Ticker: BLUEECO), which provides daily financial data.

“Our index measures global ocean economic activities. Just as the S&P 500 Index reflects the health of the US capital market, our index offers an estimate of the blue economy,” Waltsak said in an email response.

He said the goal is to get the index picked up by an asset manager to take it public.

The index, which follows the World Bank definition of the “Blue Economy,” a broad swath of sustainable uses of ocean resources. These include the harvest of living and nonliving resources, renewable or inexhaustible natural forces such as wind or wave energy, carbon sequestration, and ocean- and waterways-based commerce, transport and trade.

“The index continues to outperform its closest benchmarks, the MSCI All World Index, the S&P 500, and the S&P 500 Industrials,” UNCW said in the announcement. “While S&P 500 Industrials showed the weakest gains throughout the month, rising only 1.69%, the MSCI All World Index and S&P 500 were neck and neck, achieving 4.10% and 3.93% respectively. Despite these major indices showing modest growth in May, the Blue Economy Index surged past them, delivering gains more than double those of its nearest benchmark (MSCI) and closing the month with a remarkable 10.11% increase.”

The top performer, according to the index, was TPI Composites Inc, a US-based wind blades manufacturer, which saw a 72.33% increase. The gains followed a recent earnings report in which TPI announced revenues that were 0.94% higher than expected.

A Taiwan-based shipping company, Wan Hai Lines Ltd., also performed strongly, posting a return of 57.70% for the month after launching a direct service from Indonesia to West India.

According to the index, the worst performer was Mitsui E&S Holdings, a shipbuilding company in Japan focused on engines and automated gantry cranes. The firm had posted a disappointing earnings report for the first quarter.

The UNC Wilmington Blue Economy Index was developed in collaboration with the UNCW Cameron School of Business, UNCW Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (CIE), CIE’s Alliance for the Blue Economy, and FactSet, a data and software firm serving investment professionals worldwide.

The UNCW index places an emphasis on environmental impact and offers investors insights into what its developers describe as a “burgeoning economic landscape surrounding coastal communities.”

CHAPEL HILL — Environmental organizations are seeking to intervene in a federal lawsuit brought by a North Carolina commercial seafood business operator that they contend seeks to virtually eliminate remaining federal wetlands protections that were dramatically scaled back last year.

The Southern Environmental Law Center said Wednesday it had filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina a motion to intervene and memorandum in the case, which it says could strip provisions that protect waterways that support fishing, hunting and outdoor recreation and undermine their related economies. The law center is representing the National Wildlife Federation and the North Carolina Wildlife Federation.

The case was brought in March by Robert White of Pasquotank County. White is challenging what he contends are illegal provisions in Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers rulings “to restore his own right to make use of his own land,” according to his attorneys, and to ensure both agencies comply with — and courts apply — the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that dramatically narrowed Clean Water Act protections.

Pacific Legal Foundation, which specializes in property rights cases, is representing White, who plans to operate a sand mine on river-adjacent land he owns. Pacific Legal said the Supreme Court’s decision requires that wetlands must be indistinguishable from navigable waters to be regulated. “Land such as Robert’s, which does not bear this connection to the two waterways — cannot be subject to federal regulation under the Clean Water Act.”

The nonprofit law firm known for property rights advocacy contends that the high court’s 5-4 majority opinion in Sackett v. EPA held that the Clean Water Act extends to only wetlands with a continuous surface connection to bodies that are “waters of the United States.” Pacific Legal lawyers had successfully represented Chantell and Mike Sackett in their dispute with the EPA.

“Last term in Sackett the Supreme Court made clear that the Clean Water Act forbids the type of wetlands regulation at issue in Mr. White’s case,” Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Charles Yates said in a statement in response to Coastal Review’s query. “That the Clean Water Act only authorizes the regulation of wetlands that are ‘indistinguishable’ from covered waters, is beyond dispute. Yet rather than adhering to Sackett’s rule, the Agencies have doubled down and are transparently seeking to evade the judgment of the highest court in the land. All Mr. White seeks is a declaration that, per Sackett, the Agencies may no longer regulate his property. The interveners in this case are unsatisfied with the statute Congress actually passed and the Supreme Court’s ruling insisting that it means what it says; the proper audience for their complaints is the legislative branch.”

Pacific Legal said that White owns “low-lying,” flood-prone land on Big Flatty Creek and the Pasquotank River. Seeking to make improvements to minimize flooding and for business endeavors including agriculture and sand mining, White became engaged in permitting disputes with the EPA and the Corps regarding the “navigable waters” provision in the Clean Water Act.

He faces “crushing civil enforcement action,” according to Pacific Legal.

The Southern Environmental Law Center said the relief the plaintiff seeks would effectively write most wetlands out of the Clean Water Act.

“A ruling adopting this extreme view could have devastating effects on waters in North Carolina and throughout the nation,” said Mark Sabath, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “Wetlands are vital to help protect drinking water supplies, wildlife and fisheries, and our communities from flooding. If the wetlands along our coastal waters like the Albemarle Sound are developed and destroyed, communities will be wrecked by job loss, wildlife loss, and flooding.”

The National Wildlife Federation and the North Carolina Wildlife Federation say that the ruling stands to have large economic repercussions. They say healthy fish and wildlife depend on clean water, and that valuable waterways threatened by the lawsuit support fishing, hunting, and outdoor recreation, as well as the jobs these activities sustain. They contend that the clean water that hunters, anglers and other outdoor enthusiasts expect is a pillar in a $788 billion outdoor recreation industry.

“We care about the water quality and wetlands of North Carolina for both people and wildlife,” said Tim Gestwicki, CEO of the North Carolina Wildlife Federation. “We cannot protect fisheries if the wetlands and streams flowing into estuaries are polluted or destroyed. We cannot ensure that critical wildlife habitat is preserved for fishing, hunting, birdwatching, and outdoor recreation if wetland protections are weakened.”

The groups say nearly all of the commercial catch and over half of the recreational harvest in the Southeast are fish and shellfish that depend on wetlands, and wetlands provide important flood protection for communities.

“What the plaintiff in this case is seeking could make it more difficult to protect wetlands and other waters that are critical to fish, waterfowl, shellfish, and other wildlife, and allow widespread destruction and degradation of those critically important waters along with pollution and flooding downstream,” said Jim Murphy, senior director of legal advocacy for the National Wildlife Federation. “Strong Clean Water Act protections safeguard critical wetlands and other waters that sustain our nation’s wildlife and people.” 

White is currently facing a separate federal enforcement action for building and filling a bulkhead on wetlands without a permit on his property on the Pasquotank River and Big Flatty Creek. His attorney did not respond to questions pertaining to that case.

Dr. Braxton Davis, who recently stepped down as director of the state Division of Coastal Management, assumed his new role Thursday as executive director of the North Carolina Coastal Federation.

Davis said Thursday during his first meeting with staff that it may take some time to get up to speed but he was excited to be doing that now.

“In terms of what my initial priorities are, it’s getting out and engaging with all our partners and friends along the coast and hearing their their thoughts and visions for the future. This is a very collaborative organization, so I’m really excited about building those relationships and maintaining those relationships. I really am looking forward to that part of the job in the coming months,” he said.

The Coastal Federation, a nonprofit advocacy organization that works to establish and maintain a healthy North Carolina coast and publishes Coastal Review, had for nearly 42 years until Wednesday been under the leadership of its founder Todd Miller.

Miller announced in December that he would be stepping back and that the organization’s board of directors had appointed Davis to succeed him. Miller has said his new role would be to serve as Davis’ senior adviser and as an “ambassador” for the Coastal Federation.

“He was my choice to assume my role, and I could not be more pleased that our Board of Directors agreed with my recommendation, and that he accepted this new assignment with enthusiasm and his own sense for how it needs to be fulfilled,” Miller wrote in an email to Coastal Federation staff early Thursday.

Miller wrote that, while his new role would take time to sort out, “my commitment to our cause and organization is unwavering.”

Coastal Federation Board President April Clark told Coastal Review that the board unanimously rallied behind the decision to hire Davis, who had led the Division of Coastal Management since 2011. Clark said the board was confident in his abilities, values and leadership experience to continue the work of protecting and restoring the coast while steering the organization toward new environmental milestones.

“This is a significant change for the Coastal Federation,” Clark said. “Our organization has grown and matured into a renowned, sought-after environmental organization that provides much-needed work and guidance to our state and beyond. Our staff and board are mission-critical to the work of the organization and having Braxton at the helm gives us the confidence and comfort to move forward into a new chapter at the Coastal Federation.”

Todd Miller, founder and executive director of the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review, announced Monday that he is stepping down and that the nonprofit organization’s board of directors had appointed Dr. Braxton Davis, director of the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, to step into the role early next year.

The Coastal Federation is a nonprofit with 16,000 supporters working for a healthier North Carolina coast. Miller founded the organization in 1982. He is a founding board member with Restore America’s Estuaries, and serves on the Board of Visitors for the University of North Carolina Institute for the Environment and as a board member on the Leadership Committee for the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership.

“With a mix of emotions, I find myself ready to set a new course in the remarkable voyage I’ve shared with the Federation since 1982. The time has come for me to pass the helm of this incredible organization to the next generation of leaders who will steer our mission to new horizons in the years ahead,” Miller said Monday in a message to staff, members and supporters.

The organization’s board approved the selection of Davis in a unanimous vote during a special meeting Dec. 4. The change in leadership is set for Feb. 1, but Miller stressed that he will continue to remain engaged in the Coastal Federation’s work, “and not going out to pasture.”

Miller is to serve as Davis’ senior adviser and as an “ambassador” for the Coastal Federation.

Miller said the transition will allow him to focus on the work he does best – championing the group’s causes and advancing its mission.

“I requested this change and wanted to do it while it was not a necessity or an unpredictable crisis situation — and we’ll be a stronger organization as a result,” Miller told Coastal Review.

‘Exceptionally well-qualified’

Miller described Davis as “exceptionally well-qualified to lead the Federation into a new era of innovation and impact. His extensive experience and unwavering commitment to coastal management, coupled with a proven track record at state and national levels, make him the ideal individual to navigate the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.”

Davis, who has been Division of Coastal Management director since 2011, told Coastal Review last week that after 12 years with division, he was ready for the next phase of his career and excited about the opportunity to join the Coastal Federation.

He described how the Coastal Federation had been a longstanding partner with the state’s coastal program and that he had worked directly with many of the organization’s staff over the years.

“I’ve always been impressed with the expertise and energy they bring to their work, and their engagement with diverse stakeholders. The organization has grown significantly over the years and is leading a wide range of projects, so I look forward to transitioning into my new role in early 2024 and hope to hit the ground running in support of the great work they are doing,” Davis said.

Davis, whose hometown is Lynchburg, Virginia, earned a bachelor’s in environmental science from the University of Virginia, a master’s in biological sciences from Florida International University, and a doctorate in marine affairs from the University of Rhode Island. He has experience in coastal and marine research and policy analysis and was the lead principal investigator for a number of grant-funded coastal resources, management and policy research projects. He has provided congressional briefings and testimony on climate and coastal resilience issues.

Davis said that in his new role he plans to visit with folks across the North Carolina coast during the coming year to explore new partnership opportunities, including opportunities to build on the partnerships the Coastal Federation has had over the years with the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and the Division of Coastal Management.

Same issues, slightly different perspective

The transition from a state regulatory agency to a coastal advocacy organization is natural for Davis, he told Coastal Review.

“I’ve been doing this since the very beginning, since I was in graduate school, and a lot of it was policy, policy advocacy and research and then coastal management in South Carolina where I was focused on the nonregulatory side,” he said.

Davis said that after a dozen years at the division, “honestly, it just feels like a really good progression for me. I really feel like it’s going to be a fun, fresh start to look at the same issues in a slightly different way, work on them in a slightly different way.”

Davis said his background can help the Coastal Federation achieve its goals in restoration, land acquisition and other work, “and certainly there’s some advocacy as well in my background that will be helpful for that. I think because I understand where the challenges lie and what can work as cooperative solutions that people can buy into, I think that’s going to be helpful on that front.”

Davis said the best part of his state job has been the people that he works with every day — staff at the Division of Coastal Management, leaders at the Department of Environmental Quality, members of the Coastal Resources Commission — people who he described as positive, solution-oriented, and hardworking in their efforts to help people navigate federal and state rules, resolve conflicts and protect coastal resources. He said the “great team” at the division has earned a reputation for friendly and professional public service.

“It can be a tough job at times, but that’s because the issues and projects we work on are complex and important to our economy, environment, and culture. It has been a rewarding career and honestly a privilege to be a part of for all these years,” Davis said.

50 years of coastal management

The pending leadership changes at both the state agency and the nonprofit come as North Carolina’s Coastal Area Management Act, the law that created the Division of Coastal Management, turns 50.

“Most people know of CAMA through the regulatory or permitting program. As CAMA celebrates its 50th anniversary, as with any regulatory program, its achievements can be difficult to measure because you’re trying to understand what would have happened if the regulations were not in place. CAMA requires us to seek a balance between economic growth, development, environmental protection, conflicting uses, and the protection of cultural and social values,” Davis said.

He said the division issues about 3,000 permits each year, but its field representatives visit about 5,000 sites per year for project consultations.

“Every day, DCM field reps help resolve conflicts between neighbors, avoid obstructions to navigation, site development farther from eroding shorelines, and limit impacts to sensitive resources,” Davis said.

Davis said he had worked to foster a science-based, collaborative and solution-oriented approach to administering the state regulatory programs. This includes steps over the years to streamline permit reviews while maintaining environmental protections.

“A good example is the streamlining of permit applications for living shorelines for erosion-control projects by coordinating a general permit with other federal and state agencies,” he explained.

He also highlighted the new Resilient Coastal Communities Program, which provides direct financial and technical support to coastal communities for resilience planning and project implementation, as one that had grown from a few hundred thousand dollars to an approximately $15 million budget, including $10 million in the most recent state budget and a recently announced $3 million grant from the National Fish and Wildlife Federation.

“We’re continuing efforts to strengthen and integrate resilience planning into local comprehensive plans along the coast,” Davis said.

Davis also highlighted the expansion during his tenure of the state Coastal Reserve that totals more than 44,000 acres, including a recent acquisition at the Bird Island Coastal Reserve. He said other nonregulatory programs, such as the Public Beach and Shoreline Access Program and Clean Marinas Program, were also expanded.

He said North Carolina continues to be actively engaged with other coastal states and territories to develop fisheries management strategies. Davis has served as chair of a two interstate policy workgroups focused on ocean inlets, beaches and coastal erosion issues through the Coastal States Organization.

‘No wetlands, no seafood’

For almost two years while Division of Coastal Management director, Davis served simultaneously as state Division of Marine Fisheries director, where he said he also worked with the best available science to provide the Marine Fisheries Commission “with carefully considered recommendations, and I’m proud to have been a part of the DMF team.”

“No wetlands, no seafood” has long been a Coastal Federation slogan, and Davis agreed that fisheries are inseparable from coastal management. He said state legislators also agree.

“There are connections that have been drawn by the General Assembly with the Fisheries Reform Act and the creation of the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan, where you have all three commissions, the (Environmental Management Commission, the Coastal Resources Commission and the Marine Fisheries Commission) working together because there are those intersections between fisheries and all the work of the Coastal Resources Commission and the EMC on water quality and habitat. And so they’re inseparable in that way,” Davis said.

In terms of dealing with a public that may be skeptical of both regulatory agencies and nonprofit environmental organizations, Davis said he’s confident that the challenges are not as big as may appear.

“Once people understand what you’re doing, then there’s a heck of a lot more buy-in than you realize,” Davis said. “People want to know that they’re doing things right and they’re doing it the right way. They want it to be understandable and clear and efficient. No one wants to impact resources.”

Davis said the regulatory side of coastal management is interesting because there are so many agencies with different interests involved, everything from submerged lands to the Army Corps of Engineers to navigation and other issues. The division is a “one-stop shop for most coastal projects,” Davis said, adding that this comprehensive review is efficient.

“I think there’s more buy-in to regulatory than one would think based on the individual cases where there are snags, or folks that just don’t want to be regulated at all, but I think those same people, if their neighbor were putting in something that was impacting their property along the shoreline, they might have a different feel about that,” said Davis.

He said understanding and experience are valuable when facing misperceptions about environmental nonprofits or state coastal regulation.

“It’s really about finding solutions that people can work with. I will say, you know, regulations alone are not the solution to comprehensive coastal management. They are at the state level, they are the minimum standard that can be applied coastwide, and every different situation that is acceptable from the regulated public and politically and as a compromise across a lot of different interests. Find that balance,” he said.

Those regulations are important to reducing the scope and scale of coastal impacts and in resolving conflicts, “but you still have to have partnerships to do things like land acquisition for sensitive areas, you just don’t use regulations as the only tool. So, I think people hopefully will, over time, understand that it takes all of these tools, all of these different types of organizations to sustain the coast of North Carolina to make it continue to be the fantastic place it is.”

Before joining the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, Davis was director of the Policy and Planning Division of the South Carolina Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. He praised Miller’s accomplishments and said he expects a smooth transition into his role with the Coastal Federation.

Davis said Miller had done an incredible job of bringing in and engaging with so many different types of people from different backgrounds and different areas but all with a similar mindset. “And I think that’s remarkable, and that is what’s been a big part of the success of the Coastal Federation.”

There’s also familiarity with and mutual respect among the organization’s staff.

“It’s fortunate for me that I already know most of the staff at the Coastal Federation and I have worked with them so, not only is that more comfortable for me, but hopefully for them in that they kind of know what I’m about. I think the world of them, and I think it’s going to be really fun working with them. And I’m ready,” Davis said.

Miller’s email message to Coastal Federation members and supporters Monday hearkened back to the organization’s beginnings. “My journey with the Federation began in the early 1980s when the organization was merely a seed of an idea. Through the collective efforts of tens of thousands of people who consistently contribute their ideas, time, and resources, that seed has grown into a thriving force for positive change along the North Carolina coast.”

Miller, in his announcement, also expressed enthusiasm for Davis’ coming arrival and the transition ahead. “These changes herald new ideas, talents, and energy that will ensure the Federation’s work remains at the forefront of coastal protection and restoration efforts nationwide. The North Carolina Coastal Federation is poised for continued success, thanks to the solid foundation laid by the board and staff, and their vision that will be carried forward by Dr. Davis.”

This story is part of a new reporting partnership with The Outer Banks Voice.

BEAUFORT – Newly appointed members took seats for their first Coastal Resources Commission meeting here Thursday – also the first since state lawmakers changed the rules regarding its makeup — and four members promptly and unsuccessfully attempted to replace Chair Renee Cahoon.

The board, along with the Environmental Management Commission, was one of the state regulatory commissions that a three-judge panel deciding Gov. Roy Cooper’s legal challenge to Senate Bill 512 on Nov. 1 allowed to proceed with new appointments that the law took away from the governor. The superior court judges gave Cooper a partial victory but did not rule on appointments to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission or the state Building Council.

The 7-4 vote to reinstate Cahoon, whom Cooper had appointed as chair when that was still state law, came after new commission member Jordan Hennessy’s motion to delay a vote on the chair until after the entire board had been seated. Members Larry Baldwin, James Yates and Robert High joined Hennessy in opposing Cahoon.

Mary Lucasse, the commission’s legal counsel, halted that move, saying that a quorum being present was all the authority needed to proceed with the election and other business on the agenda.

Hennessy told Coastal Review during a break in the meeting that his desire to delay election of a chair was because other new appointees were absent.

“We have two new commissioners that were just appointed along with myself who weren’t here, and they asked for a virtual connection to this meeting and that wasn’t provided. I feel like that when 15% of our commission who are new appointees are not able to be here that they should be able to have a say in their leadership position,” Hennessy said.

The commission sets policies for the North Carolina Coastal Management Program and adopts rules for the state’s Coastal Area Management Act and the Dredge and Fill Act.

Cooper had vetoed the bill that stripped the governor’s appointment powers Aug.24, but the GOP-controlled legislature overrode that veto Oct. 10. Cooper immediately challenged the measure’s constitutionality in court.

Previously, the governor appointed nine members but the new law took away three, gave the North Carolina General Assembly two additional appointments for a total of six, and gave the state insurance commissioner one.

Hennessy, a former aide to then-Sen. Bill Cook, R-Beaufort, and a CEO/managing partner with EJE Dredging Service, was Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey’s appointee.

Hennessy told Coastal Review that he looked forward to being of service to the commission. Asked about his relevant coastal management expertise, he said he had “various different experiences of working with local governments on various different projects.” He noted his six years working in the General Assembly, an Outer Banks dredging project and some real estate projects.

Cahoon, during a lunch break, told Coastal Review that she was honored by the commissioners who supported her in the vote. But she declined to comment on those who didn’t. Cahoon said building consensus was the biggest challenge she expected in her renewed role as chair.

“Blending the board, in terms of getting everybody working together,” she said. “It’s important to make sure everybody’s had their orientations and understand the CAMA program and that we’re here for the people of the coastal North Carolina and trying to protect the coast of North Carolina while being still fair to all the property owners.”

Cahoon said she was optimistic that regardless the outcome of any future legal challenges, “I think we’ll all be fine. We all just have to learn to know each other.”

These days it may seem like every month of the year celebrates some concept or ideal to which we should all aspire. In the case of countless coastal residents and visitors, not to mention those who wish they could be here, October is a green light to pursue the lofty goal of eating more oysters.

Oysters in North Carolina waters may be harvested wild starting in October each year, but cultivated or farmed oysters can be enjoyed year-round. Nevertheless, October is a perfect time to honor the humble oyster. It’s North Carolina Oyster Month, a “shellabration” of what scientists call a keystone species, one that’s crucial to North Carolina’s marine and coastal environments.

“Our eastern oyster is a coastal treasure: They help to keep our waters clean and clear by filtering them, providing habitat (or homes) for up to 300 different coastal species, and being a tasty treat for humans and other animals alike,” North Carolina Coastal Federation Oyster Program Director Erin Fleckenstein told Coastal Review.

Fleckenstein, who was the longtime coastal scientist with the Coastal Federation’s Wanchese office, coordinates the statewide Oyster Blueprint, a guide for oyster restoration and protection measures in North Carolina. Its focus is on protecting water quality, creating and restoring oyster habitat, nurturing the burgeoning shellfish mariculture industry, sustaining the wild harvest of oysters and then engaging the public in this work.

Oysters are beneficial in all kinds of ways. Nutritionists at the Cleveland Clinic say there are reasons to love oysters, “even if you hate them.” They’re a low-calorie, high-protein food loaded with nutrients that are deficient in a significant portion of people, especially as they age – nutrients such as copper, iron, selenium and zinc, and vitamins B-12 and D.

More than a nutritious culinary treasure, oysters also serve important functions in the marine environment, and oyster cultivation is a sustainable way of producing seafood. Advocates tout the need for no added food, chemicals or antibiotics, and their harvests relieve pressure on wild oyster populations.

And both wild and farmed oysters are filter feeders, improving water clarity and quality. Advocates, including the Coastal Federation, often point out that a single oyster can filter up to 50 gallons of water a day. The improved clarity benefits the entire ecosystem.

“They really are to be celebrated and I’m excited that we’ve been able to partner with North Carolina Sea Grant, the Department of Cultural and Natural Resources, North Carolina Shellfish Growers and the North Carolina Oyster Trail to honor them in a monthlong celebration,” said Fleckenstein.

The Coastal Federation has partnered with Sea Grant and the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources in organizing Oyster Month festivities under the umbrella of the NC Oyster Trail. The NC Oyster Trail provides experiences intended to help sustain oysters and oyster growers, “resulting in economic, environmental and social benefits to the state’s seafood industry and coastal communities,” according to its website.

Sea Grant Coastal Economist Jane Harrison recently said that North Carolina Oyster Month events “highlight the ecology, culture, economy, and history related to this vital resource.”

The Department of Natural and Cultural Resources has published a calendar of events for Oyster Month.

The Coastal Federation is hosting the following Oyster Month events:

• Oct. 9 Volunteer event at Morris Landing.
• Oct. 12 Oysters Uncovered: Kayak tours.
• Oct. 12 Green Drinks: Oyster Month Focus.
• Oct. 19 Oysters Uncovered: Kayak tours.
• Oct. 24 Ambassador’s Program: Oyster Month focus.
• Oct. 26 Oysters Uncovered: Kayak tours.
• Oct. 27 Tide to Table: evening event with Coastal Studies Institute.

Also in October, look for messaging on the importance of oyster shell recycling and how you can do your part.

And importantly, eat lots of delicious oysters.

More information, more work, more study and more discussion are needed.

Topsail Beach commissioners said Monday that a Raleigh software entrepreneur’s evolving plan to purchase and develop a personal multi-home family compound with a private marina on an undeveloped 119-acre site situated at the south end of town isn’t yet on solid enough footing to allow for a decision on a long-pending rezoning request.

The town board said it still wants more answers and professional analyses related to the proposal before it decides.

At one point during the special called meeting held to discuss proposed conditions and comments on the conditional rezoning application for the New Topsail Inlet property known as The Point, Commissioner John Gunter suggested the entire process needed to start anew because so much had changed, including late-hour changes that he said made it appear that the Olsons were just trying to win votes.

The applicants and prospective owners of the parcel, Todd Olson, founder of Pendo, and his wife Laura Olson, were at the meeting. The Olsons said they were merely reacting to feedback from the public and town planning board in making multiple changes to their plans since talks of the proposal began last year. They said the plans were presented as a “vision doc” and had been fluid to allow for dialogue, “to open up the aperture of what’s possible” regarding the site, which is part of the federal Coastal Barrier Resources System.

The Olsons said their proposed private development of the federally restricted site would be far less dense than any other development in town and all changes made in the latest iteration of their plans had been made in response to officials’ recommendations.

But some commissioners were frustrated that changes were made as recently as the night before the meeting.

“I’m struggling with why we’ve gotten to this point when my feeling is, you have had six months or more to respond to the initial public comments that you solicited yourself and then didn’t really address to people’s satisfaction,” Gunter said to the Olsons. “And now the proposal, in my mind, has changed in hopes of securing more agreement to it.”

Commissioner Frank Braxton said the Olsons could be best served by professional assessments that address the issues raised in prior discussions.

“You’re trying to sell a plan, and we don’t have it yet,” Braxton said.

The board consensus included calls for soil scientists for septic, hydrogeologists for potable water and engineers to study issues such as water pressure for fire suppression where public utilities cannot be extended. An environmental assessment was also recommended.

Jacksonville-based surveyor Charles Riggs submitted the rezoning request last year on behalf of the Olsons. Riggs offered on Monday to draw up a new site plan to allay the board’s unease, but Braxton suggested bringing in other expertise instead.

“You may be going outside of your wheelhouse on something like this because this is a one-of-a-kind shot. This is one of the most primo lots on the East Coast right now and something very unique. And I would think you’d really want to throw what you can at it and get a very talented architect and engineer — landscape architects, a planner, whatever — and have them really go over it and try to give you something good to sell,” Braxton said.

Braxton is president of an engineering and landscape architecture firm who has also worked with the Raleigh Planning Department.

Much of the meeting’s discussion centered on a draft of points for proposed conditions. The Olsons had previously agreed to the planning board’s conditions, included in the document, but commissioners wanted more detailed answers.

Earlier, during the public comment portion of the meeting, several property owners cited similar and familiar concerns about the proposed project. But it was the late-hour revisions that chafed some members of the board.

Commissioners said it was unfair to them and the public to be expected to consider the controversial rezoning application when the plan was still changing as recently as within 24 hours of the workshop meeting at town hall.

Todd Olson said the initial documents were submitted anticipating that further questions would be asked and intending to provide a sense for what the couple would be amenable to in advance.

“We’re not saying, ‘We need that,’ we’re not saying, ‘We want that.’ We’re not saying that even is what’s going to exist. We’re saying that if there’s discussion of a parking lot, there are questions that are, ‘What does it look like?’ and ‘What amenities will be there?’ And we’re simply open to having the conversation. We’re not saying this is what we think, but there’s a lot of conditions that we haven’t had an open dialogue around and we’re trying to create an open dialogue,” Olson said.

Olson said that the changes were also in response to public feedback.

“I don’t think there’s any submission that we’re going to submit that’s going to make people happy to be quite honest,” he said.

Gunter noted that the plans had been public for months, an official public hearing was set for Sept. 13, the board was expected to make its decision in October, and now among the last-minute changes was enlarging the proposed building envelope.

Riggs said that was to allow the family flexibility, “So that when they want to build a house in a couple of years, they can pick the spot and then design it, and then 10 years later, when they want to build their second house, they can pick that spot and then design. So, any plan that you see today is going to be approximate.”

“This needs to start all over again if you’re going to expand what you’re proposing,” Gunter said.

Conservation enhancements

Information was sent to Coastal Review on behalf of the Olsons over the weekend. In it, the couple says their plan would yield community benefits such as preservation of property the town had tried to purchase for more than 20 years, improved and more accessible beach access with showers and bathrooms maintained by an attendant, and enhanced conservation as the new owners would improve awareness of wildlife nesting site “disturbances” now most often caused by “unknowing beachgoers.”

The Olsons say they have been working with the Coastal Land Trust and, if conserved, the nonprofit’s “efforts would have uninterrupted reach between Topsail and Figure Eight Island.”

Their home placement decisions considered factors such as sea level rise, distance from critical habitats, inlet movement and distance from the ocean and Serenity Point.

“We chose these spots to be at the high points on the property,” according to a PowerPoint that was provided to Coastal Review. The slideshow was created by Laura Olson and details the steps the family plans to take regarding conversation and preservation.

The slideshow also notes the accretion of sand at The Point as the inlet has shifted farther out: “The walk around the point was a much shorter walk 50 years ago!” a text box superimposed over an aerial image showing historic shoreline positions over the decades.

Dr. Rob Young, director of the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University, has maintained that the site is appropriately zoned as-is. He said the Olson’s proposed conditions do nothing to diminish the risk.

“There are no ways to modify the project that would reduce the hazard exposure,” Young told Coastal Review Monday in an email.

Young, who has been mapping coastal hazards for three decades and has served on the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission’s Science Advisory Panel, also leads a project working with the National Park Service to assess the vulnerability of every asset in every U.S. coastal park.

In previous comments submitted to the town, Young has contended that the site “would rank as extremely high in every single category we evaluate for coastal hazards” and leave town residents responsible for the potential consequences, including post-storm liabilities.

In his comments also published on his LinkedIn page, Young warned, “Don’t be misled by the fact that the spit is currently growing. It is still highly storm vulnerable. Land adjacent to inlets can change rapidly and it will experience extreme storm surge and significant wave impact during storm events. If you approve building here, you may as well eliminate all restrictions and pretend that we have learned nothing about coastal processes and coastal hazards over the last few decades in North Carolina. It is as simple as that.”

Part of a series on pollinators.

When people shop for ornamental trees, shrubs and flowers for their gardens and yards, visual appeal is usually top of mind. Chain stores and nurseries offer lots of striking choices, but often plant species native to the North Carolina coast are hard to find.

Biologists say that’s a problem.

It can take some effort to find a retailer selling native species, and professional landscapers often fail to include them in their designs, but these plants play a critical role in providing for bees, butterflies and other pollinators here.

Amy Mead of the North Carolina State Extension for New Hanover, Pender and Onslow counties explained to Coastal Review last week that native species are the foundations of coastal ecosystems. For insects like bees and other pollinators, native plants provide nectar, but that’s just one facet of their importance, Mead said.

“Especially for butterflies and moths, so many of our native plants are host plants for their caterpillars, and so they’re looking for these plants to lay their eggs on,” she said. “These native plants are providing the food source for those caterpillars to complete their life cycle. They are absolutely critical, and then that moves up the food chain to these birds looking for these caterpillars to be able to complete their life cycles, as well.”

It’s not an unusual sight in North Carolina: Vines of kudzu or wisteria sprawling across the landscape, reaching up, wrapping around, covering and choking the life from trees and other vegetation and creating a mess that’s not only unsightly, it’s also bad for the environment.

Though common, these vines aren’t native to this area, they were introduced as ornamental plants and subsequently became invasive. They’re just a couple of high-profile examples of plants that cause ill effects because they don’t belong here.

So, how can coastal property owners and landscapers avoid harmful landscaping plants? What plants native to North Carolina would be better alternatives?

A collaborative called the Coastal Landscapes Initiative has compiled a new guide of what it describes as “attractive eco-friendly plants” to substitute for commonly used “bad actors” that the initiative has identified as landscaping plants to avoid.

The Coastal Landscapes Initiative, a public-private partnership created more than five years ago to promote beautiful, functional, cost-efficient and environmentally friendly coastal landscape designs, recently released its free guide, “Plant This Instead!” The publication is available in print at county Cooperative Extension offices and online at the North Carolina Sea Grant website in PDF form.

“The Coastal Landscapes Initiative was started to find ways to promote and support landscaping practices at various scales, practices that meet our human needs and our desires, but also protect and enhance our coastal resources, resources like water quality fisheries and wildlife habitat,” said Gloria Putnam during a webinar in March that shared the title of the new publication.

Putnam, North Carolina Sea Grant’s coastal resources and communities specialist who leads the Coastal Landscape Initiative, said that the North Carolina coast has diverse ecosystems, and each has its own distinct set of plants that are naturally found here – they are native to the area.

“The type of soil, the amount of water and the temperature are really the primary determinants of the type of plant that can live in an area, and the type of plants that are there determines the kind of animals that can exist. In other words, native plants are naturally adapted to the local soil and climate conditions. These plants co-evolved with other species in the area. Some of these plants have highly specialized relationships with animals, and they work as a system,” she said.

Putnam, during the webinar, cited the cedar waxwing and the eastern red cedar as an example.

“Eastern red cedar is actually Juniperus virginiana, so it’s not a cedar at all. It’s juniper, which is why it’s important to know the scientific name,” she said. “Red cedar is very common on barrier islands, and they’re adapted to the conditions there. They’re adapted to the soil and salt aerosols and drought, and the waxwing depends on the cedar for food. And the cedar depends on the waxwing for seed dispersal.”

Invasives can be costly

A big problem with nonnative species is that they can outcompete the native plants, and often with devastating results, environmentally and economically.

According to the publication, estimates of invasive plants’ economic effects can vary. But costs to control just one ornamental species, Lythrum salicaria, commonly known as the European purple loosestrife, and the loss of forage associated with the invasive plant are estimated at $45 million each year in the 48 states where it is found.

The publication cites a 2018 University of Delaware study of residential yards in the Washington, D.C., area, which found that Carolina chickadees there could sustain their numbers only where available plants were at least 70% native species. That’s because Carolina chickadees mainly eat caterpillars that often rely exclusively on a limited number of native plant species for their food.

“A single clutch of chickadees, hatched from 3 to 10 eggs, consumes up to 9,000 caterpillars in the 16 days it takes to develop into fledglings,” according to the publication.

Native plants in coastal landscapes support numerous other birds, as well as other animals and insects, including bees and butterflies.

The guide includes alternatives for commonly used nonnative species, with options for various landscape uses, such as trees and grasses as accent plants, shrubs for foundations and borders, privacy screens and hedges and ornamental deciduous vines to add “vertical interest and flowers.”

For example, the guide suggests Amelanchier canadensi, or serviceberry, and Cercis canadensis, or redbud, trees instead of commonly used Pyrus calleryana, or callery pears, that include Bradford and other cultivars.

Bradford pears, which bloom beautifully in March along much of the North Carolina coast and are frequently featured in landscape designs here, were bred to be sterile, but because they are grafted onto other pear rootstock, which can send out suckers that flower, they can cross with other pear trees nearby.

“Bradford pears can’t crossbreed with one another but they can crossbreed with other cultivars and other pear species,” Mead said during the webinar.

Mead said the Bradford pear had become a “poster child” of good intentions. Structurally weak and “malodorous,” she said that, while it is a beautiful, spring-blooming tree, “I have heard the blooms described as (smelling like) rotting fish or urine, not something that I want to have in my yard.”

Alternatives to the Bradford pear include Cornus florida, or flowering dogwood, Magnolia virginiana, or sweetbay magnolia, and Acer rubrum, or red maple.

For shrubs, plant Ilex vomitoria, or yaupon holly, instead of Nandina domestica, or nandina.

Instead of ornamental grasses like Cortaderia selloana, or pampas grass, the guide suggests planting taller cultivars of native Panicum virgatum, or switchgrass — or Muhlenbergia capillaris, or pink muhly grass, where plant height is not a priority.

Supply and demand

So why aren’t native plants more widely available in stores here?

“It’s sort of a chicken and egg — there’s got to be a demand for the native plants in order for box stores to start carrying these, but then it goes all the way back to the supply chain. The nurseries need to have the demand from the box stores to be able to start growing these plants,” Mead told Coastal Review.

She said it’s not always easy growing native plants on a commercial scale. There’s the matter of the native seed supply, and then figuring out how to grow them.

“And then there’s the psychology, too, of what plants people will buy in the box stores. It has to look pretty and be blooming, and so there’s so much more that goes into it rather than just saying, ‘Hey, you should grow more native plants,’” Mead said.

The effort to increase awareness of the importance of native plants is so that it will drive more demand. “So people will start going into these large home improvement stores and asking for native plants and then they will start asking the growers to grow these plants as well. We’re hoping to drive that supply and demand and we’re starting with education,” she said.

Knowledge could steer folks away from what Mead calls “the starter pack of crepe myrtles and loropetalums,” plants easily found in stores and widely used – sometimes to the exclusion of all other choices – in residential landscaping.

Mead said there are so many more plants to choose from that will thrive on the coast and provide benefits to the environment. These plants can be added to established gardens, including those planted with nonnative species.

“I’m not a native purist,” Mead said. “We don’t live in a natural forest, but I would say add plants. I’m a big fan of expanding your garden beds, adding in plants. If you’re ready, if you have failing or older plants, it’s a good opportunity to plant something new.”

She advises trying to plant 70% native species, and then ornamental plants can be included as “ornaments in your yard.” Sometimes a few nonnative plants can simply bring joy.

“I have a beautiful gardenia bush that reminds me of my childhood. And so that’s something that gives me pleasure, and I can have it in my yard. It’s important that something is beautiful and gives me pleasure,” Mead said, adding that Japanese maples are similar. “Something that I really enjoy having in my garden, as well. Those are going to be beautiful, they’re not going to be invasive or cause any harm.”

Find a nursery

To find native plants, contact your county office of the N.C. State Extension, which also offers the following links to help you locate a nursery near you that sells native plants:

• North Carolina Botanical Garden
• North Carolina Forest Service
• North Carolina Native Plant Society

HARKERS ISLAND – The Hannah, a sailing ship blown off course on its voyage from Sierra Leone in Africa to Charleston, South Carolina, arrived at Ocracoke Inlet for provisions in 1759. Its cargo was human, 301 captives, but the records provide no details on what happened to the 258 or so surviving Africans who disembarked at Portsmouth Island.

Those and at least 343 other documented captive African people were honored and remembered Saturday during a ceremony at the end of the road on Harkers Island. The event was to dedicate identical markers to be placed at Portsmouth Village and about 39 miles south at the Cape Lookout National Seashore visitor center on Harkers Island acknowledging that this North Carolina port was part of the horrific Middle Passage.

Tyisha Teel of Beaufort was one of the speakers during the ceremony on the grass overlooking Back Sound at Shell Point, just across the road from the visitor center. She described how history is painful and embarrassing at times, but those feelings should motivate people to bring positive change.

“We should be motivated to take what we know and to do more with it to bridge the divides of inequality, of racism, of ageism — any of the ‘isms’ that are out there,” Teel said. “How do we make it a lasting change? We start first with acknowledgement, which is exactly what this ceremony is doing, acknowledging the history of where we come from, of the Africans who were enslaved and brought over through the Middle Passage, and the Black history of this country. But yet, I want us to remember that our Black history is American history. It happened here, it is the Americas, it is us, it is all of us.”

Cape Lookout National Seashore Superintendent Jeff West said that from its establishment in 1753, Portsmouth was an important maritime port to the central North Carolina region. He said that throughout Portsmouth’s history until about 1861, half of the population of Portsmouth were enslaved people.

“Enslaved African Americans were brought to Portsmouth to labor. They served as stevedores. They served as lighter tenders. They served as pilots. They served as sailors,” West said. “Another large contingent of enslaved people were brought in through Portsmouth to be sold and traded inland into a life of bitter slavery.”

West said he finds the topic difficult to discuss.

“I’m a historian by training. So, as a historian, I have absolutely no problem reviewing facts, placing them in context, explaining why things happen from a strictly factual perspective. As a human being I, to this day, I cannot understand or see how people could treat other people that way. I can’t understand it. That’s the human side of me.”

West said that part of the National Park Service’s mission is to tell the story of people and places and to tell it honestly and without prejudice.

“I’ve had to do that in many different places. Sometimes it’s hard, but it is the truth. Truth is important,” he said.

Middle Passage refers to the roughly 80-day voyage that was the middle part of the journey from Europe to West Africa, to the West Indies and North America, before the ships returned to Europe – the Triangle Trade. It’s when the vessels were packed with humans bound for slavery, and it was brutal and often deadly.

Heather Walker, executive director of the Eastern Carolina Foundation for Equity and Equality, is a subject matter expert and a research historian. Walker volunteers as an independent consultant and has worked closely with the National Park Service, North Carolina African American Heritage Commission, and the James City Historical Society.

“Roughly 12.5 million African people were forced to endure the brutality of the ocean voyage known as the Middle Passage,” Walker said.

She said that much like prisoners of war, when African nations would break out in conflict, people would be held by those rivals until either the conflict was over or they could be traded for one of their captured people.

“The Europeans took advantage of this and began to purchase these prisoners of war. And when there were none left to purchase, they began staging raids with rival African nations. And then they started kidnapping and selling those that they were able to capture. And this was all done in order to supply the Americas with an enslaved labor force, lowering their overhead,” Walker said.

She cited the words of African slave trader turned abolitionist and author of the hymn “Amazing Grace,” John Newton, who described unsanitary and horrid conditions aboard the vessels and how the captive Africans were stacked beside and on top of each other “like books upon a shelf,” and with insufficient food and water.

“Those who were forced to embark on the journey of the Middle Passage endured unimaginable cruelty in the form of physical, emotional and psychological torture,” Walker said. “This is evidenced by the following excerpt from an article in the North Carolina State Gazette, dated February 12, 1789. It says, ‘A young Negro woman, with her infant at her breast, was kidnapped away from her husband and parents and offered by the dealers in human flesh to this commander for sale. He was willing, he said, to purchase the young woman but could do nothing with the brat. However, as they could not be separated, he purchased them both at the same time, dashed out the brains of the infant on the deck of the ship, and threw it overboard in the mother’s presence. As she was a woman of uncommon beauty, in less than an hour, she was dragged by the captain to his bed and was forced to endure the embraces of her child’s murderer.’”

She said that about 2 million African people perished along the journey to the Americas, through acts of resistance and acts of violence such as this. “And although it’s commonly referred to as the Black Holocaust, the United States has yet to recognize the transatlantic human trade as a crime against humanity.”

Walker said that, like elsewhere in the Colonies, people in Portsmouth Village forcefully bred enslaved people and sold their children like cattle to turn a profit.

“It was the unpaid labor of those children that created wealth in this country. Enslaved people piloted these waters and lightered the ships at Ocracoke Inlet. It was their unpaid labor that made this a once-thriving maritime trade center. Enslaved people brought with them from Sierra Leone their knowledge and technique for making and mending fishing nets, a technique, mind you, that we still use here today. It was their unpaid labor that built and sustained our area’s fishing industry. Enslaved people worked these lands and built the settlements, some of those which we still call home. It was their unpaid labor that made survival possible,” she said.

She said that, sadly, a lot of the “bad stories” have been erased from history.

“But the real injustice here is that the good stories have been erased too. Those stories are gifts left to us by the ancestors. Those stories belong to us. Those stories are our stars of hope. Being deprived of these stories also deprives us of hope,” she said.

Walker said that from the foods we eat to the color we use to paint our porch ceilings, the traditions brought by enslaved Africans have become American traditions.

“Have you ever wondered why we hang ornaments on a tree, or why we bury our dead facing east? But for the strong, resilient and intelligent people who risked death to give us hope by smuggling rice seed and grain in the braids of their hair, we wouldn’t have okra or black-eyed peas, we wouldn’t have the sweet summertime treat that we call watermelon. But most importantly, we wouldn’t have hope,” she said.

Also during the ceremony Saturday, North Carolina native Rhonda Jones delivered the invocation, reciting a poem to the rhythm of attendees tapping together stones and seashells. The poem included the following verse:

In Your Honor, we stand on the island of Harkers,

To place a permanent reminder of your arrival, 

With a marker.

It is often said that we are our ancestors’ wildest dreams.

It is your DNA that we carry,

Deep within our genes.

All Africans who came before and after the Hannah,

It is you we celebrate.

I call you to rise and take your place,

As you elevate.

There is recent evidence that trauma and abuse, even when the details are lost to history or intentionally obscured, can leave a genetic imprint on future generations. Teel said that understanding history also means acknowledging how it has affected the descendants of enslaved Africans.

“Oftentimes, we wonder why African Americans are on the bottom of all the good lists and at the top of all the bad ones. And I’m here to tell you that part of it is because of the psychological trauma that is passed down through the generations and through the genes of those who come from enslaved people,” Jones said.

She said the lasting impacts of trauma are social and health related.

“And so you may wonder, why is hypertension and why is diabetes so high in the African American community? Well, oftentimes, it’s because we are still dealing with the impacts of those psychological traumas, and that has affected how our bodies actually respond to our environment today,” she said.

Understanding leads to empathy, she said, and that can lead to change.

“But that change requires time and understanding and the willingness to fight for what is right,” Teel said. “The question, when you leave here, that you must ask yourself as individuals is, are we willing to fight, are we willing to hold to the good fight, to stand up for what is right?”

ATLANTIC BEACH – Numerous oceanfront property owners here are banding together in a developing legal dispute over who owns the dry sand beach in front of their houses.

An attorney representing the owners said last week that he hopes the state attorney general will intervene to protect the public’s rights.

The dispute arose last month after a Cape Carteret resident, who also has an apparently dormant real estate business website for a firm in Wilson, notified the beachfront property owners and others that he now owns the dunes and that their continued access to the beach amounts to trespassing.

James Anthony Bunn in April registered quitclaim deeds with the county for more than a dozen parcels in Atlantic Beach south, or oceanward, of beach houses and condominiums to the east and west of the boardwalk at the former amusement circle. Bunn’s mailing address is 102 Hunting Bay Drive, Cape Carteret, according to county records. Last year, he also registered deeds on parcels in Down East Carteret County. 

All show sales prices of zero dollars or minimal exchanges, such as $10 in consideration, with no county revenue stamps paid. Attorneys who prepared the deeds noted that no title work was requested or performed. 

Unlike warranty deeds, quitclaim deeds in North Carolina carry no guarantee of title.

Some of the individual oceanfront parcels that Bunn claims to own front multiple beach houses — one as many as five separately owned homesites.

Attorney Rob Wheatly of Beaufort is representing some of the Atlantic Beach property owners whom Bunn had notified of his claim of ownership.

“First, he started by sending out a statement. I don’t know if he sent it to everybody, I know that a couple of people showed me what they had. He wanted them to sign some agreement with him, sort of like a lease where they would be able to continue to go on about the property. He was not going to interfere with their use if they in fact signed that paper. The people we talked to, we told them not to sign it for various legal reasons,” Wheatly told Coastal Review Friday.

Wheatly said that because nobody would sign the agreement, Bunn had since been “stepping it up” to the point where he had posted “no trespassing” signs and was telling people who were accessing the beach that they were trespassing.

Oceanfront property owners told Coastal Review that Bunn was wearing a gun on his hip during their interactions with him. Some described cordial conversations, but others said Bunn acted in an intimidating or threatening manner, allegedly calling one homeowner a “chickenshit,” and that his going armed on the public beach,in the presence of families with children, was out of line.

Coastal Review has obtained two police incident/investigation reports dated April 18 and April 27 involving “verbal disputes” between Bunn and other individuals. Some information in the police reports was redacted.

Bunn, when reached for comment, said his intention in claiming ownership was for his “quiet, personal enjoyment.” He said he had tried unsuccessfully to work with the oceanfront property owners. Bunn then said he didn’t want to answer Coastal Review’s questions and hung up. He then called back shortly after and agreed to answer questions but only by email.

In his email response to Coastal Review’s questions, Bunn said he was, “in the process of evaluating my land for a suitable location to develop a non profit low impact site to provide a covered structure with bathroom facilities, running water electricity and private parking to be used by physically or mentally impa(i)red individuals who could not otherwise peacefully enjoy a day at the beach.”

Bunn did not respond to further questions, including whether he had formed a nonprofit or partnered with an existing organization to provide such services. He also did not respond to questions regarding any discussions he might have had with town officials or staff with the state Division of Coastal Management regarding his development plans.

Atlantic Beach Mayor Trace Cooper told Coastal Review last week that the strip of dunes was once part of a tract known as the Musgrave property, but that land had completely eroded away decades ago.

“I don’t think they are lots anymore. These kinds of ocean parcels have been on the tax maps for a while, but my belief, based on what I remember as a kid in the ’70s and what I’ve heard from everybody, is that those areas eroded away before we began our beach nourishment program. The first beach nourishment was in 1979, and there’s a state statute on point that says oceanfront, basically beaches, if it is created through a publicly funded beach nourishment project, that sand is property of the state, and all the public trust rights that would apply to other parts of the beach would apply to that,” Cooper said.

According to state law, the title to land in or immediately along the Atlantic Ocean raised above the mean high-water mark by publicly financed beach nourishment projects “shall remain open to the free use and enjoyment of the people of the State, consistent with the public trust rights in ocean beaches, which rights are a part of the common heritage of the people of the State.”

Wheatly agreed that the ocean had decades ago washed away the beach, he said up to a seawall that had been placed there sometime in the mid-1950s. The beach has since been nourished several times with sand from the shipping channel in Beaufort Inlet. 

Wheatly said that’s referred to as “avulsion,” where, in this case, there’s a sudden throwing up of spoil next to the ocean or a river, “and by statute that becomes property of the state of North Carolina,” he said.

“The big issue is going to be where these dunes have now been created through the years, or the neighbors putting sand fences or these sorts of things,” Wheatly said. “And of course, the neighbors have been walking across the area down to the water all these many years, and they would have what is referred to as a prescriptive easement to go from their property down to the beach, and that requires a 20-year use. So, if it’s not the state of North Carolina’s public trust lands, then these people certainly would have a prescriptive easement to go to and from their properties the way they’ve been going all those many years.”

Cooper said no town-owned properties are involved in the dispute, only privately owned homes and condos.

“My guess is that he’s trying to be big enough of a problem that these homeowners may just want to pay him off,” Cooper said. “The town is trying to do what we can, but it’s essentially a private property dispute. We are not allowed to spend public money for private benefit, so we couldn’t be the lead plaintiff in this, even if we wanted to be. We probably don’t have standing, but we’re standing by to do anything we can to help these homeowners put this issue to rest.”

Wheatly said that in his discussions with Atlantic Beach town attorney Derek Taylor, the dispute amounted to a beach access issue for the town. 

“I would assume the people that live on the second, third, fourth rows walk through these areas and paths and on all roads going down to the beach. But it can be a real mess, and especially for these renters when they rent their houses, and the guests come there and, all of a sudden, they’re walking down to the ocean and see a sign saying ‘no trespassing.’ It could be a real detriment to everybody,” Wheatly said.

Wheatly said he had spoken about the dispute with the Division of Coastal Management, who had recently put him in touch with the State Property Office.

“We really don’t know where we’re going in this yet, but I assume that eventually, maybe the attorney general will come in and protect the public. If not, then there will probably have to be private litigation,” Wheatly said.

As we pause to ponder the year that was 2022 and consider our goals, or resolutions, for the year ahead, we at Coastal Review vow to our valued readers to continue our work to provide objective reporting and thorough analysis of issues important to all North Carolina coastal counties and communities.

We will strive in 2023 to further extend our reach and provide the relevant, credible, accurate and thorough environmental reporting that you have come to expect, as well as the cultural, historical and science journalism that resonates with so many readers.

Coastal Review has published more than 900 news items and reached more than 689,000 readers during the past 12 months, with 1.1 million page views.

In addition to our daily publication of breaking news and features, we published during 2022 more than a half-dozen special reporting series to examine relevant issues more closely.

This year included special reports on climate science and solutions as relevant to the North Carolina coast, as well as aquaculture in a changing climate; navigation and federal infrastructure spending; the five years of research and efforts to address chemical contamination of drinking water supplies in eastern North Carolina; state funding of shallow-draft inlet maintenance; the role of sustainable seafood in the American diet; and the issue of erosion-threatened houses on the public beaches of the Outer Banks. The sustainable seafood series published this year was produced in collaboration with another respected nonprofit news service, North Carolina Health News, our first joint effort.

Some of our most-read stories of 2022 have been about coastal transportation issues such as navigation, N.C. 12 and bridges, and three of our top six stories in 2022 were related to the collapse of oceanfront houses and associated issues.

Our work also earned recognition from our peers. In 2022, Coastal Review received seven awards during the North Carolina Press Association’s annual editorial contest, including first-place awards for breaking news coverage, feature photography and general news photography, a second-place award for overall general excellence and third place for appearance and design in the contest’s online-only division. Entries are judged by member journalists in other state associations.

Coastal Review has been a member of the North Carolina Press Association since 2015. The association works to protect the public’s right to know through the defense of open government and First Amendment freedoms and helps maintain the public’s access to local, state and federal governments.

We worked during the past year to help sustain environmental journalism as a profession. Our science freelancer Lena Beck received her master’s in environmental science and natural resource journalism this year and included her work for Coastal Review in defending her thesis. We also added fishing columnist Capt. Gordon Churchill, highlighting another important aspect of life on — and the lure of — the North Carolina coast.

Our publisher

The work of the Coastal Review staff and contributors is but one aspect of the 40 years of accomplishments of our publisher, the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which marked the anniversary by stepping up its efforts to protect and restore the North Carolina coast.

“Doing what we do best — protecting and restoring our wonderful coast — is the best way we could ever celebrate the past four decades of work,” said Executive Director Todd Miller, who founded the organization in 1982. “We’re proud that the Coastal Federation has been able to continue to make lasting strides to improve the health of North Carolina’s coastal environment.”

The work included efforts to keep coastal waters clean, maintain and expand living shorelines along estuaries, restore oyster reefs and expand shellfish farms, remove hundreds of tons of marine debris, and improve day-to-day decisions about how the coast is managed.

In terms of water quality improvements, the Coastal Federation completed a 20-year restoration at the nearly 6,000-acre North River Wetlands Preserve, one of the largest single wetland recovery projects in the nation.

The organization also restored 365 acres of wetlands in Hyde County; installed a rain garden at the University of North Carolina Wilmington that collects 200,000 gallons of runoff per year; installed a pervious paver cul-de-sac in Pine Knoll Shores that will infiltrate 14 million gallons of runoff per year; and installed a stormwater outfall retrofit in Swansboro that treats approximately 13 million gallons of stormwater per year.

The Coastal Federation worked with watermen and women and contractors to remove 652,180 pounds of large-scale marine debris from coastal waters. It worked with 48 commercial watermen and women to find and remove 1,983 lost crab pots and hosted eight volunteer cleanups that resulted in the removal of 1,200 pounds of small-scale debris. The organization worked with the N.C. Division of Coastal Management and N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission to remove 21 abandoned and derelict vessels totaling 182,860 pounds.

The Coastal Federation built a total of 1.21 miles of living shoreline at 34 sites and worked with Belhaven, Carteret County, Carolina Beach, and Fort Macon, Hammocks Beach and Jockey’s Ridge state parks, Marine Corps air stations Cherry Point and New River, Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, the N.C. Department of Transportation, Swan Quarter Harbor, and Morehead City to fund, design, and permit future large-scale living shorelines.

The Coastal Federation collected 2,778 bushels of oyster shells and worked with the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries to build 7 acres of new oyster sanctuary at Cedar Island. It worked with the Natural Resources Conservation Service to offer a new cost-share program for oyster growers and partnered with Carteret County to plan a logistics hub for shellfish farmers who don’t own waterfront property.

The Coastal Federation helped Topsail Beach, Surf City, North Topsail Beach, and Wrightsville Beach in their development and adoption of ordinances to ban the use of unencapsulated polystyrene in dock construction. It hosted an Offshore Wind and Wildlife Summit to advance understanding of environmental management issues involved in siting offshore wind energy facilities. And it promoted the use of nature-based stormwater solutions to improve water quality and reduce flooding in the state funding priorities.

Support our work                 

While we maintain separation between our reporting and the advocacy work of our publisher, your donations to the Coastal Federation also support Coastal Review. Our objective with Coastal Review is to provide various perspectives and inform readers. Our professional journalists strive to meet the highest standards of fairness and accuracy. Our editorial decisions are made independently of the publisher and any other persons or interests.

Our publisher’s financial health, accountability and transparency have earned it a perfect score with Charity Navigator. Fewer than 1% of the thousands of charities rated by Charity Navigator have earned perfect scores.

You can support our work by joining or giving a gift membership to the Coastal Federation, by becoming a member of the CRO Press Club, or by putting your business in the Sponsor Spotlight.

We thank our donors, sponsors and Press Club members. Your support empowers us to continue to deliver the news that matters for the coast.

Lined with charter boats, old homes, restaurants and retail stores, Morehead City’s downtown waterfront has long been its biggest attraction, and a stone’s throw across the water, Sugarloaf Island has long helped protect the economic center of town from the brunt of coastal storms.

But Sugarloaf, which was created when Harbor Channel was dredged decades ago and forms a barrier to the wider expanse of water just inside Bogue Banks and Beaufort Inlet, has been eroding rapidly for years and causing alarm about the loss of protection from severe storm damage and flooding.

Now, with a $2 million state appropriation, a team of professionals is setting out to combine the best shoreline stabilization methods for the island in a way that officials said will balance shoreline protection, public uses and natural resource conservation. While the city has yet to secure all the money to complete the project, officials said the restoration would be incremental with $2 million enough for the first phase.

“When the town cut was first dredged and Sugarloaf Island was built back in the ’30s, I believe it was, it gave Morehead City the economic opportunity of growth on the waterfront,” Mayor Jerry Jones explained Thursday during a press conference at the Ottis Landing Deck on Shepard Street. “And over the years in my lifetime I’ve seen at least 1,000 feet of Sugarloaf erode away. It used to extend as far west as 12th Street and now it’s about Ninth Street. We’ve lost about three blocks and that erosion is accelerating.”

The erosion leaves uprooted trees and vegetation and the currents and wave exposure carry sediments and nutrients and degrade water quality.

Also in attendance at the press conference were members of the city council, waterfront business owners and Sen. Norm Sanderson, R-Pamlico, and Rep. Pat McElraft, R-Carteret, who helped secure the funding in the state budget.

“We are so blessed here in Carteret County to have our marine sciences, who have — all of them — banded together with the Coastal Federation to find the right solution, environmentally friendly solution for what I call the buffer, or the speed bump, protecting this beautiful city of Morehead City,” McElraft said at the event Thursday.

She said the funding was available for storm mitigation and resiliency because the legislature had built up copious “rainy day money.” The state’s rainy day fund, a budget surplus savings reserve for lessening the effects of sharp economic downturns and disasters, is projected to be about $4.75 billion by the end of next year.

Sanderson said that looking at Sugarloaf Island from above, from 20,000 feet or 10,000 feet with a drone, the tiny island might not look very important. “It’s very small on the grand scale of things, if you look at that, compared to our coastline. But because of this strategic location, it is extremely important to downtown Morehead City,” Sanderson said.

He said the North Carolina General Assembly shares the town council’s and coastal conservation group’s desire to be good environmental stewards.

“I don’t want, 50 years from now, somebody standing on this dock, saying, ‘Didn’t there used to be an island out there?’ and ‘Yeah, it was but it started going away, and even though we had technology to do something about it, we just didn’t think it was that important.’ Well, it is important,” Sanderson said.

Robert Purifoy owns and operates Olympus Dive Center at 713 Shepard St., directly across from Sugarloaf. He told Coastal Review that he had seen water coming up through the floorboards of his business during coastal storms, and while the structure is on pilings, it is normally over dry land. He said the restoration was a critical project for the waterfront.

City officials, aquatic restoration company Sea & Shoreline, the nonprofit North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review, and Quible & Associates announced in July the start of the project to restore and protect the island using wave attenuators that disperse wave energy to reduce erosion and help rebuild the shoreline, seagrass plantings to stabilize sediment, create essential fish habitat and improve water quality, and a living shoreline to build salt marsh and upland vegetation.

The combination of methods should also address tree and shorebird habitat loss on the island and provide carbon sequestration benefits. Officials said ecotourism opportunities from increased beach area and improved water quality conditions were another expected benefit.

Brian Henry, director of Sea & Shoreline’s North and South Carolina offices, said the project was his idea for the Florida-based firm’s entry to the market here. He said the legislators supported the idea from the start.

“Without hesitation, they dove in very quickly and told us that this is very, very important, critical infrastructure for Morehead City and that they would see what they can do. A lot of things had to come together to get this money,” Henry said during the press conference.

He said the project is in the permitting phase with about another 35 to 40 days likely remaining.

“No questions or real objections at this point because we had a really good team on the front end that put all the work together from a technical perspective,” Henry said.

Coastal Federation scientist Dr. Lexia Weaver explained that the plan to use living shorelines was a natural, long-term shoreline-stabilization method.

“These living shorelines have proven time and time again to work significantly better, are more cost-effective, and they are incredibly more resilient to the effects of storms compared to the traditionally used sea walls that have hardened our shorelines and unfortunately have led to the reduction in our valuable salt marsh habitats and oysters, as well, in the process,” Weaver said.

She explained how the island protects the entire downtown area from the winds, waves, storm surge and other damaging effects of strong storms that have increased in intensity and frequency in the last few years.

“Unfortunately, the island has eroded due to these rising water levels and these strong storms,” Weaver said. “More than three whole city blocks of the island have been lost and it has exposed this waterfront to the direct effects of Mother Nature, and it continues to shrink in size. So, if nothing is done to protect this island, this waterfront is in trouble.”

The planned project components to be installed off the island’s shoreline will not impede navigation as they are to be placed in areas too shallow for vessels to navigate at high speed, according to information provided at the press conference. The breakwater will also be staggered to allow fishers to reach areas around them.

GOLDSBORO – River conservation organization American Rivers, based in Washington, D.C., announced Monday that it was honoring the Neuse River as its 2022 “River of the Year.”

The river has had a long, troubled history of pollution, and problems with nutrient pollution continue, especially from nonpoint sources – mainly runoff from developed areas.

Along with the Cape Fear River, American Rivers had included the Neuse at No. 7 on its Most Endangered Rivers of 2017 list, as well as in prior years, because of industrial agriculture waste within their basins. But the national recognition announced Monday during an event on the riverbank at Old Waynesborough Park in Goldsboro with congressional, legislative and regulatory officials and community and environmental advocates in attendance was to celebrate progress and serve as a call to action for clean water, said American Rivers President Tom Kiernan.

“It is because of the community, the state, the federal leadership that has worked so hard over the last several decades to improve the health of this river, improve the water quality of this river for the benefit of the people, the communities and nature in this region,” Kiernan said during the event.

Related: Nutrients in the water — too much of a good thing

Tuesday marked the 50^th anniversary of passage of the Clean Water Act. But as 1^st District Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C., noted during the event, a challenge to a key provision of the law is now before the Supreme Court. 

As the EPA defines it, Section 401 of the Clean Water Act is a tool for states to protect water quality of federally regulated waters within their borders, in collaboration with federal agencies. Butterfield said the provision gives states authority to place conditions on permits and licenses for the construction and operation of any project that could harm rivers or streams.

The case, Sackett v. EPA, challenges methods used to define federal jurisdiction — Waters of the United States, or WOTUS. The case was argued Oct. 3.

Butterfield said that if Section 401 is struck down, “American families will lose protections and continue to face unclean water in some communities.”

Butterfield said that some in Congress were drafting a resolution commemorating the Clean Water Act’s 50th year. “I will be supporting this legislation, and I’m confident that it will enjoy bipartisan support. And I pray that my successor will also support the resolution,” he said.

‘A profound effect’

Kiernan said the Clean Water Act had “a profound effect” on water quality in rivers and water bodies nationwide, including the Neuse River.

“It set in law the obligation to be good stewards of the environment and it set goals and expectations for specific communities on what they needed to do,” Kiernan said, adding that it was a good thing, “because in the mid-1990s, the Neuse River had toxic algae blooms that were sucking all the oxygen out of the river. 

“We had fish kills, we had recreational opportunities that were lost because of the poor water quality. And not surprisingly, during that period, American rivers listed the Neuse on its most endangered rivers list five times back in the ’90s and 2000s. But backed by the Clean Water Act, the communities — you and political leaders in the state and in Washington, D.C., would not accept that fate for the Neuse.”

He said science pointed to excessive pollution coming from the wastewater treatment facilities and from untreated urban and rural agricultural runoff, and he praised the state and local officials for acting. 

“You invested millions of dollars in wastewater treatment facilities, you protected the land along the river, you improved farming practices, and you began addressing the stormwater runoff problem. These efforts saw a dramatic improvement in the water quality.”

Kiernan said the case before the Supreme Court could end up restricting the Clean Water Act in ways that would remove protections from 350,000 acres of Neuse River wetlands.

“The Neuse is a success story that we must continue writing,” said Kiernan, who also applauded the work of Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan, who was formerly secretary of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, and Regan’s successor at DEQ, Elizabeth Biser.

Cultural connections

Regan, who hails from Goldsboro, said being back home was a reminder that he had grown up hunting and fishing in eastern North Carolina with his father and grandfather, and that experience had nurtured his passion for the outdoors and environmental stewardship.

“Rivers and streams across this country provide an opportunity for education, cultural connections, and recreation, while existing as magnificent natural resources central to the cities and towns that depend on them,” Regan said. “That’s why our work to preserve and protect and invest in these waters for the next generation is so vital.”

Regan said that not long ago, rivers were so polluted that fisheries collapsed, they were unsafe for recreation, and some were covered in oil slicks and regularly caught fire. He said that Tuesday he would be on the banks of the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland, Ohio, to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the passage of the Clean Water Act. 

“As many of you know, the Cuyahoga River, which was dubbed River of the Year just a few years ago, was one of the major catalysts for the environmental movement that ultimately led to the Clean Water Act,” Regan said. “Like too many waterways across this country, in the 1950s and ’60s, the Cuyahoga River had fallen victim to years of unchecked pollution. I’m talking about the days when many of our rivers were seen as nothing more than dumping grounds for sewage and industrial waste.”

American Rivers had awarded previous River of the Year honors to the Cuyahoga River in 2019 and the Delaware River in 2020.

Regan said that during his travels across the country, he had seen firsthand the results of years of indifference and neglect and what that had done to the nation’s waterways, water systems and the people who rely on them. He called the recently passed bipartisan infrastructure law “the linchpin to the next 50 years of water progress in America.”

State of the river

Biser outlined her department’s mission to provide science-based environmental stewardship for the health and prosperity of all North Carolinians. “And we do that in many ways. On the regulatory side, we have permits to regulate what’s allowed to enter the river. The Neuse River in particular has been plagued by excesses in levels of nitrogen and phosphorus since the 1980s, risking aquatic life habitats and drinking water quality. And in response, as you’ve heard, today, we developed the Neuse nutrient strategy, a set of rules designed to equitably regulate sources of nutrient pollution in the basin.”

Those rules took effect in 1997 and have been updated over the years, “as a comprehensive strategy that takes into account impacts from wastewater, stormwater and agricultural sources,” Biser said. 

“While parts of the river are still impaired, we’ve come a long way,” she said.

Biser said the state had completed the equivalent of 82 miles of stream mitigation, restored 10 square miles of wetlands and removed more than 1.5 million pounds of nitrogen from the water in the Neuse. “In case anybody’s wondering, that amount of nitrogen is equivalent to the same amount of weight as 287 pickup trucks,” Biser said.

She mentioned other programs and initiatives, including the North Carolina General Assembly’s funding of programs such as the statewide Flood Resiliency Blueprint. 

“I’m grateful for Representative Bell’s leadership on this and for helping allocate $20 million that support that effort is going to make us better informed and target our decisions as a state so that we can have the maximum impact with dollars that we’re investing in communities,” she said, referring to state House Majority Leader Rep. John Bell, R-Wayne, who was also on hand for the event.

‘Going the wrong way again’

The state nutrient rules adopted in 1997 aimed to recover the Neuse River estuary within five years. The rules addressed wastewater discharges, cropland agriculture, stormwater runoff and established riparian buffer protections. 

According to information DEQ provided Tuesday, nutrient loading to the estuary improved after the rules were enacted, but over time those gains were lost. Reductions in nitrate-nitrogen reaching the estuary were offset by organic nitrogen inputs, returning total nitrogen loading to levels seen before the rules. DEQ said the reasons were “complex and not entirely clear.”

Dr. Nathan Hall at the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences regularly monitors Neuse River water quality. He told Coastal Review Tuesday that yes, there was definitely progress between the early 1980s and 2000, “but since then things have started going the wrong way again.” He shared figures illustrating how nitrogen concentration trends in the river “are heavily driven by hydrology rather than nutrient management.”

State officials pointed to recent studies that have shown that a substantial increase in the frequency and severity of tropical cyclone activity such hurricanes and other big storms in coastal North Carolina driven by climate change played a significant role in the increased organic nitrogen reaching the Neuse River estuary.

Staff with the DEQ Division of Water Resources said rules addressing stormwater runoff from new development need to be strengthened. They said amendments to the Neuse stormwater rule that took effect in 2020 help, but further measures were likely needed, along with management actions to reduce runoff from existing developed lands that predated or otherwise were not addressed by current stormwater rules.

“Significant progress has been made in agricultural nitrogen loss reduction, and the agricultural community in the Neuse Basin consistently reaches its 30% reduction goal. However, the measurable effects of management changes and conservation practice implementation on overall in-stream nitrogen reduction may take years to develop due to the nature of non-point source pollution,” according to the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 2022 annual report on the Neuse Agricultural Rule.

The division is in the process of a comprehensive review of management progress to date, watershed changes, current science and management recommendations going forward. That report is to be completed by April 2023.

Need for greater investment

Sound Rivers Executive Director Heather Deck called the river “the lifeblood of our communities.” Deck began her advocacy career 20 years as the Pamlico-Tar Riverkeeper. She said that everyone can agree that access to clean water and healthy rivers was vital. 

“We’ve come a long way since the early days of dumping toxins directly into the Neuse, but many still bear the burdens of pollution, outdated infrastructure, and flooding,” Deck said. “Working together to address these issues in our watershed, that work begins with our most vulnerable communities. What we need is greater investment in our communities on the river. And right now, right now we have a unique opportunity to make significant changes for the Neuse River, and all the people who rely on it, and to right the many environmental injustices that continue to stand.”

Deck said that river needs state and community leaders to prioritize investment in safeguarding residents from flooding and helping the Neuse watershed become resilient to climate change, “updating sewer infrastructure still starting in our most vulnerable communities on the Neuse, investing $20 million in the state swine buyout program to remove toxic pollution such as swine waste from flood-prone areas of the Neuse and its tributaries, and restoring funding to our regulatory agencies so that they’re fully staffed and equipped to enforce the protections for the Neuse watershed.”

Pursuit of environmental justice

Deck called for community-focused executive action in the pursuit of environmental justice. “It’s our role to write 50 more years of progress into the next chapter of the Neuse River,” Deck said.

Dr. Dawn Baldwin Gibson is executive director of the Peletah Institute for Building Resilient Communities, a faith-based organization based in New Bern. She said the organization she and her husband founded in 2011 had fed thousands and assisted thousands more in getting back into homes after storms. The group had also led numerous projects in partnership with other faith organizations to build community resiliency in underserved areas. She said that in celebrating the American Rivers recognition, efforts to address climate impacts on the most vulnerable must continue.

“These are our neighbors who struggle every time there is a rain event by the impacts of flooding due to living in low-lying communities that are too often under resourced, that have lived on this river for decades and some for generations. We need the resources, the funding, the technical assistance to build our communities strong, resilient and equitable,” she said.

Rep. Bell told attendees that Wayne County had a “love-hate relationship” with the Neuse. He said residents are proud of the river and understand its economic importance. “But when we have disasters, hurricanes and storms that come in, this area floods. So we want to do everything we can to, at the state level, to mitigate that damage — to mitigate the property damage, mitigate the business damage to our economic engines and mitigate the loss of life — and that’s why your state in a bipartisan fashion has committed hundreds of millions of dollars to that effort.”

Second District Rep. Deborah Ross, D-N.C., noted that nearly 2.5 million people live within the Neuse River basin, “including communities I represent in Wake County, from Goldsboro, to Raleigh, millions of people rely on this river and its tributaries for clean water. They walk the miles of hiking trails that wind around this beautiful area, and they use the river to power economic growth throughout the state,” she said.

President Joe Biden signed into law this week a sweeping measure that promises to address inflation in part by lowering Americans’ energy costs and bolstering the clean energy economy.

The administration said the new law would reduce the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars and create millions of good-paying, clean energy jobs. The Inflation Reduction Act also removes the Trump administration’s 10-year moratorium on offshore wind energy leasing.

“That is certainly the most impactful provision for offshore wind for the Southeast that came out of the IRA,” Katharine Kollins, president of the Southeastern Wind Coalition, told Coastal Review Wednesday.

The coalition of developers, manufacturers and labor groups sees vast economic potential in adding leases off the North Carolina coast, beyond the current Kitty Hawk and Carolina Long Bay wind energy areas. 

“There’s still a lot of opportunity for additional leases, even off the coast of North Carolina. And without those, we just can’t maximize the opportunity that offshore wind brings to the Southeast. I think this is a very big deal,” Kollins said.

The House approved the measure Friday, 220-207. Rep. Greg Murphy, a Republican from North Carolina’s 3^rd District, called the bill an “irresponsible liberal spending spree” that “wastes $350 billion on Green New Deal priorities” and would have no effect on inflation.

Rep. Deborah Ross, a Democrat representing North Carolina’s 2^nd District, released a statement noting that she had fought for repeal of the offshore leasing moratorium. 

“I’m especially proud that this package includes a measure I have championed since I first came to Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore wind development in the Southeast, enabling new offshore wind energy projects to move forward that will power homes and create new jobs across North Carolina. This historic legislation puts our state and our nation on a path to a better and brighter future for all,” Ross said.

In the Senate, Vice President Kamala Harris cast the tiebreaking vote Friday with Republicans unanimously opposed.

Biden signed the bill during a White House ceremony Tuesday, calling the measure the most aggressive action taken to confront the climate crisis and strengthen the economy and energy security.

“It’s going to offer working families thousands of dollars in savings by providing them rebates to buy new and efficient appliances, weatherize their homes, get tax credit for purchasing heat pumps and rooftop solar, electric stoves, ovens, dryers,” Biden said. “It gives consumers a tax credit to buy electric vehicles or fuel cell vehicles, new or used. And it gives them a credit — a tax credit of up to $7,500 if those vehicles were made in America.”

The White House said that in North Carolina, there were already 103,854 workers employed in clean energy jobs last year. The act will bring an estimated $2.7 billion of investment in large-scale clean power generation and storage to North Carolina between now and 2030. Tax credits for clean energy include bonuses for businesses that pay prevailing industry wages for those positions.

The administration said the law puts the country on track to meet Biden’s climate goals and save every family an average of $500 per year on their energy costs.

The clean energy provisions will benefit rural electric cooperatives serving 42 million people, strengthen climate resilience and protect nearly 2 million acres of national forests, and reduce pollution while creating millions of good-paying jobs making clean energy in America, the administration said.

Included measures are expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about 1 gigaton by 2030, which the White House said equals 10 times more climate impact than any other single bill ever enacted.

The energy industry sees opportunity, not just in renewables, resulting from the new law. National Ocean Industries Association President Erik Milito said the act also creates a framework for continued development of U.S. offshore oil and gas. 

“No legislation is perfect, but the IRA’s offshore energy provisions will enable continued investment in U.S. energy projects by an industry that is already solving, scaling, and deploying low carbon energy solutions,” Milito said in a statement. 

The association praised the law’s reinstatement of Gulf Coast lease sales for oil and gas that had been blocked.

Kollins, with the Southeast Wind Coalition, said most Americans understand that the country must move toward a cleaner energy future. “And that’s exactly what this bill does. This bill creates a framework where every state in the country can take advantage of the optimal resources that they have for generating clean energy. And as we move toward that cleaner future, I think it’s important that we are placing a strong emphasis on how we do that in the most economically competitive way.”

She said the provisions boost clean technologies and create opportunity for new economies of scale that will over time bring down costs of newer technologies, and that’s been proven with land-based wind and solar generation.

“What we’ve seen in the wind and solar industries over the last decade is, because of some of the early-stage government support, those technologies now stand on their own as the least-cost electricity generation in a number of states where the resource is strong and the supply chain is there. In North Carolina, you can look at solar. Solar generates the cheapest electricity for the state of any resource,” Kollins said.

In addition to solar, Kollins cited the Amazon Wind Farm US East in Pasquotank and Perquimans counties as an example of the benefits renewables bring to local communities. The wind farm that went fully operational in 2017 is the largest taxpayer in the two counties. Kollins said the revenue generated elevates local school systems and improves community services.

“That kind of investment is what really helps rural communities say, ‘Yes, this is this is what we need in our area.’”

Kollins said that removing the 10-year moratorium significantly advances the timeline for offshore wind energy development in numerous ways, particularly in terms of transmission planning, both onshore and offshore, and looking at the mix of resources. But, she said, North Carolina’s seaports need to be investing now in significant upgrades to be able to service the industry and compete with ports in other East Coast states.

Carteret County economic development officials and the North Carolina Ports Authority have touted the authority’s Radio Island property in Morehead City as a potential staging area for offshore turbine construction. Kollins said the authority needs to work more aggressively to lure the offshore industry to North Carolina.

“We’ve heard from a number of companies that the ports authority could do more to ready the ports for the kinds of construction and operations capabilities that will be required to fully support this industry,” she said. “I think we’ve seen a lot of support certainly from the governor’s office in North Carolina — not as much directly from the port.”

Infrastructure investments are also needed to get the power to the land grid. Kollins said that work is underway at the federal level. 

“There’s a lot of discussion and a lot of planning right now by the federal government to look at how we can build a transmission backbone, they’re calling it, so that you don’t have individual lines going from every East Coast project to shore. That’s the most economically or environmentally efficient way to build offshore transmission, if we’re talking about the 30 gigawatts-plus of development over the next few decades,” she said.

Early planning is happening in North Carolina, but Kollins said that states that are further along in the offshore wind development cycle have a significant presence and strategies to ensure that economic benefits go to communities that have been historically negatively impacted by the energy industry.

“The jobs that are based primarily offshore, which are fewer in number than those based onshore, but those that are based primarily offshore have average salaries well over $100,000 a year – clearly family-sustaining wages,” Kollins said. Onshore jobs, including the related manufacturing jobs, also offer good pay, she said. “And I think that this industry is committed to, again, ensuring that they don’t repeat some of the pitfalls that we’ve seen from the more extractive industries in the past.”

The administration noted that climate change disproportionately impacts low-income communities and communities of color. The new law creates a system of environmental justice block grants to address pollution in port communities. It also authorizes projects to protect minority communities from extreme heat, flooding and other climate impacts.

Still, some say more environmental justice protections are needed.

The advocacy group Green Latinos praised passage of the act and its investments in climate, jobs and health, but Green Latinos President and CEO Mark Magaña said the fossil fuel-related “trade-offs” included in the measure are dangerous for Latino communities. More work must be done, he said.

“We are experiencing deadly levels of contamination, pollution, and environmental degradation that will, unfortunately, be exacerbated by the increased fossil fuel exploration, mining, drilling, processing, refining, and transporting that will be realized if the fossil fuel handouts in the bill are not reversed,” Magaña said in a statement. 

Usually right after a hurricane, dollar estimates of the damage are calculated and reported in the media and in academic and government papers, but the human toll exacted when floodwaters enter or destroy homes cannot be expressed in strictly monetary terms and may not be fully understood.

A collaboration of social and environmental scientists and engineers has been working to better grasp how flooding disasters disrupt people’s day-to-day lives in coastal North Carolina and how these communities respond and rebuild.

In addition to the economics, the effort, called Dynamics of Extreme Events, People and Places, or DEEPP, is working to gauge the environmental, social and psychological damage that hurricanes and flooding inflict. The goal is to help people in flood-prone areas better prepare and recover.

To accomplish this, DEEPP is piecing together information derived from surveys of families and individuals in affected communities along with satellite photos and flood and storm surge mapping. 

The project has focused on select areas within four counties, with communities chosen to represent diverse ecosystems and ecological environments that were also different economically and demographically. Interviewers have been working in the Hatteras area of Dare County, mainland Hyde County and Ocracoke, Beaufort and Down East in Carteret County, including Merrimon and North River, and most recently in New Bern in Craven County.

“Those areas span pretty different places, different kinds of livelihoods, and different degrees of damage from both Florence and Dorian,” said University of North Carolina researcher Dr. Elizabeth Frankenberg, director of the Carolina Population Center and a primary investigator with the DEEPP project. Among her areas of study is how people who survive disasters are changed, including their physical and psychosocial health. 

As guest speakers for a recent “Parlor Talk” hosted by the Core Sound Waterfowl Museum and Heritage Center at its Morehead City museum store, Frankenberg and Dr. Nathan Dollar, a social demographer at the Carolina Population Center and project director with the DEEPP household survey, and members of the household survey team discussed their experiences and findings – so far. They said the work is the beginning of a long commitment to these counties and could lead to improved disaster response.

“Typically, we’re talking about the effect of an extreme weather event in terms of property damage,” Dollar said. “We know less scientifically about how people in communities are affected, how to prepare and how to recover and the complexities and the duration of that recovery.”

Frankenberg said that an early observation, although not a particularly surprising one, is that these coastal areas include a relatively higher number of residents with multigenerational ties to the community, as compared to more urban areas. 

“And that has generated, I think, a very deep attachment to place,” she said, adding that the feeling is complicated by residents’ anxiety about the future, with worries such as, “Is this going to be a viable place for my children or my grandchildren to make a living economically?”

“Looking backwards, it’s also clear that these major hurricanes had left scars on people’s economic outlooks and on their health or psychosocial health. Their recovery process is long, and it’s slow, and it’s complicated, and it’s hard to know in what order to do things and where to turn for potential assistance and whether you’re trying to move fast or whether to try to take your time and figure out what might be the best long-term solution for your home or your property,” she said.

Frankenberg said she had a deep connection to the coast, in particular Carteret County, where her father worked at the UNC Institute of Marine Sciences in the 1970s, and that she had long wanted to better understand the area.

“That’s partially because I spent a long time studying the Indian Ocean tsunami in Indonesia, of all places, and got very interested in how water changes landscapes and then ultimately peoples’ lives lived in those landscapes,” she said.

She said the DEEPP project is to learn more about how families go about putting their lives back together after a flood.

“If you read the papers around hurricanes, a lot of effort goes into calculating property damage after big events and how many counties have disaster declarations, but then it quickly kind of drops off the papers. And I know from Indonesia that the process of trying to recover, trying to get your life back together and trying to rebuild what you want to rebuild, and also just thinking about your future, it’s really a months- and yearslong proposition after a really major storm,” Frankenberg said.

Random samples of tax parcel data provide the names and addresses, and DEEPP survey teams then go out to find those addresses and interview the residents. Sometimes, the addresses are long-term nursing care centers, sometimes the residents are homeowners, other times they’re renters. Some are full-time residents, sometimes the addresses are second homes.

“Sometimes, we’ll find that people have moved out. And ideally, we try to find them and understand their decision to move away from a particular place,” Frankenberg said.

Talking to every member of a family is how the researchers are trying to gain a deeper perspective of recovery. The surveys include modules for the entire household but also questions for each member of the household 15 and older. 

“So, we get the high schooler’s perspective on missing school and the mom’s perspective on not having daycare or babysitting or disruptions to work, and the dad’s perspective on trying to do the pieces that he’s taking responsibility for,” Frankenberg said. “Ideally, we talk to everybody in the household to collect this information.”

Some who are contacted are willing to talk to the interviewers, others not as much. Dollar said one of the biggest impediments to the success of the project is that people don’t like surveys. “And I don’t blame them. And our survey is not your typical 10-question survey. It takes a while,” he said.

There are also trust and privacy concerns for some, such as mistrust of outsiders coming in asking questions or worry about neighbors knowing their business.

Members of the survey team who were also present at the discussion said many were just happy that someone was willing to listen, that their voices were being heard.

Frankenberg said that the team’s approach was important in breaking down any barriers.

“It’s not so much that people don’t want to talk about the topics that we’re talking about, but it’s how to kind of ease into the interview, as opposed to just a normal conversation. And the more we can make it like a conversation, I feel like the better it goes,” Frankenberg said.

The information collected could have significant implications in terms of preparing for and responding to flooding disasters, the researchers said.

Dollar said that because of the Census Bureau’s undercount in mainly rural areas, the census doesn’t provide reliable information on not only population but also the age breakdown in that area.

“There are some serious significant issues related to aging on the coasts,” Dollar said. “All of these coastal counties are getting older and age is the factor that shapes people’s ability to prepare for and recover from storms. And I’ll say one of the strengths of kind of the household-based, tax parcel, methodological sampling approach is that we have really rich, representative data. We’re going to have a really good picture of what the population looks like in these counties.”

He said a better picture of the demographic composition of coastal counties could be important for planning and emergency preparedness.

“We really hope that data could be useful to the communities themselves,” Dollar said.

He said the researchers had been discussing their findings with officials at the Department of Emergency Management. “They’re very excited about the data that we’re collecting,” he said, adding that state officials were especially interested in “more people-centered emergency management approaches.”

MOREHEAD CITY — The COVID-19 virus has been showing up in eastern North Carolina’s wastewater during the past two weeks at levels not seen since the peak this past winter — a troubling early warning sign for community spread and illness.

The latest wastewater sampling data on the state’s COVID-19 dashboard, which shows trends among people who use toilets connected to selected sewage treatment sites and is updated every Wednesday, indicate that the prevalence of the virus has significantly increased over the past 15 days and particularly in the coastal region. And the detection rate is at or above that of early 2022, when more than 200,000 new cases were being reported each week in North Carolina and more than 4,000 people were being admitted weekly to hospitals with confirmed cases.

Dr. Rachel Noble is a researcher at the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences in Morehead City. Her lab analyzes wastewater samples for pathogens and works with other academics, the state Department of Health and Human Services, wastewater utilities and public health departments to provide the data driving the dashboard. She told Coastal Review Friday that the trends mean we are still in the upswing of the pandemic.

“The numbers that we’re seeing now are either equal to or similar to the very highest numbers that we’ve seen since we started monitoring,” Noble said.

The wastewater samples are screened for the genetic material in the virus that causes COVID-19. Researchers can detect the viral RNA using a polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, test.

The dashboard’s latest 15-day rate of change shows detection increases of more than 100% in wastewater in Wilmington, New Hanover County, Beaufort and Roanoke Rapids. The latest percentile data show that most of the above sites are at or nearly at the peak levels seen in January, as indicated on the dashboard map by red or orange dots. But Noble said that because of recent heavy rains on the coast, the data may not fully reflect the extent of the virus’ spread in the communities where sampling is done. She said it’s likely a conservative estimate because of stormwater infiltration of sewer lines, a common problem with aging infrastructure.

“One of the reasons why I would interpret those numbers a little bit cautiously is that we know that — definitely in the eastern part of the state, if not in the majority of the state — our wastewater in the summer months here has been diluted more by rainwater. And so those concentrations are still reading as being high, but if we were accounting for the dilution from rainwater, they would look even higher to us,” she said. 

“Our sewer systems are not closed systems. They were actually engineered to be closed systems, but the sewage systems in North Carolina, they suffer from a lot of inflow that comes from rain.”

Also flowing into coastal areas are throngs of tourists each week. The influx of summer vacationers means a lot more people are contributing to the wastewater systems here. And in coastal communities where there is wastewater monitoring, there are more and more viruses detected in the systems, Noble said.

“We are getting this constant influx of new community members and a portion of those are infected. They might be asymptomatic. They might do what a lot of people are doing and say, ‘Oh, I have just a little cold,’ and keep going through their vacation, but they’re still contributing viruses to the system,” Noble said.

The more people who are exposed to the virus, the more opportunities the virus has to evolve and become more easily transmissible or cause more severe symptoms.

Viruses constantly mutate and these changes sometimes result in a new variant. According to information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the omicron virus spreads more easily than other variants but has generally less severe symptoms. And while omicron is still a variant of concern, it has evolved with numerous sublineages. These are still referred to as being in the omicron family, “But we’ve gone all the way from BA.1 to BA.2 and now we’re at BA.4 and BA.5,” Noble said. 

“When we do our analysis in the laboratory, we’re trying to basically figure out what the most dominant current lineage is or what the most dominant current variant is in any given location, and what we’re seeing in North Carolina right now is BA.4 and BA.5. They’re still an omicron-type virus, but they’re not the original omicron that we saw in December and January,” she said.

And while the BA.5 variant is highly contagious, the trade-off is that for most people, symptoms have been milder, especially those who have had a previous coronavirus infection or were vaccinated.

The CDC has labeled 41 of North Carolina’s counties as high COVID-19 community levels because of BA.5. The number is up from 18 the previous week. These counties have a high risk of illnesses that could strain the healthcare system. Many of these counties are on the coast, especially in the northeastern part of the state. The BA.5 variant is causing repeat infections, including in people who have recent past infections from other variants or were vaccinated. 

Meanwhile, many — all of us — are suffering from pandemic fatigue and some may be letting down their guard. Others may be resigned to the fact that everybody will at some point get the virus. Noble said she understands the mindset.

“I think everybody is going to get it,” she said. But, she added, there’s still the problem that if people think, “Well, everybody’s going to get it, put away the masks, go to concerts, do what you’re going to do — normal life,” the virus spreads and mutates even more.

“We keep on giving the virus opportunity to mutate in a way that actually sends us right back to those really dangerous variants like delta and like alpha, which caused a lot of hospitalizations and a lot of deaths and a lot of very, very serious illness and long-term illness for people that were either obese or had diabetes or some in some cases, just genetic diseases,” Noble said.

A premature return to pre-pandemic life comes with the risk that new variants will mean hospital beds are unavailable and elective surgeries must be postponed, she said.

“I feel like we’re playing exactly into the virus’ hands by allowing that circulation,” Noble said.

Officials say vaccines remain highly effective in preventing severe outcomes including hospitalization and death from COVID-19.

“While Covid variants continue to infect people, we have the tools to protect ourselves from the most serious effects of this virus,” Gov. Roy Cooper said last week. “Get vaccinated and boosted, wear a mask indoors in crowds if you believe you need better protection and if you become infected, talk with a health professional quickly about effective treatments like Paxlovid. Cases are on the rise with this latest BA.5 variant so I encourage all North Carolinians to know their risk and take steps to protect themselves.”

The CDC and FDA announced last week that the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine, a different type of coronavirus vaccine, may be used by adults ages 18 and older when it becomes available in the coming weeks. 

“Today, we have expanded the options available to adults in the U.S. by recommending another safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine. If you have been waiting for a COVID-19 vaccine built on a different technology than those previously available, now is the time to join the millions of Americans who have been vaccinated. With COVID-19 cases on the rise again across parts of the country, vaccination is critical to help protect against the complications of severe COVID-19 disease,” CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said in a statement Tuesday.

MOREHEAD CITY — Science, sustainability, stewardship and acrylic superpaint are being mixed and blended this week to create a highly visible, stories-high representation of what the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences means to coastal communities.

Max Dowdle of Hillsborough is the artist creating the three-story mural in process at the institute on Arendell Street. A muralist who has done similar project across the state, Dowdle was selected for this project after a national call for proposals. 

Dowdle got started Friday chalking the outline of his vision and, as of Tuesday, work was proceeding ahead of schedule.

“Every once in a while, we get chased out by the rain but it kind of cools things down too, so it’s nice,” he said.

The acrylic superpaint is an industrial-grade exterior coating, and at the very least, Dowdle said, it’s rated for 10 years. “But I’ve had things last longer than that,” he said. He’ll then seal the finished mural with an anti-UV coating, as well as an anti-graffiti coating. “That adds a lot of lifespan. It evens out the surface as well as it gives it all one sort of finish.”

While it’s his concept, Dowdle isn’t doing all the work alone. Faculty and students from the institute and others, including volunteers from the Arts Council of Carteret County, high school students and mother-daughter charity teams have chipped in.

“It’s been a nice, big crew, and they’ve all been really awesome and really helpful. We’ve made short work of a lot of it,” he said.

The mural project — the brainchild of Libby O’Malley, the institute’s development manager — illustrates the diverse work done at the UNC research laboratory that has roots in Carteret County extending back to the 1890s and formal facilities here since the 1940s.

The mural is flowing in blue tones, as Dowdle noted Tuesday morning as he jumped from several feet above ground in a pair of aviators with blue lenses after coming most of the way down in the basket of a cherry picker that had been extended to near the top of the building.

“I use water a lot in my work,” he said. “I find it’s very organic. Everybody can have something that they can relate to with water, and so I find that it’s a nice access point for people. Also, growing up in Charleston, (South Carolina,) I was at the beach all the time, and I think it informs our work a lot.”

Related: Mural to mark UNC Institute of Marine Sciences’ 75 years

Gesturing at the sky above and Bogue Sound behind him, Dowdle said blue is just a great color to work with. “It’s, it’s calming, it’s just atmosphere, and I really enjoy that about it.”

But beyond pleasing hues, the mural depicts details of the coastal environment and the people who here.

“The idea is that it’s basically these frames in front of each other that are sort of stacked and they’re all delineated by the edge of coastal areas around here,” Dowdle said as he traced in the air the lines of his design. “And so, using that as my sort of initial superstructure, I then started thinking, ‘Well, let’s have it be more coastal,’ as it is down here closer to us on the ground. And it moves to deep water as we get farther up. So that’s why we’ve got the Capricorn up there, which is the ship the IMS uses — that’s what I’m working on today — and that’s out in the deep water.”

The frames wrap around the front corner of the building, depicting various marine life grouped according to their natural proximity to shore: sharks and rays and deep-water organisms that are studied at the institute up high, with ocean shorelines and inshore marshes with crabs and oyster beds closer in.

But it’s not just flora and fauna, as UNC Institute of Marine Sciences Director Rick Luettich noted.

“it seems to cover the various habitats we work in, from the coastal waters in to the inner nearshore, it covers that well. It has a North Carolina bent to it for sure,” Luettich said Tuesday. “If you’ve seen it since yesterday, you’ll see that very prominent on it are three figures, three silhouettes, which really is sort of the juxtaposition of people working in these habitats, and so that was what really resonated with me.”

The middle figure represents someone working in a lab. The figure at left represents someone working with a drone, “And that’s indicative of the new technologies that we’re working with, always looking to move forward in how we do research in the coastal zone,” Luettich said. The silhouette at the far right is holding a laptop, which again is a huge part of the work and research, he added, “dealing with data, and of course everything is computer driven.”

Prominently placing people in the painting brought all the elements together, Luettich said. About 60 to 70 work there during this time of year. In the fall, a dozen or more undergraduate students will study here. Sometimes the number totals close to 100.

About 30, the faculty and staff, are full-time residents. The graduate students, whose numbers total 15 to 20, generally live here year-round.

“They’re living here while they work on their graduate studies, and when they finish, they may or may not stay in the area,” Luettich said. But even those who leave have a lasting impact in the community, as is also the case with the Duke Marine Lab, North Carolina State University’s Center for Marine Sciences and Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The universities’ and NOAA presence in eastern North Carolina has a huge impact, he added. “And its impact is indeed largely due to the people that are here that come and raise their families here and are just part of the community fabric.”

This “rich group of folks” has contributed in major ways to the North Carolina coast being a safer, more productive and sustainable place to live, Luettich said.

“In terms of leaving the mark of service to the state and through our work, we’ve been effective. I think there’s a lot of evidence of that,” he said.

But the public may not always be aware of the work that happens here. Communicating the institute’s presence started with a small sign out front, then a larger sign, and then 15 years ago, large lettering and the UNC Old Well logo were installed on the building itself. Still, more was needed.

O’Malley had the answer.

“She had the notion that we could use the end of the building and the side of the building that faces west to tell much more of a story of what we do at the lab,” Luettich said.

While the approval process was a challenge, it may not have been as daunting as the thought of selecting a design.

“Can we get a design that we will feel, really says what we want to say, given how big it’s going to be and the fact that we’re going to see it every time we show up? That was just a little scary,” Luettich said.

Dowdle’s submission put minds at ease.

“We had respondents from California to Florida to North Carolina — a lot of great ideas. The one that Max admitted was far and away the best one. It really stood out,” Luettich said.

The design also resonated with the faculty, Luettich said. He said the institute’s mission and research are a service to the state and its people and especially to eastern North Carolina.

“Most of the research work that goes on at the institute is designed to solve problems relative and relevant to eastern North Carolina. And we do a lot of that. That being said, I think that for years and years and years, most people in eastern North Carolina and Carteret County and in Morehead City drove by our facilities day after day and never really even knew that the university was there,” he said.

He described the mural as the culmination of 75 years of efforts to communicate a message that the science done here is broad and encompasses number crunching and it encompasses field and lab work, but also encompasses art.

“This is an opportunity to bring the right brain and the left brain together and kind of in a big way, point out all of the great things that are going on at the institute and also just simply welcome people to Morehead City,” he said.

Dowdle said his vision encapsulates how the people who work here perform their work and how their work is important to sustaining the coastal environment. Sustainability is important, he said.

“We only have the one planet, so it’s important to be good stewards of it,” he said.

This report has been updated.

Cleanup of the house that fell into the ocean last week on a rapidly eroding stretch of Outer Banks beach has begun, now that National Park Service officials have approved the necessary permit.

The work means that the section of beach on the Cape Hatteras National Seashore near the site of the house in Rodanthe is temporarily closed.

With debris spread along about 15 miles of beach to the south of the collapsed house site, area residents are invited to help with the beach cleanup on a drop-in basis. Volunteers will be provided with gloves, garbage bags and trash pickup sticks by the National Park Service for the organized effort. To receive supplies, volunteers should meet National Seashore rangers at either the Outer Banks KOA Resort at 25099 N.C. Highway 12, Rodanthe, or off-road vehicle ramp 23, just south of the village of Salvo.

Related: Rodanthe house falls into ocean, officials warn of debris

Officials said Sunday that much of the wood pieces that have washed up on the beach have exposed nails, so all volunteers are encouraged to wear thick-soled footwear. Children under the age of 18 must be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian.

“We are very appreciative of Dare County residents and Seashore visitors who have pitched in from day one of the house collapse by picking up and moving large amounts of debris to above the high tide line,” said National Parks of Eastern North Carolina Superintendent David Hallac in a statement. “Additionally, we are thankful to the Outer Banks KOA Resort and North Carolina Beach Buggy Association for partnering with the Seashore.”

Volunteers should place garbage bags and debris above the high tide line to ensure the items don’t get washed back into the ocean.

Park Service officials said Friday that the owners of the house had submitted a removal plan and hired a contractor to complete an extensive cleanup of the house and “many miles” of National Seashore beach.

“After a careful review of the plan, the Seashore this morning issued the homeowner a special use permit to immediately begin removal work,” officials said.

The owners of the house hired W.M. Dunn Construction, LLC of Powells Point to remove the house and all associated debris. National Park Service rangers have observed debris along about 15 miles of beach to the south of the collapsed house site.

“The large debris field from the fallen house poses a risk to Seashore visitors,” Hallac said. “We have been in contact with the owner of the home since the day of its unfortunate collapse and appreciate his efforts to follow through on submitting a removal plan and hiring a contractor to clean up the beach and eliminate hazards.”

Officials said visitors should use caution when participating in recreational activities on the beach and in the ocean between the villages of Rodanthe and Avon due to debris from the collapsed house.

Sections of the collapsed house and its associated debris were seen in the surf line and well beyond. Surfers and mariners are also advised to use caution in these areas.

Wood debris that washes up on the beach might contain sharp, exposed nails, which could cause harm to pedestrians and damage to vehicle tires, officials warned.

Beachgoers who observe chemicals or other hazardous materials are asked to call 252-473-3444 to report it.

Officials said short-term beach closures south of the house site may continue to be necessary. Beach closures will be announced at http://go.nps.gov/beachaccess.

Preventative measures

Dare County officials had been working with the owners of the house to demolish or remove the structure from its precarious perch before the structure collapsed.

“We have been in contact with the homeowner over the course of the last year to try to motivate him to implement some action to either relocate the house or completely demolish the house, and I believe the homeowner was in the process of doing all that. But the ocean evidently was working faster than he was,” Dare County Planning Director Noah Gillam told Coastal Review late Wednesday.

The house had not been occupied in about a year, Gillam said. Its septic system had been destroyed during a previous period of extreme high tides or swells. “So, when that happens, we don’t allow a structure to be occupied.”

Since the collapse, county officials have looked at other properties nearby and are letting the owners know that they should take steps against the threat of erosion.

“I was down there this morning with several of our building inspectors and we did canvass the neighborhood,” Gilliam said Wednesday. “We walked up and down Ocean Drive, and we do have a list of several other structures. I can’t say any of them are in immediate threat of collapse, but there are some that we are notifying the property owners that there are things they need to take action on, proactive measures to try to secure steps and decking, in case or in the event that the erosion or high tide does continue to threaten.”

Vulnerable area

The area where the home collapsed has some of the highest erosion rates on the North Carolina coast.

The shoreline at the site of the collapse had moved 284 feet at a rate of more than 13 feet per year on average in the years between 1998 and 2019, according to data from the U.S. Geological Survey’s Digital Shoreline Analysis System. The DSAS is software used to calculate rate-of-change statistics from multiple historical shoreline positions. The data was posted on Twitter by Michael Flynn, physical scientist with the National Park Service Outer Banks Group and a former coastal scientist with the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review.

The house, which was once on private property, was on the National Seashore when it collapsed. That’s because of North Carolina’s doctrine that ocean beaches are in the public trust.

“Even when much of what is referred to as the dry sand beach erodes, the Seashore’s boundary — based on our interpretation of our establishment and all of the deeds — is generally always at least from the low-tide line to the high-tide line,” Hallac told Coastal Review Friday. “Now, even that is a complicated statement, because the low-tide line and high-tide line change over time, right, especially as erosion is occurring. But generally, if you’re within that zone, we consider it Cape Hatteras National Seashore property.”

It’s been three years since Hurricane Florence and five years since Hurricane Matthew – both of which wreaked havoc in North Carolina, damaging or destroying homes and disrupting lives. Those whose homes were most severely damaged are in some cases still rebuilding. Others remain in limbo, waiting for promised assistance from the state.

Brenda Hite works as a certified nursing assistant and lives in an older mobile home close to Bogue Sound and Broad Creek in Carteret County. Florence destroyed her roof and days of rainfall associated with the storm poured into the home’s interior.

Despite repairs, conditions inside make the structure still partly uninhabitable, Hite said. Although the home has two bedrooms, she said unrepaired damage and a still-leaky roof force her to sleep in the living room, which, along with the adjoining kitchen, are the only rooms fit to occupy.

Hite applied in June 2020 to Rebuild NC, the state’s long-term disaster recovery program administered by the North Carolina Office of Recovery and Resiliency. A caseworker assessed her home and told her that she would qualify for a replacement home if she could show that damage from the storm totaled more than $5,000.

Hite told Coastal Review that she provided all the required documents possible, but she received no paperwork for partial repairs to her home performed by another state agency, NC STEP, or Sheltering and Temporary Essential Power, work she considers substandard and incomplete. NC STEP says it “provides basic, partial repairs to make homes safe, clean and secure to help North Carolina homeowners with minor damage from Hurricane Florence get back in their home quickly,” according to the agency’s website.

Getting receipts for the work was “like pulling teeth,” she said, and her caseworker told her in July of this year that should expect an award letter from Rebuild NC.

“I never got any paperwork of the work they’ve done — they did all theirs on iPads and tablets, so I didn’t receive not one piece of paper,” she said.

Then Hite’s case manager told her she had missed the deadline for documentation, but Hite said she had proof in the form of an email that she hadn’t missed the deadline.

Then in August, Hite received another notice that more documentation was needed.

Most recently, Hite said Rebuild NC told her again Oct. 7 that she should expect an award letter and a follow-up contact in the next 30 days to go over details and discuss floor plans and color choices for a modular home because of a shortage of mobile homes.

Hite continues to wait, but she remains skeptical.

“That’s what’s so frustrating about this,” she said. “I’m doing everything they’ve asked me to do and I don’t see that they’re doing anything for anybody. This is my second caseworker. The other one quit.”

Greg Dail of North Topsail Beach was also promised financial assistance based on his losses from Hurricane Florence.

“In fact, we were solicited to join the program,” Dail told Coastal Review in an email. “But no monies have been forthcoming, and from what I’m reading on social media, I’m not optimistic.”

Dail, 67, is retired and disabled as a result of rheumatoid arthritis, and his wife Rachel works as a nurse. He told Coastal Review in a phone interview that the storm blew the roof off their home.

“Our house was completely destroyed,” he said. “This was a very slow-moving storm, so it rained inside the house for about six hours.”

Dail said he had paid about $100,000 out of pocket for repairs. He said it shouldn’t take months or years to process these claims, even with the coronavirus pandemic.

“We have insurance. This put us in a financial hardship, but we recovered. The thing about it is, it’s just bureaucratic headaches, you know?” Dail said.

Like Hite, Dail has had caseworkers come and go. He thought the process was nearly complete, with all inspections and paperwork completed, and then a new caseworker contacted him.

“She said, ‘Well, we need to come out and inspect your house.’ Oh really?” Dail said.

“There are some people in dire need, a hell of a lot more need than me. I’ve got a roof over my head, and I will recover eventually — I hope. But the people who are in worse shape than I am are also still being strung along, and the frustration lies in — again — the process has just taken, way, way too long.”

Nearly all the dozen or so reviews posted on the Rebuild NC Facebook page echo Hite and Dail’s frustration.

“The exhausting application process and LENGTHY review (well over a year) turned out not to be worth my time,” Sara Jayne Anderson Cailler of Wallace posted on the agency’s social media page. “They strung us along for 15 months with countless requests for information, copies of multitudes of documents (sent multiple times because they claim they never got them), driving to their offices to deliver documents, more emails and phone calls than I care to count. Six (yes, SIX) different case managers throughout the process. Today we got notice that we are INELIGIBLE. If I had to do it all over again … I WOULDN’T. Very disappointing AND discouraging.”

Burgaw resident David Sandmeyer posted a similar review on the agency’s Facebook page: “We applied in July 2020 and have not received any updates. Our case worker rarely responds to our requests for updates and when she does it is always the same answer ‘It is under review.’”

Laura Hogshead, director of the North Carolina Office of Recovery and Resiliency, recently told Coastal Review that the agency had completed construction on 667 homes and has awarded more than $198.3 million to 2,274 applicants for long-term recovery from hurricanes Matthew and Florence. Rebuild NC is NCORR’s largest hurricane recovery program.

The agency’s Homeowner Recovery Program is funded through a federal Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program, or CDBG-DR. The state program includes an eight-step process that follows HUD’s guidelines and requirements for the use of the federal funds for long-term housing recovery. The steps include application, eligibility review, duplication check, inspection and environmental review, grant determination, contractor selection, construction and completion.

The Homeowner Recovery Program has a budget of $150.84 million for those affected by Hurricane Matthew and $352.72 million for Hurricane Florence.

The funding is intended to be a last resort for residents with low-to-moderate income and to supplement, but not duplicate, funding received by other federal, state and local recovery assistance programs.

“Often, these homeowners need considerable time and assistance in gathering documentation, getting access to the deed on their homes, and catching up with property taxes in order to effectuate construction,” Hogshead said.

The state Office of Recovery and Resiliency employs state employees and contractors to staff the Homeowner Recovery Program. State employees lead the project management operations, which include housing program management and applicant services, as well as program delivery operations, such as construction oversight and delivery.

Case managers employed by vendors are supervised by state employees. Case managers are responsible for staffing ReBuild NC centers throughout the state, working one-on-one with applicants to ensure they understand the application process, their responsibilities, and the responsibilities of the program.

Case managers are to maintain regular contact with applicants and provide status updates on their cases, Hogshead said in an email response to questions.

“Once the applicant moves into the construction phase, each applicant is assigned a Construction Liaison. The Construction Liaison is in contact with the homeowner bi-weekly to check on progress, respond to questions or concerns and ensure proper construction coordination is taking place.  The General Contractor assigned to the applicant’s project works with the Construction Liaison to keep the applicant apprised of progress,” she said.

Hogshead said all external contractors are to document progress, updates and interactions with applicants through a system called Salesforce, “and these logs are closely monitored in order to meet federal regulations and HUD standards.”

NCORR’s Project Management office and Program Delivery office manages the applicant’s progress through the eight steps of the project.

“NCORR has implemented timeliness milestones for our staff and vendor staff to follow, and these milestones are monitored consistently. That said, every homeowner’s path through the eight steps is dependent on that homeowner’s responsiveness and ability to provide required documentation and other factors, such as whether or not asbestos and lead are found in the home prior to construction,” Hogshead said.

The state is responsible for ensuring that applicants move through the eight steps as quickly as possible while being compliant with federal requirements, she added.

Timelines for individual cases vary because of factors including staff processing, construction estimates, material availability and applicant engagement.

Hogshead said it was important to note that each HUD grant, the one for Matthew and the one for Florence, is available for a minimum of six years. “Recently, recognizing the effects of the pandemic, HUD extended the Hurricane Matthew grant, which was awarded in 2017, for two full years. Additionally, HUD did not offer and sign a grant agreement with North Carolina for nearly two years after Hurricane Florence made landfall in N.C., meaning that the state could not begin recovery efforts until that grant was executed in June 2020. “

She said the pandemic had caused delays for Rebuild NC contractors in obtaining materials, and manufacturers have been unable to produce high volumes of manufactured housing units. “These circumstances are unfortunately out of the program’s control.”

The agency is working to identify solutions to the materials and labor shortages, she said, “but these delays are seen across the country in every CDBG-DR grantee program, as shown by HUD’s decision to extend the grants by two years.”

She encouraged applicants with questions to contact their construction liaison or the program’s construction hotline at 919-444-2761.

The news on the climate front keeps getting worse.

Regarding the report released Monday by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, the headlines paint a dire picture: “Code Red for humanity,” was CNN’s banner for its coverage, quoting UN Secretary-General António Guterres; “Humans have pushed the climate into ‘unprecedented’ territory,” was how The Washington Post topped its story; “A Hotter Future Is Certain, Climate Panel Warns. But How Hot Is Up to Us,” warned The New York Times’ analysis.

All noted that even if nations of the world acted immediately to curb greenhouse gas emissions, enough damage is already done to guarantee a 1.5-degree Celsius rise in average global temperatures, or about 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit hotter.

The consequences of not rapidly and permanently cutting emissions, as The Post reported, are “increasingly catastrophic impacts.”

As we reported last year, North Carolina’s Climate Science Advisory Council’s 2020 assessment predicted warmer and wetter conditions with more flooding statewide and with coastal areas as risk from rising seas and increasingly frequent heavy downpours. At the time, our Kirk Ross interviewed State Climatologist Katie Dello about the report. She made it clear then that change was already happening.

“We’re feeling climate change now, so we don’t get to the luxury of talking about this as a future problem anymore,” she said. “It’s here in North Carolina. It’s here in our backyard and we’re seeing it through the sea level rise and extreme downpours.”

The IPCC’s summary of its findings for policymakers bears that out: “Human influence has warmed the climate at a rate that is unprecedented in at least the last 2000 years.” Some of the changes already happening, including sea level rise, are irreversible.

In 2019, atmospheric CO2 concentrations were higher than at any time in at least 2 million years, according to the summary, and concentrations of other greenhouse gases were higher than at any time in at least 800,000 years.

Global mean sea level has risen faster since 1900 than during any century in at least the last 3,000 years

Each of the last four decades has been successively warmer than any decade that preceded it since 1850.

It is likely that human behavior contributed to changing rainfall patterns since the mid-20th century, and mid-latitude storm tracks have shifted toward the poles in both hemispheres since the 1980s.

The scientists say it is virtually certain that oceans have warmed just since the 1970s and it is extremely likely that human influence is the main driver. It is also virtually certain that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main driver of ocean acidification.

Coastal cities, towns and villages “are particularly affected” by climatic factors that have already changed and will continue to change, whatever happens with regard to emissions. That means increases in extreme heat, flooding rainstorms, coastal erosion and coastal flooding. Increasing relative sea levels are compounding the flood problems associated with storm surge and intense rainfall.

There’s still much we can do to limit the damage. As the Times phrased it, “humanity can still prevent the planet from getting even hotter.” Doing so will require what the IPCC report describes as “strong and sustained reductions” in emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. And even then, it could take two to three decades before global temperatures stabilize. But we will have at least taken steps to lessen the damage that would otherwise only be worse for our children and grandchildren.

And while there’s no silver lining, North Carolina, which still has a reputation for climate change denialism, has begun slowly moving in the right direction. As Coastal Review has reported in detail, debate here has shifted over the past decade from whether to do something to what should be done.

Officials released in 2020 the North Carolina Climate Risk Assessment and Resilience Plan as a comprehensive guide for addressing the risks of climate change to the state’s infrastructure and economy. The plan was hailed for addressing both the causes and effects and providing planning tools for local governments.

Also, the legislature has in recent sessions advanced bills that reflect a more comprehensive approach to flooding and stormwater management.

The House budget plan for the next two years would boost funding for the state’s Land and Water Fund and and other conservation programs with nearly $2 billion for flood prevention, resiliency and stormwater and wastewater infrastructure.

Meanwhile, new federal infrastructure and climate initiatives promise an even larger flow of funds if the state has programs in place to take advantage of it.

While these efforts offer numerous reasons for optimism, as the IPCC report states, the time to act on resiliency and the kind of carbon reductions that will truly make an impact for the next generation is now.

As we look ahead to the prospects outlined in the report and the state’s risk assessment, we know that what we do in the immediate future will have an impact on what the next generations face.

At Coastal Review, our role is not just to report on the impacts of the climate crisis, but to critically examine the plans, the science and proposed solutions in detail and to take a clear-eyed approach to the decisions at the state, federal and local levels that will affect our region and, ultimately, our planet. 

A new report from an ocean conservation advocacy organization finds that most ships are exceeding speed limits in areas federally designated to protect critically endangered North Atlantic right whales, with some of the worst compliance measured off the southern North Carolina coast, south to Georgia.

Oceana said it analyzed vessel speeds from 2017 to 2020 in speed zones established by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration off the East Coast and found that only about 10% of vessels complied with mandatory speed zones and only about 15% cooperated in voluntary areas. The findings show the need for the federal government to update vessel speed requirements and expand enforcement, the group said.

Collisions with vessels and entanglement in fishing gear are the two leading causes of injury and death for North Atlantic right whales, of which only about 360 remain.

The worst compliance with speed restrictions was in the zone between Wilmington and Brunswick, Georgia, where an average of 87.5% of vessels violated the mandatory 10-knot speed limit. The zone is part of one of two areas designated as critical habitat for right whales. The area, with calving and nursing grounds from November to April, extends to south of Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Oceana said its analysis focused on vessels 65 feet or larger that are required to use public tracking devices, but any vessel can cause fatal injuries to right whales. The group said a calf died earlier this year from wounds from a collision with a 54-foot recreational fishing vessel off the Florida coast.

“Vessels are speeding, North Atlantic right whales are dying, and there’s not enough accountability,” said Whitney Webber, campaign director at Oceana, in a statement.

North Atlantic right whales were hunted until the practice was banned in 1935 after their numbers diminished from an estimated 21,000 to possibly fewer than 100 by the 1920s. Although the whaling ban allowed some recovery, Oceana said only about 360 remain.

The slow-moving whales – they swim at about 6 mph – can be hard to spot and unable to move out of the way of fast-moving ships. Oceana said that collisions with vessels are one of the leading causes of North right whale injuries and deaths.

NOAA’s two management tools to help protect right whales from vessel strikes are permanently designated mandatory seasonal management area speed zones in places where whales are expected to be, and reactive, voluntary dynamic management area speed zones when a whale is spotted.

“Oceana’s analysis shows that speeding vessels are rampant throughout North Atlantic right whales’ migration route, all along the East Coast, and in both mandatory and voluntary speed zones. North Atlantic right whales are dying from vessel strikes and NOAA must take action to prevent this,” Webber said. “Killing even one is a problem, as scientists estimate that even a single human-caused North Atlantic right whale death a year threatens the species’ chances of recovery. If NOAA is serious about its mandate to save North Atlantic right whales from extinction, speed zones must be designated in the areas where whales currently are, and they must be enforced. Until speed zone rules are mandatory and violators held accountable, North Atlantic right whales will continue to die on NOAA’s watch.”

Oceana said that it is urging NOAA to immediately revise vessel speed regulations to expand and establish new seasonal areas, make compliance with dynamic areas mandatory, expand speed requirements to include vessels under 65 feet in length and require vessels to continuously broadcast public tracking signals. Oceana is also calling on NOAA to improve compliance and enforcement of mandatory speed limits and narrow the exemption for federal agencies.

Kate Brogan, acting director, NOAA Fisheries Public Affairs, said Tuesday that the agency was aware of the Oceana report and its findings. She said the recommendations of the Oceana report largely agree with those published in NOAA Fisheries’ 2020 North Atlantic Right Whale Vessel Speed Rule Assessment.

“NOAA Fisheries is currently reviewing the public comments received on its 2020 assessment, which the agency will consider, along with the findings of Oceana’s report, as we evaluate additional options to further reduce vessel strikes of North Atlantic right whales,” Brogan said in an email response to Coastal Review.

The NOAA Office of Law Enforcement and NOAA Office of General Counsel have primary responsibility for enforcement of the vessel speed rule. The Office of Law Enforcement is supported by U.S. Coast Guard, which works in collaboration with NOAA Fisheries to assist with mariner compliance of federal regulations.

Enforcement actions include notices of violation and assessments of administrative penalty, referred to as NOVAs, and written warnings to vessels found to have exceeded the 10-knot speed limit in seasonal management areas. Civil penalties are assessed commensurate with the charges and are most often issued in cases where a vessel operator has shown substantial or repeated failure to comply with the speed rule.

Secondly, compliance assistance letters are sent to mariners found to have exceeded the 10-knot speed limit in less severe cases “to educate mariners on the requirements
of the speed rule and potential enforcement actions if the alleged conduct continues in
the future,” according to the 2020 assessment.

Thirdly, the Coast Guard hails vessel operators found transiting in excess of 10 knots in active seasonal management areas. Mariners are reminded of the speed rule and informed that they should reduce their speed accordingly. Vessel compliance with hail instructions is noted and reported to NOAA Fisheries.

The 2020 assessment notes than in recent years, 2017-2019, NOAA General Counsel, NOAA Office of Law Enforcement, and the Coast Guard have had a total of 178 enforcement-related contacts via the three avenues. The total includes 60 contacts in 2017, 54 in 2018 and 64 in 2019.

Since most vessels transit repeatedly through seasonal management areas, one enforcement contact may cover numerous transits in possible violation of the speed rule. Vessel operators are given a chance to provide evidence that their excess speed was for safety reasons.

Oceana analyzed vessel compliance with speed restrictions in both types of area between 2017 and 2020 using data from Global Fishing Watch, an international nonprofit organization founded by Oceana in partnership with Google and SkyTruth. Oceana said it analyzed self-reported vessel speeds and location data to track vessel speeds and positions in North Atlantic right whale conservation areas.

More than 80% of the vessels violated the speed limit between Cape May, New Jersey, to Florida, and the southern states’ dynamic management areas had the highest rate of noncooperation, Oceana said. But the high volume of traffic in the Southern New England management area poses the greatest threat to right whales despite having a lower percentage of noncooperation than others, Oceana said.

The group said that cargo ships were the least compliant vessel type in both dynamic and seasonal management areas. Two-thirds of the vessels that exceeded the 10-knot speed limits operated under foreign flags, but the worst offenders were flagged to the U.S., Panama, Marshall Islands, Liberia, Germany and Singapore.

MOREHEAD CITY – Researchers here participating in a newly expanded program now have the capability through sampling and analysis of public wastewater to quickly see the emergence of COVID-19 variants of concern in specific municipalities, a potentially valuable early warning system for outbreaks as people return to schools and work settings.

“What this means is that as new variants emerge that are really dangerous — and these will happen — that might cause more severe disease or more severe numbers of hospitalizations. We’re working with a company that develops these tests as these variants circulate around the world. They’re developing the tests in real time,” said Dr. Rachel Noble, an environmental molecular microbiologist at the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences in Morehead City.

Noble studies pathogens in wastewater and stormwater, including SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in samples taken from public treatment facilities across the state. She said the analysists working on the wastewater monitoring project are among the top global beta testers for the new assays used to detect these emerging variants, “and we’re working very tightly with that company to do that.”

The company, Bio-Rad of Hercules, California, says that to better understand and respond to the U.K., South Africa, Brazil, California, New York or other variants, researchers need to reliably identify where they are, when they appear, and how prevalent they become over time. Each variant can be identified by the known mutations in its genomic sequence, the company says. These changes can make the virus more transmissible or difficult to treat.

The project for the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services that began earlier this year expanded from testing 11 wastewater treatment plants in the state to 19. The department’s COVID-19 dashboard was updated Thursday with the latest results that include the new wastewater-monitoring sampling sites.

“And of those, we can see that we’ve returned to some blips, indications in the wastewater, that COVID has returned, as seen also by cases or hospitalizations in North Carolina,” Noble said.

The lab was sampling 11 sites since the inception of the program but the state was only reporting 10 on its dashboard. Now all sites are being reported on the dashboard. Other sites are expected to be added in the coming weeks.

Also included in the program’s expansion are new quality controls.

Earlier this summer, many of the sites being monitored had dropped to either low concentrations or nondetectable levels of the COVID-19 virus in the wastewater.

“We are definitely not in that situation currently,” she said. “We’re seeing some, what I would call blips on the radar screen in the wastewater.”

She explained that while that expansion only has been going for about four weeks now, in terms of trends where these blips on the radar screen appear in wastewater, they are generally closely followed by increases in clinical cases in those areas.

The lab in Morehead City is receiving samples from North Carolina sites twice a week for analysis. “That’s 38 total samples right now that we received, and we’re able to report that data back out to the CDC very quickly. We have a really nice turnaround on our surveillance program.”

The lab has completed variant analyses for the U.K. variant, the Delta variant and the Brazilian variant. And as variants emerge and continue to evolve, the surveillance program will serve as a warning system for those that could pose serious concern.

“It’s not perfect, but wastewater has shown itself to be a good predictor of what’s coming,” Noble said. “When someone becomes infected, just the same as with the flu or with other types of viruses, you actually start shedding the virus quite early in the infection, but you might not feel full-blown symptoms for several days.

“When a person becomes infected, they begin to contribute to the virus signal in the wastewater before they would pursue any sort of a clinical tests. Regardless of whether they’re asymptomatic, the wastewater is still picking up that virus signal.

“We are likely to see that as especially younger individuals, and by that I mean 40 and younger, that we’re likely to see numbers of individuals that are asymptomatic, that are carrying the virus but they either are completely devoid of symptoms or they have very mild symptoms and think that they just have a cold. So, that would allow the wastewater to contain the viruses that we are seeing. And those people have the capability to still shed the virus and give it to someone else, but they themselves are not seriously ill.”

This poses risks for older parents, or siblings that have not been vaccinated, she said.

Collaborative monitoring

The state announced Thursday the expansion of the sampling program to better identify areas where virus is spreading. The project is a collaboration between the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, University of North Carolina system researchers, wastewater utilities and public health departments.

“As the Delta variant emerges in North Carolina, it’s more important than ever for us to use all available tools to track the spread of COVID-19 so health officials and members of the public can take action if trends are increasing,” said State Epidemiologist Dr. Zack Moore said in a statement. “The recent increases we’ve seen are an important reminder that COVID-19 is still here and still a risk for people who are not fully vaccinated. If you haven’t gotten your shot, don’t wait to vaccinate.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services are collaborating with various other federal agencies on the National Wastewater Surveillance System in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The data is being used to help public health officials better understand the extent of coronavirus infections in their communities.

“I think we’re seeing that the wastewater is going to prove itself to be important as we return back to school and many people return back to the workplace,” Noble said.

The CDC says that sewage testing has been successfully used for early detection of other diseases, such as polio. But the initial sampling sites in North Carolina didn’t provide a complete picture.

“When we first designed the surveillance program, we designed it necessarily where we had partners that could do some of the sampling for us. So originally, that was Chapel Hill, Raleigh, Charlotte, Wilmington, and there were very few rural areas represented in our selection. Now that wasn’t because we were trying to ignore rural areas, it was because we were just trying to build the program,” Noble said. “Since then, we’ve added primarily rural towns, knowing that there are differences in vaccination rates between metropolitan cities and rural towns, and we are seeing trends of these emerging concentrations in wastewater in the rural towns, which is concerning.”

Trends in rural areas where sampling occurs are currently showing increases or sustained increases, as classified by the North Carolnia Wastewater Monitoring Network dashboard map updated Thursday.

With the latest data from Carteret County and New Hanover County wastewater sampling sites, levels of the virus have plateaued.

In late June, Beaufort officials announced higher levels had been detected in samples from the town’s wastewater plant. The increase appeared to correlate to an especially busy period for tourism in the county, during an already busy season.

Noble noted that the increase was not followed by an uptick in the number of clinical cases reported by the Carteret County Health Department.

“What this means for wastewater is that if you have large numbers of people in any particular city or town who are asymptomatic, they’re not getting captured in the clinical case data that’s being reported at the county level. They’re not seeking an urgent care test or an ER test because they feel fine,” she said.

There are a couple of reasons that detection trends in wastewater may not be reflected in the numbers of cases in a county.

“One is that if a tourist does have symptoms, and even if they get tested at an urgent care here, the test result is reported at their home address by DHHS,” Noble said. “The second reason is that we all know that people come to the coast to be outdoors. So even if they are carrying COVID and they’re asymptomatic, they may be unlikely to share it with other people and cause measured cases in the community because they’re out at the beach, they’re out on a boat, they’re out fishing, and they’re largely staying within their own kind of groups of friends.”

Noble said trendline peaks and valleys for communities where wastewater sampling is done is to be expected, not just here in eastern North Carolina but broadly. And as the public returns this fall to more indoor life, indications could change, possibly for the worse.

“And one way to protect yourself from that is to seek the vaccine,” she said. “A lot of people have said that they’re busy or they don’t have time.”

North Carolinians can go to MySpot.nc.gov to find a vaccine location near them.

The other way, Noble said, is that, if people are concerned about getting the vaccine, then simply wear a face mask while out in public.

“It’s not a bad thing, just wear a face mask if you’re in the grocery store,” she said.

CARTERET COUNTY — Boaters unfamiliar with the waters around Harkers Island and Cape Lookout National Seashore can quickly get into a lot of trouble, and that’s happening more and more.

The risk of running aground near Cape Lookout is nothing new and even seasoned skippers have discovered the perils.

“Anybody who says they haven’t run aground in Core Sound is a liar,” Cape Lookout National Seashore Superintendent Jeff West told Coastal Review last week.

West describes the area as “constantly shoaling and just not very deep,” and he emphasized that it’s particularly dangerous for the unfamiliar.

“Typically, that’s the person we see getting into trouble,” he said.

Mariners say the channel here moves with nearly every tide and storm and locals advise those unfamiliar with these waters to avoid the area.

Karen Willis Amspacher, a lifelong resident of Harkers Island and executive director of the Core Sound Waterfowl Museum and Heritage Center, said the best course is to rely on professionals to get to Cape Lookout.

“If you don’t know your way to the cape you might as well just stay home or you’ll spend the day shoving,” she said last week in an interview.

Capt. Peter Koltun of Sea Tow Crystal Coast explained to Coastal Review that more and more boaters are finding trouble here. Sea Tow provides marine towing and on-water assistance.

“We’ve had a huge increase in jobs in that area,” Koltun said. “The channel is getting skinnier and skinnier.”

Koltun and others said the Barden Inlet Channel, including a segment long known as “The Drain,” had become so “bottlenecked” there’s no room for even the slightest error. One wrong turn and “it goes from 6 feet at high tide to 2 inches at high tide,” Koltun said.

The only way to get to Cape Lookout is by boat, via the Barden Inlet Channel, which is a federally authorized channel although it’s not maintained and is no longer marked. Federal funding for dredging here hasn’t been available since the 1970s. The remaining aids to navigation in Barden Inlet were removed  late last year after conditions were deemed too unstable and unsafe.

West said providing safe access to visitors is paramount, but the park service can’t do it alone.

“The National Park Service has not taken responsibility for this in the past, and for good reason: Most of the channels are outside our boundaries,” he said.

Capt. George Aswad is operator of Crystal Coast Lady Cruises and the Lookout Express, the park service-authorized ferry service to Cape Lookout and Shackleford Banks with round-trip service from Harkers Island and Beaufort.

“We transit (the area) every day, so we’re used to it. It does change and it’s changing as we speak,” he said. “The worst is The Drain, or the S-curve, near Morgan Island. It gets pretty shallow there, but a new channel is opening on the north side of it and that’s getting deeper every day.”

“The Drain” and the “S-curve” are parts of a series of channels that comprise the South Core Banks/Lookout Bight Channels. The congressionally authorized channel to Back Sound and Lookout Bight, which extends from Harkers Island to the bight itself, incorporates the severely shoaled S-curve or S-turns area. 

The National Park Service administers the remaining channels, including the Great Island Ferry Channel, the Lighthouse Channel, Les and Sally’s Channel, and the Shackleford Dock Channel.

When shoaling in the federal channel reached a critical stage, that was when the Coast Guard removed aids to navigation.

Aswad said his ferries make 20 round trips per day between Shell Point at Harkers Island and Cape Lookout and Shackleford Island. He sees boaters get into trouble all the time.

“A lot of private boats come through there at full speed, not knowing where they’re going, and we watch them go aground at full speed. Plenty of times we yell at them trying to get them to slow down,” he said. “Most of the time, the private boats follow us. We gladly help everybody and let them follow us through there, that’s not an issue at all.”

Aswad said more common sense and courtesy on the water could help the situation all around, but he and others agree, Barden Inlet needs attention.

The Coast Guard recently announced changes to aids to navigation in nearby waterways, including Shackleford Slue and the Middle Marshes, Harkers Island Channel West and Core Sound Channel, which are regarded as improvements. But it’s uncertain when fix for the federal channel is coming, although the money for dredging is available.

Cooperative management agreement

Greg Rudolph is manager of Carteret County’s Shore Protection Office. He oversees beach nourishment projects in the county, projects that generally use sand from channel dredging, and serves as the county’s principle liaison with the Army Corps of Engineers and other agencies on related issues.

Rudolph explained that, although the channel is federally authorized, federal funding for its maintenance has not been a priority because use of the inlet these days is mainly recreational. But that’s no excuse, Rudolph said.

“If you were going to the Grand Canyon and there was an avalanche at the only way to get into the Grand Canyon, there would be funds for that,” Rudolph said.

So, to secure funding, Carteret County officials in July 2019 struck an agreement with the National Park Service to cooperatively manage waterways serving park service properties.

The deal set the terms and conditions for the county to accept funding from the park service to put up as the required match for grants from the state’s Shallow Draft Navigation Channel Dredging and Aquatic Weed Fund. Revenue for the fund comes from fees for boat registrations and title transfers. Approved projects must be paid for with at least one non-state dollar for every $2 from the fund.

During the first year of the agreement, the park service provided $590,554 to the county, which, along with money from the Shallow Draft Fund, resulted in a total $1.77 million provided to the Corps of Engineers. In 2020, the park service provided an additional $1.3 million to the county, which again leveraged with the Shallow Draft Fund resulted in another $3.9 million contribution to the Corps for a total of more than $5.67 million to cover costs associated with preparing an environmental assessment with a finding of no significant impact needed to secure the necessary permits and authorizations and most of the dredging expense.

Now, county and park service officials are waiting for the Corps to formulate the project

“That is the key to solving this for the long term,” West with the park service said. “It’s the only way to keep the channels open and it will allow long-term, joint management of the waterways and systems with some federal money.”

“The biggie for everybody is Barden’s Inlet,” West added. “Once the environmental assessment is done, they can get started, and we’re including all the waterways in this area in the environmental assessment to get the compliance out of the way.”

He said that Barden Inlet is the priority, but dredging that channel will bring multiple benefits, including helping to lessen erosion problems in front of the Cape Lookout Lighthouse.

“There is a reason they call it The Drain, here locally. Once it’s opened up, it will do its job,” West said.

But, he added, there are decisions that can only be made once the environmental assessment is complete.

“We don’t want to do the wrong thing, and sometimes putting a dredge in the same spot, it just fills back in. It might be smarter to take advantage of some of the naturally deeper water, but there might be legal ramifications. Half of any of these battles is getting the process started and we’re about halfway through the battle.”

Officials with the Corps of Engineers’ Wilmington District had not responded Tuesday to a request last week for comment on the status of the environmental assessment.

Changes in adjacent waters

In nearby waterways, the Coast Guard is changing 25 aids to navigation near Shackleford Banks and Harkers Island, changes officials say were needed because of dangerous conditions that are getting worse.

The changes were set to begin earlier this month for Shackleford Slue and the Middle Marshes, Harkers Island Channel West and Core Sound Channel.

The Coast Guard said the intent is to make the lateral aids — the red and green buoys — more readily comply with the “red, right, returning” direction of travel in an area where there are several converging channels from sea and around various barrier islands.

Chief Warrant Officer Chris Winters, the officer in charge of aids to navigation for waters served by Coast Guard Station Fort Macon, told Coastal Review that the significant changes were “in response to worsening conditions in Core Sound, the heavy flow of recreational vessel traffic from Beaufort Inlet to Taylor’s Creek via Shackleford Slue and to make the waterway easier to understand for mariners not familiar with the area.”

Winters said the latest changes were not associated with the removal of aids to navigation in Barden Inlet, which was completed late last year after conditions were deemed unstable and unsafe, although he said they do affect the adjacent waterways.

“The National Parks Service, Carteret County and the Army Corp of Engineers are actively working on funding dredging operations, once the dredging is complete the Coast Guard will assess channel conditions and replace (aids to navigation) as appropriate,” Winters said.

Rudolph agreed that the changes to aids to navigation have little to do directly with Barden Inlet or The Drain “or whatever you call that long channel reach from Harker’s Island to the lighthouse.” But numerous boaters who will benefit from the improvement to aids to navigation “and it is an improvement,” he said, are also using the Barden Inlet Channel, “so it’s almost marking a road to a dead end until we can get it dredged and navigable.”

The Coast Guard is making more than two dozen changes to aids to navigation near Shackleford Banks and Harkers Island in Carteret County.

Changes for 25 aids to navigation were set to begin earlier this month for Shackleford Slue and the Middle Marshes, Harkers Island Channel West and Core Sound Channel.

The Coast Guard said the intent is to make the lateral aids – the red and green buoys — more readily comply with the “red, right, returning” direction of travel in an area where there are several converging channels from sea and around various barrier islands.

Chief Warrant Officer Chris Winters, the officer in charge of aids to navigation for waters served by Coast Guard Station Fort Macon, told Coastal Review that the significant changes were “in response to worsening conditions in Core Sound, the heavy flow of recreational vessel traffic from Beaufort Inlet to Taylor Creek via Shackleford Slue and to make the waterway easier to understand for mariners not familiar with the area.”

Winters said the changes were the result of a recently completed waterway analysis in which the Coast Guard solicited and received feedback from local power boating groups, commercial salvage operators, charter captains and the public.

“We also utilized historical AIS (automatic identification system) data, surveys and other data sources to craft our proposal. The changes were advertised to the public beginning in February via the Local Notice to Mariners and only positive feedback was received,” Winters said.

For vessels that provide automatic identification system data, the information can include their heading, latitude and longitude and speed.

At Shackleford Slue/Middle Marshes, the following aid changes were planned:

• Shackleford Slue Light (LLNR 29415) change to Green Squares, Fl G 4s, and rename Shackleford Slue Channel Light 5.
• Middle Marshes Daybeacon 4 (LLNR 29326.1) change to Green Squares and rename Shackleford Slue Channel Daybeacon 7.
• Middle Marshes Daybeacon 3 (LLNR 29326.1) change to Red Triangle dayboards and rename Shackleford Slue Channel Daybeacon 8.
• Middle Marshes Daybeacon 1A (LLNR 29326.01) change to Red Triangle dayboards and rename Shackleford Slue Channel Daybeacon 10.
• Middle Marshes Daybeacon 1 (LLNR 29326) change to Red Triangle dayboards and rename Shackleford Slue Channel Daybeacon 12.

In Harkers Island Channel West, the following changes will be made:

• Middle Marshes Junction Light MM (LLNR 34325) change to Black & White Diamonds, Fl W 4s, and rename Harkers Island West Light HW.Harkers Island West Channel Daybeacon 3 (LLNR 34735) change to Red Triangles and rename Harkers Island West Channel Daybeacon 2.
• Harkers Island West Channel Buoy 1A (LLNR 34730.1) change to Red Nun and rename Harkers Island West Channel Buoy 4.
• Harkers Island West Channel Light 1 (LLNR 34730) change to Red Triangles, Fl R 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 6.

Core Sound Channel from Core Sound Light 60 to Core Sound Light 37A will be renamed Harkers Island Straits, with a direction of buoyage returning from Beaufort Inlet. The following changes were planned:

• Core Sound Light 60 (LLNR 34775) change to Green Squares, Fl G 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 1.
• Core Sound Light 58 (LLNR 34745) change to Green Squares, Fl G 2.5s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 3.
• Discontinue Core Sound Buoy 56B (LLNR 34741).
• Core Sound Daybeacon 56A (LLNR 34739) change to Green Squares and rename Harkers Island Straits Daybeacon 5.
• Harkers Island West Channel Light 1 (LLNR 34730) change to Red Triangles, Fl R 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 6.
• Core Sound Light 56 (LLNR 34723) change to Green Squares, Fl G 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 7.
• Core Sound Light 55 (LLNR 34705) change to Red Triangles, Fl R 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 8.
• Core Sound Buoy 51 (LLNR 34700) change to red nun and rename Harkers Island Straits Buoy 10.
• Core Sound Daybeacon 50 (LLNR 34695) change to Green Squares and rename Harkers Island Straits Daybeacon 11.
• Discontinue Core Sound Daybeacon 48 (LLNR 34690).
• Core Sound Daybeacon 47A (LLNR 34681) change to Red Triangles and rename Harkers Island Straits Daybeacon 12.
• Core Sound Light 47 (LLNR 34680) change to Red Triangles, Fl R 4s and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 14.
• Core Sound Light 46 (LLNR 34675) change to Green Squares, Fl G 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 15.
• Core Sound Light 44 (LLNR 34770) change to Green Squares, Fl G 2.5s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 17.
• Core Sound Light 42A (LLNR 34650) change to Green Squares, Fl G 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 19.
• Core Sound Daybeacon 42 (LLNR 34645) change to Green Squares and rename Harkers Island Straits Daybeacon 21.
• Core Sound Light Buoy 41 (LLNR 34640) change to red nun, Fl G 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Lighted Buoy 22.
• Core Sound Light 39 (LLNR 34635) change to Red Triangles, Fl R 4s, and rename Harkers Island Straits Light 24.
• Core Sound Light 37A (LLNR 34650) change to Black & White Diamonds, Fl W 4s, and rename Core Sound South Light SS.

The Coast Guard advises mariners to refer to local notices to mariners available online and to regularly update electronic charts used by chart plotters and smartphone apps.

The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission has announced its participation in a nationwide campaign to promote sobriety while boating and educate boaters about the dangers of boating while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

The campaign set for July 2-4 is called Operation Dry Water.

“Ultimately we want to reduce the number of alcohol- and drug-related incidents and fatalities on the water,” Wildlife Commission Lt. Forrest Orr said in a statement. “The fourth of July weekend is traditionally the busiest weekend on the water. Our partnership with Operation Dry Water helps us to educate operators and passengers on the dangers associated with boating while impaired. We want everyone to have a great summer on the water — to do that boat operators must remain sober and alert.”

During last year’s campaign, law enforcement officers issued 443 warnings, 371 citations and removed 59 people who were boating under the influence from the state’s waterways. In North Carolina, a driver or vessel operator with a blood-alcohol concentration that meets or exceeds 0.08, or is substantially impaired by alcohol and/or drugs, is subject to arrest.

Drinking affects the skills necessary to operate a boat, including:

• Peripheral vision and ability to focus.
• Judgment and rational decision-making. 
• Balance and equilibrium. 
• Coordination and reaction time.

“We also will be reminding boaters of other safe practices, such as wearing a life jacket and enrolling in a boater education course,” added Orr. “Not wearing a life vest is a contributing factor in many fatal incidents. Boating incidents happen quickly and wearing a life vest is the best way to be prepared.”

Boating at night typically increases during holiday weekends, so boaters should practice caution and be on high alert due to reduced visibility. Inland lighting rules are in effect and water skiing is prohibited between one hour after sunset and one hour before sunrise. Personal watercraft are prohibited on state waters between sunset and sunrise.

For more information about boating in North Carolina, visit ncwildlife.org/boating. 

Regular readers may have noticed this week that things look a bit different here at CoastalReview.org.

We are excited to announce our first major redesign since launching this site in 2015. The changes are part of an overall effort to better serve our readers, especially mobile users who make up a growing majority of those who visit here. And while you may know us as Coastal Review Online, you also probably knew we were online without having to tell you.

The redesign allows us more flexibility and responsiveness in delivering the news of the North Carolina coast that you have come to expect and trust. In response to your comments and suggestions, we’ve added new or improved functions and are continuing to refine them to make it easier to find stories and information from the recent, or not so recent, past. Other new features are tools we needed to up our game.

After 10 years of coastal environmental reporting and six years since the North Carolina Coastal Federation launched Coastal Review as a freestanding, daily, online coastal news site, our readership continues to grow, and by larger margins each year.

There is clearly a lot of interest in news about North Carolina’s coastal region and this should come as no surprise. The 20 counties we cover are environmental treasures that are rich in abundance, ecological diversity and scenic splendor, with fascinating people and culture.

The region’s place in history is well known as a setting for early European exploration, the beginnings of a nation, and home to significant events and important people in the centuries that followed. It’s also a lesson on how life here has for thousands of years depended on the water that surrounds us.

These waters — the ocean as well as creeks, rivers, marshes and sounds — are the foundation of much of eastern North Carolina’s economy. Water is the draw for millions of visitors each year who spend billions of dollars in coastal counties.

“Tourists have discovered the unspoiled natural beauty and relative lack of congestion in the region’s beach areas,” says the NC East Alliance, an economic development organization for eastern North Carolina.

While the region has long been a popular tourist destination, North Carolina’s 20 Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA, counties are also home to more than 1.06 million people, ranging from just under 5,000 residents in Hyde County to more than 234,000 in New Hanover County.

It may go without saying that no two are alike, but even neighboring counties can be vastly different. The North Carolina Rural Center ranks all but one coastal county, New Hanover, as rural, or having fewer than 250 people per square mile. While some counties are rapidly growing, others are seeing flat growth or slight declines in their population. But in each county, coastal waters play a significant role in the sense of place, quality of life and cultural identity.

The health of North Carolina’s seafood industry and the state’s significant recreational fishing-related economy depends on protecting the water around us. Fishing and hunting are a big part of coastal culture, especially in smaller communities.

Coastal wetlands and sounds not only are habitat for highly coveted fish and shellfish, but they also serve as a shock absorber, absorbing some of the brunt of coastal storms. Wetlands serve as an indicator of changes, such as those associated with sea level rise and rising ocean temperatures. In addition, our coastal waters are a laboratory for researchers in a variety of fields.

The North Carolina coast has been for more than a century a hub for scientific research. It’s home to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Beaufort Laboratory and the Duke University Marine Lab, both in Beaufort; the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Institute of Marine Sciences and the North Carolina State University Center for Marine Sciences and Technology, both in Morehead City; the East Carolina University Coastal Studies Institute in Wanchese; and the University of North Carolina Wilmington Center for Marine Science in Wilmington.

The research and findings at these institutions are often groundbreaking, sometimes with worldwide implications and recognition, and often the language is highly technical. Much of our science reporting is tied to issues related to pollution or contaminants and public health and sometimes these studies are mandated by the legislature.

We try to make science and the exacting but sometimes purposely vague language of legislation accessible to ordinary people. We strive to present in-depth reporting on topics that are often ignored, glossed over or delivered elsewhere without context or history.

We keep in mind that people too are part of the environment. Their well-being, ingenuity and perseverance are at the center of our environmental reporting.

Coastal communities are making new investments in protecting, conserving, celebrating and capitalizing on their resources because it makes sense for the environment and the economy, and it benefits people who live here.

Although our coverage focuses on issues that matter most to coastal residents, our audience, according to Google Analytics, is much more widespread, with significant numbers of readers in Raleigh, Atlanta — the location of Environmental Protection Agency’s Southeast regional headquarters — and Washington, D.C., in addition to the coast. This fact strengthens our resolve to clearly communicate coastal issues not just for the folks on the coast but also for key decision makers at the state and federal levels.

Our name, “Coastal Review,” dates back to the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s earliest days and a twice-yearly newspaper-form newsletter first published in August 1983 with a $5 per year subscription rate that covered environmental threats, water quality issues, legislative news and coastal residents — not unlike the coverage we now strive to deliver each day, Monday through Friday, at no cost to readers.

Then and now, North Carolina Coastal Federation Executive Director Todd Miller’s approach has been one of informing rather than trying to persuade. “People need to think for themselves based upon good, factual information,” he says.

Todd and Frank Tursi, a former environmental reporter at the Winston-Salem Journal before taking the helm of the federation’s Coastkeeper program, created Coastal Review Online in 2012 as part of the federation’s website, nccoast.org, and launched the freestanding news website at coastalreview.org in 2015. It was, “an act of desperation,” as Frank put it in 2016.

“Environmental groups depend on good journalism to educate people about the complicated science and policy issues that they often tackle. But decades of wilting revenue and falling readership had decimated daily newspapers, which reduced staff and cut coverage in response. Environmental journalism was a casualty,” Frank noted at the time.

Although published by an advocacy organization, we work hard to deliver unbiased, objective reporting and editorial decisions are made independently from the publisher and any other persons or interests.

With a full-time staff of two, we rely largely on freelance reporters, mostly veteran newspaper journalists who know the region and issues that matter. Our work has helped us grow our audience to more than three-quarters of a million readers during the past year alone, with more than 1.2 million pages viewed.

Since being accepted as a member of the North Carolina Press Association in 2015, our work has garnered more than 100 awards, including a first-place Public Service Award for 2020 presented earlier this year. We want to continue growing and improving to better serve the communities we cover.

Coastal Review is not supported by paid subscriptions or advertising. Our continued work to report the news of the North Carolina coast depends on your help. So, we’re offering new ways to make it easier for you to support our work through donations, sponsorships and gifts. Visit coastalreview.org/support to learn more. Our publisher’s financial health, accountability and transparency have earned it a perfect score with Charity Navigator. Fewer than 1% of the thousands of charities rated by Charity Navigator have earned perfect scores.

We extend our utmost appreciation to our website designer and technical guru Sara Birkemeier of 8dot Graphics LLC for her extensive work during the past few months, weeks and days to incorporate our ideas, suggest things we hadn’t considered and make this redesign as seamless as possible for Coastal Review staff. She lived up to her company’s slogan in making us “shine.”

Also, we thank our publishing partners who reprint our stories and share theirs with us to keep coastal residents informed. We’ve added a new feature on each story page so that publishers who wish to share our work with their readers may do so with all the proper attribution and contact information readily available, and to help us track our reach.

Just one more thing: Astute regular readers may have noticed at the top of our pages a new logo, which not only states who we are but also where we are, right here at CoastalReview.org. So, please suggest us to anyone who may have an interest in the news of the coast and tell them where to go. And while the moniker Coastal Review Online is a thing of the past, you can still call us “CRO.” We don’t mind a bit.

CARTERET COUNTY – Maintenance dredging of the harbor at the North Carolina Port of Morehead City and associated placement of the sand on Bogue Banks is set to begin during the first week of January 2021.

Greg Rudolph with the County Shore Protection Office announced Tuesday on the county’s Beach News website that the mobilization and staging process that began earlier this month was continuing and that Cranford, New Jersey-based Weeks Marine’s cutterhead-suction pipeline dredge, the J.S. Chatry was scheduled to arrive soon after the holidays and could begin the $18 million combined channel maintenance and beach renourishment project Jan. 5, 2021.  Weeks Marine will likely complete the work by the end of March.

The Army Corps of Engineers in November gave the company the notice to proceed with the work.

Rudolph told Coastal Review Online Tuesday that the project, which had been delayed over federal funding issues, was the result of “a lot of good planning and a little bit of luck.”

The planning part was the Dredged Material Management Plan for the Morehead City Harbor, which the Corps and the National Park Service developed to address long-term dredging and disposal issues at the harbor as part of a legal settlement the Corps and Carteret County agreed to in 2008. What it means is that sand removed from the harbor and placed on the beach at same time, rather than deposited at an offshore disposal site, is entirely federally funded.

The luck part was getting the funding.

“Every third year, instead of dumping the sand offshore they put on Bogue Banks at full federal cost,” Rudolph explained, adding that the project was supposed to happen last year, but the Corps’ funding came too late.

“So, here they are now,” Rudolph said.

The project is expected to remove 1.14 million cubic yards of sand mostly from shoaled areas known as Range B, the Cutoff and Range A.

The is the first fully federally funded beach renourishment project since Hurricane Florence in 2018. During the past three years, the county has used a mix of Federal Emergency Management Agency reimbursement for sand lost during Hurricane Florence and state hurricane relief funding to renourish beaches from the Point in Emerald Isle to the Atlantic Beach Circle. The current project will add sand to beaches from the Circle to Fort Macon.

“We’ve been chipping away at 18-19 miles of Bogue Banks over three years and this is going to take us over the finish line,” Rudolph said, referring to the nearly 25-mile-long barrier island. “The state money, which was appropriated for Florence and (Hurricane) Michael recovery, has a 50% cost-share stipulation, which is no problem — we’ve been collecting occupancy taxes for years and years and years for that purpose,” Rudolph said.

Carteret County’s occupancy tax revenues are split between beach renourishment projects and promotion of the county by the Tourism Development Authority.

Audubon completes first phase of oyster reef restoration.

Audubon North Carolina has used money paid by Duke Energy companies, which had pleaded guilty to violations of the Clean Water Act, to build its first oyster reef project on the lower Cape Fear River to help restore bird and fish habitat and improve water quality.

The state program of the National Audubon Society announced this week that work is now complete on the first $300,000 phase of the project at Shellbed Island near the mouth of the river.

The nonprofit conservation organization noted how oyster reefs provide a vital food source for birds while also helping to sustain important nesting habitat called onshore shell rakes. Rakes are banks of old oyster shells that wash ashore once the mollusk dies. These shell formations can be found throughout the lower Cape Fear River and are used by birds like American oystercatchers to nest and raise their young.

The habitat that oysters support on the river has suffered as oyster populations plummeted in recent decades, contributing to a decline in water quality and depleting the source of shells that would typically replenish shell rakes, the group said.

“Oysters are amazing creatures because they support entire webs of life, from birds to fish to local communities. Building oyster reefs is one of the best ways to restore ecosystems in a way that mimics nature,” Curtis Smalling, director of conservation at Audubon North Carolina, said in a statement.

Shellbed Island is part of a network of bird sanctuaries on the river that Audubon protects and manages for nesting waterbirds, including species like American oystercatchers, royal terns, and brown pelicans. Audubon said its larger network of coastal sanctuaries, including barrier island habitat, provides a home to 40% of the state’s coastal nesting birds.

The new oyster reef at Shellbed Island consists of 140 concrete reef balls and 2,600 oyster bags, forming three 160-foot-long sills that will be exposed at low tide and submerged at high tide.

A single adult oyster can filter up to 50 gallons of water a day.

As larvae, oysters drift through the water until they attach to a hard surface, such as other oyster shells. New oysters are expected to begin growing on the reef in as soon as a year.

In the short term, the reef will provide foraging grounds for oystercatchers and habitat for fish and a wide variety of other marine organisms. In the longer term, the new reef will help sustain the nesting rakes on the island and others nearby.

The restoration is expected to benefit American oystercatchers in particular. Audubon said 100 breeding pairs of oystercatchers live on the lower Cape Fear River, a quarter of the state’s entire population. While the black and white birds with long, bright red bills and yellow eyes are familiar to beachgoers, they depend on oysters and their shells for food and nesting habitat.

Audubon said declines in oyster populations and reduced number of oyster reefs on the Cape Fear have put American oystercatchers in a precarious position with fewer shells available to build up rakes over time. Lower shell rakes leave oystercatchers’ eggs and chicks more susceptible to boat wakes and king tides that wash away their nests. Audubon said this overwash is the leading cause of nest failure for American oystercatchers on the river.

“American Oystercatchers have a special relationship with their namesake mollusk—they depend on oysters and their shells for food and a safe place to raise their chicks. The reef project will help ensure these special birds flourish on the Cape Fear River,” said Lindsay Addison, coastal biologist at Audubon North Carolina.

Although this is Audubon’s first oyster reef project on the lower Cape Fear, back in 2012, in partnership with the North Carolina Coastal Federation, the first oyster project at an Audubon site was a living shoreline installed at Beacon Island at Ocracoke Inlet.

Three additional reefs are permitted and designed for the river but await funding.

Audubon said it selected reef sites by a mapping and assessment process that identified physical habitats most likely to support healthy oyster reefs.

The project was funded in part by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation with community service funds paid by the defendants in the cases, U.S. v. Duke Energy Progress Inc. and U.S. v. Duke Energy Carolina, LLC, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

Duke Energy Corp. was fined $14.4 million in 2015 for coal ash violations at its H.F. Lee, Cape Fear and Asheville steam electric plants. The violations related to Duke Energy’s failure to properly maintain coal ash impoundments and unpermitted discharges.

The plea agreement required Duke Energy to make a community service payment of $10.5 million to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, “to fund environmental projects, studies, and initiatives designed to benefit, preserve, and restore the riparian environment and ecosystems of North Carolina and Virginia affected by the Defendant’s conduct …”

The plea agreement also required Duke Energy to pay $5 million for wetlands mitigation in the Cape Fear, Neuse, Roanoke and six other river basins in North Carolina.

Audubon North Carolina said funding for the Shellbed Island project came through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s North Carolina and Virginia Rivers and Waters Program.

President Trump signed an order Tuesday to expand a moratorium on offshore drilling off Florida’s Gulf Coast.

The order takes the potential environmental threat off the table for 10 years for the Atlantic coasts of Florida, Georgia and South Carolina.

Trump announced the action during an event in Jupiter, Florida.

In a statement released Tuesday, the White House said Trump had made promoting a clean and healthy environment a top priority.

“Every day of my presidency, we will fight for a cleaner environment and a better quality of life for every one of our great citizens,” Trump said in the statement.

Trump during his tenure has worked to reverse numerous environmental protections, including restrictions on offshore drilling put in place during the Obama administration. In 2018, Trump announced plans to open nearly all federal waters to offshore drilling in his draft five-year program for oil and gas development on the Outer Continental Shelf. He later granted Florida an exemption from that program after objections from Florida’s Republican Gov. Rick Scott.

Environmental advocates said it remained unclear what the president’s latest decision means for North Carolina and other East Coast states.

“This is not a reason to celebrate because oil spills don’t stop at state lines,” said Sierra Weaver, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. “As long as any part of the Atlantic coast is open to drilling, all Atlantic states are at risk. Keep the champagne corked until the entire Atlantic coast is protected.”

The SELC noted that oil from the Deepwater Horizon disaster reached five states.

The National Ocean Industries Association also responded Tuesday, saying American offshore oil and gas production benefits every American.

“American offshore production produces energy with a comparatively smaller footprint than other producing regions, occurs under the highest level of regulations and standards and does not give rise to issues of environmental justice,” NOIA President Erik Milito said in a statement. “Furthermore, daily experience in the Western and Central Gulf of Mexico shows how offshore production goes hand-in-hand with environmental stewardship, national defense and other industries, including fishing and tourism.

“Our preference should always be to produce homegrown American energy, instead of deferring future production to countries like Russia and Iran, which do not share American values. Limiting access to our offshore energy resources only shortchanges America and dulls our national outlook.”

MOREHEAD CITY – The N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission has begun a process to address user conflicts associated with shellfish leases.

During its meeting Thursday, the commission voted to start the rule-making process for proposed shellfish lease rules that officials said Monday would do the following:

• Increase setback requirements from developed shorelines for new shellfish leases.
• Limit the allowable number of corner markers for demarcating shellfish leases to simplify the polygon shapes.
• Set new criteria for shellfish lease stakes and signage to alleviate navigation concerns.
• Initiate a new shellfish leaseholder training program that emphasizes user conflict reduction strategies.

Public hearings for the proposed rules are to be announced later.

If adopted, the proposed rules will implement the first phase of a shellfish lease user conflict study, aimed at addressing user conflict issues, that was adopted by the commission in November, officials said. The study was mandated by the N.C. General Assembly in Session Law 2019-37, a law that included numerous provisions to increase support for the state’s shellfish aquaculture industry, which the commission noted had grown rapidly in recent years.

Additionally, the commission voted to ask the Division of Marine Fisheries to develop recommendations for limiting the total allowed acres of shellfish leases in different water bodies of the state, and to bring this guidance back to the commission in February.

Limiting the total acreage of shellfish leases for certain waterbodies was also a recommendation of the shellfish lease user conflict study. State law (G.S. 113-201) allows the commission to limit the number of acres in any area that may be granted for shellfish leases to assure the public that some waters will remain open and free from shellfish cultivation activities.

In other business, the commission voted to:

• Ask the Division of Marine Fisheries to study making the state’s nearshore ocean artificial reefs Special Management Zones, possibly limiting the allowable gear, and to bring recommendations to the commission in November.
• Approve the notice of text and associated fiscal analysis to begin the re-adoption of a number of other Marine Fisheries Commission rules under a state-mandated periodic review. Public hearings will be announced later.
• Approve updates to the bay scallop and kingfishes fishery management plans, containing no changes in management.
• Approve the draft five-year schedule for review of fishery management plans, which now goes for final approval by the Department of Environmental Quality secretary.
• Set the annual cap on the number of commercial fishing licenses available in the Eligibility Pool for the 2020-2021 fiscal year at 500.
• Reelect Doug Cross as vice chairman.

A Maryland couple’s ongoing challenge to North Carolina’s coastal regulatory authority, a case that a federal judge dismissed earlier this year, is pitting private property rights against decades of state coastal protections and reams of scientific studies on sea level rise and erosion.

The couple’s attorney says that information isn’t relevant to the federal appeals court case.

Michael and Cathy Zito of Timonium, Maryland, sued the state Coastal Resources Commission in 2019, alleging a taking of their property without just compensation. The CRC denied permits the couple had sought to rebuild a beachfront home destroyed by fire. The couple appealed after Judge James C. Dever III dismissed the case in March.

In late July, the Southern Environmental Law Center, representing the North Carolina Coastal Federation, filed with the 4^th Circuit Court of Appeals an amicus brief supporting the commission’s regulatory authority. The federation is publisher of Coastal Review Online and has for decades advised policymakers on barrier islands’ natural processes and advocated for public access to beaches.

“The Coastal Federation seeks to protect the Coastal Resources Commission’s long-standing authority to manage the oceanfront in order to protect the right of the public to have access to sandy beaches that aren’t being destroyed by seawalls and over shadowed by houses that are about to fall into the surf,” said Coastal Federation Executive Director Todd Miller. “If successful, this case would undermine the ability of the Commission to protect the existing rights of the public to use our oceanfront beaches. The need to regulate oceanfront development so that it does not destroy our beaches grows more urgent each decade as increases in extreme weather and sea level occur.”

The federation had sought to intervene in the original case but the judge in dismissing the case denied the federation’s motion as moot.

The Zitos had sought to rebuild on the original house’s footprint on East Seagull Drive in Nags Head, where erosion eats away about 6 feet of beach each year. The CRC denied permits for the couple’s planned new home because it would not meet oceanfront setback requirements. The standard setback line for the property is 180 feet from the first line of stable vegetation. The Zitos’ planned home was about 12 feet landward of the static vegetation line.

The Zitos claim the commission’s decision left them with “an empty and useless lot,” according to court documents.

A spokesperson for the CRC said that because the case was in active litigation, staff would not comment for this report.

The Zitos are represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, which characterizes the case as a fight against the state government’s “blurred lines on property rights” and a taking without just compensation.

“We sued in federal court because our primary claim is that the Commission has violated the Zitos’ federal constitutional rights. That claim is decided by federal law, not state law, and is thus appropriate for federal court adjudication,” J. David Breemer, senior attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, said in an email response to Coastal Review Online.

The foundation last week filed its response objecting to Southern Environmental Law Center’s addendum and a reply brief on the substance of the Zitos’ appeal.

Ramona H. McGee, a staff attorney with the law center, said the commission’s decision upholds North Carolina’s longstanding coastal protections and recognizes natural coastal processes.

“If there is anything to blame for a taking of property in this situation it is the Atlantic Ocean and natural processes. It is not an act by the Coastal Resources Commission,” McGee told Coastal Review Online last week. “Sea levels are rising, erosion is happening and those natural processes, naturally eat away at the coast and that’s what’s happened here. If this sort of takings lawsuit could go forward and be successful, it would undermine efforts on the part of responsible government agencies and others to protect natural areas and to prepare against continued erosion and the results of sea level rise,”

Although the Zitos did not object to the federation’s amicus brief, they filed a motion opposing as irrelevant an addendum that included all documents, legal decisions, study reports and scientific journal articles cited in the brief.

“The amicus material is not relevant because it has no bearing on the issue before the appellate court,” Breemer said. “The only issue is whether the commission is ‘immune’ from the Constitution’s requirement of just compensation for a taking. Submitting 500 pages of material that has nothing to do with that issue burdens the court and wastes everybody’s time.”

McGee, with SELC, countered that the material is highly relevant to the court’s decision.

“This really gets at how differently the Zitos view the case from the Coastal Federation and even the Coastal Resources Commission,” she said. “The Zitos’ takings claim has to be considered in the broader context of our state’s dynamic coastal processes and attendant coastal protections that have been around for decades. The Zitos instead are trying to frame their whole case as being really just this one private takings claim when, in reality, the whole point of our brief and these materials that we’ve offered to the court is to show that this case isn’t just about that one takings claim. This case has far-reaching ramifications.”

She said the Zitos are asking the court to “put on blinders to the broader context” and that the state’s entire coastal regulatory scheme would be “severely undermined” if the Zitos were to prevail.

A two-decade veteran of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has been selected to lead the agency.

Maj. Cameron “Cam” Ingram, who has been with the commission since 1997, will transition into his new role as executive director by Aug. 1, the commission announced Thursday.

“Last fall we began an extensive nationwide search for the agency’s executive director position,” said Monty Crump, the commission’s vice chairman and chair of the Executive Search Committee. “We were pleased with the process that resulted in 92 well-qualified applicants.”

Ingram previously served as the major of field operations for the agency’s Law Enforcement Division.

“Given Cam’s decades of experience in various leadership roles at the Wildlife Commission, I am confident he will continue to lead the agency in a positive direction,” said David Hoyle Jr., chairman of the agency’s 19-member governing board.

Ingram, 47, resides in Climax with his wife Renee and two daughters, Brynne and Brooke. A graduate of East Carolina University, he holds a Bachelor of Science in parks and recreation with a concentration in natural resource management.

“I am thankful for the opportunity to lead the agency to which I have dedicated my entire career,” said Ingram. “I look forward to leading the agency’s passionate staff who exhibit their dedication through their hard work conserving North Carolina’s fish and wildlife resources.”

As executive director, Ingram will oversee a statewide agency of six divisions, 650 permanent employees and an annual operating budget of approximately $89 million.

Agency operations include maintaining more than 2 million acres of public lands for hunting, fishing and other outdoor recreation; operating six fish hatcheries for stocking public waters; maintaining eight shooting ranges; providing hundreds of free boating access areas and publicly-accessible places to fish on more than 100 different bodies of water; operating three education centers; and offering free hunter education and recreational boating safety courses.

Ingram replaces Gordon Myers, who is retiring after serving as the agency’s director for nearly 12 years.

“I have had the pleasure of working closely with Cam over the past few years,” Myers said. “His smart, thoughtful and personable leadership, along with his many years of field and management experience, will serve the agency well into the future.”

This story is the second installment in a continuing series on climate change and the North Carolina coast that is part of the Pulitzer Center’s nationwide Connected Coastlines reporting initiative.

A series of record-breaking hurricanes over the past four years has led to changes in how coastal North Carolina residents and state and elected officials talk about climate change and sea level rise.

While the above terms aren’t always part of the discussion, the words “resilience” and “resiliency” have become widely used on both ends of the political spectrum, especially when talking about vulnerable infrastructure here on the North Carolina coast.

“Certainly, resiliency is something that is being talked about a lot more, and is factored into our conversations a lot more than it has in the past,” said Jerry Jennings, the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s engineer for the division that includes the Outer Banks.

From  2002 to 2012, the state spent about $100 million maintaining 120 miles of N.C. 12 between Corolla and Ocracoke. Since then, the costs have continued to climb.

“Over the last 10 years, we spent $75 million on maintenance and repairs of N.C. 12 from Oregon Inlet to Ocracoke Village,” Jennings said, referring to the most frequently storm-damaged stretch of the highway. He added that the amount did not include the $252 million Bonner Bridge replacement project, the second phase of which is still under construction.

Geologist Stan Riggs said the economics of continuing to develop dynamic coastal islands and support and protect that development is anything but resilient.

“The reality is, ‘resilience’ is not the right word there, ‘it’s get the hell out of the way,’” Riggs said. “The human population may be becoming more resilient to this, which I don’t agree with. We’re learning a lot more about it, and we’re learning how to be safer and we’re learning how to build stronger structures, but we are not dealing with a fundamental long-term problem.”

Riggs, who is 83, said he’s seen how the barrier islands have gone from mostly wilderness to a densely built-upon area as the population exploded.

“When I moved here, the Outer Banks was nothing but beach cottages. They were little, you know, one-, two-, three-room things, and we used beach buggies — the old cars, the old junkers that you fixed up,” Riggs said.

He said that at the time, the population along the Outer Banks was still limited to a few small villages.

“It’s a different ballgame today,” Riggs said. “And rather than backing off the beach, we’re building these mega-McMansions out there now and they essentially form a hardened shoreline. It’s a wall of buildings that represents a bulkhead — it’s a house bulkhead. And in order to keep the beach there, we’re now pumping sand on over 125 miles of our beaches every two-three-four years at an incredible economic cost. That’s not resiliency, in my opinion. That’s foolishness.”

The year-round population along the Outer Banks is somewhere around 67,000, but the number normally swells to the hundreds of thousands during the vacation season. All those people have places to go and many have property to protect.

Residents and visitors expect road crews to keep transportation passages clear and safe and drainage systems functioning. Mostly, there is public good will toward NCDOT here but less for the lawmakers in Raleigh who are blamed for underfunding its projects. Storm damage becomes more costly every year and now, with the agency’s budget stretched to the breaking point by the COVID-19 pandemic, many wonder whether the constant rebuilding and repairing is sustainable.

Ditches that run along state-maintained roads are also part of the department’s responsibility and drainage is an ongoing concern, especially in low-lying areas.

Along with flooding, there is growing awareness that septic tanks and wastewater treatment plants have become more vulnerable. During Hurricane Dorian in September 2019, flooding caused untreated sewage from plants in Manteo and Columbia to spill into waterways. But most of the homes and businesses in this part of North Carolina use septic tanks, which are more at risk of leaking during storms because of higher water tables.

Intense storms and flooding will continue to affect coastal North Carolina residents for the foreseeable future, according to a report released in March by North Carolina State University’s North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies. The report finds that temperatures warmer than historic norms, disruptive flooding, increasingly intense and frequent rainstorms and hurricanes are “virtually certain” in the next 80 years.

The report also found that the past four years had the largest number of heavy precipitation events on record for the state. The study’s authors said that increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were most likely causing much, if not all, of the observed changes.

On Ocracoke Island, residents continue to rebuild after Hurricane Dorian’s 7-foot surge flooded the village. Mickey Baker, co-owner of Mermaid’s Folly, a clothing shop on Ocracoke Island, said there’s little question what’s going on.

“Climate change is apparent. The icecaps from both poles are in our yard,” Baker said. “I’ve been here for 18 storms in 36 years, not counting nor’easters. We all survived. We all swam through front doors. We all lost pets in front of our eyes. The hard part was that we couldn’t stop what we were doing to help our friends. We were totally frustrated and worried. I got a text from a friend that read ‘in attic.’”

Other coastal residents say the problem is something else.

Christine Voss, an ecosystems ecologist and research associate at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Institute of Marine Sciences in Morehead City, noted that when real estate and other business interests along the coast became concerned that climate science might lead to regulatory change, that’s when the pushback began that led the North Carolina General Assembly to restrict the use of sea level rise forecasting in planning and policy.

“I think people acknowledged what was going on but wouldn’t always admit it,” Voss said.

Voss noted that hurricanes have happened throughout history and are not unique to climate change, but the frequency of flooding in areas along the coast is increasing. Voss’ research into how sea level rise affects coastal habitats often takes her to remote, low-lying areas such as Englehard in Hyde County on the west side of Pamlico Sound.

“There’s only really one place to stay in Englehard, the Englehard Hotel, and they kind of fancy themselves as a bed and breakfast, and in the morning, when you stay there you get a breakfast, and a lot of the town folk get together there and have breakfast. It’s kind of a little place to exchange some news,” Voss said. “We would go up to sample, usually on spring tide events because we were trying to trap fish in the marsh where there were higher water levels and to see how far into the marsh those various organisms would go and what size they were. And I remember coming up and just seeing indications of sea level rise and talking about it with some folks, and even though I had been acquainted with these folks for about a year, they were like, ‘Oh, you don’t know what you’re talking about. There’s no such thing as sea level rise or climate change.’”

Voss said that while discussing the changes using those terms created a sharp division, their observations were similar.

“Two weeks later, when I went back and — I believe it was in the fall — and they were talking about, ‘You know, there’s still standing water in the parking lot,’ or ‘We’re seeing marsh grass growing in the ditches,’ and somebody else was saying what else he’d seen, like “Yeah, this area just hasn’t drained and it’s killing the grass,’ and somebody else was complaining about salt on the edge of their field. Somebody else was talking about their well water wasn’t as good anymore.

“We could discuss all these different things that are impacts of, in this case, mostly sea level rise, and as long as it wasn’t labeled as climate change, they were OK, they would acknowledge it and they would tell me about it. But two weeks earlier when I had called it climate change, there was an automatic response saying ‘no.’”

Voss said the experience was a lesson in how to communicate with the public on climate science. She also learned to ask residents how they explained the changes they were seeing, such as how privately owned land that was taxable by the county was turning into marshland.

“I asked, ‘how do you explain that?’ And they said, ‘Oh, that was the earthquake of — I’m not sure what year was, I’m thinking was around 1896 — and I looked it up to be sure, and apparently there was indeed a big earthquake, I think it was based in South Carolina. They said that overnight, the land dropped about 18 inches in that part of the county.”

Voss said the earthquake probably did cause a significant shift or decrease in elevation there.

“And it taught me that it’s important, as scientists, for us to realize that there are other things that may happen in an area, or there are ways that people would justify this to themselves. And it doesn’t explain everything, but it was interesting because I think people do look for answers when there’s not a clear answer.”

Riggs said he’s has given up on trying to change minds about the threats to the Outer Banks. He’s instead turned his attention across the Albemarle and Pamlico sounds, and created a nonprofit group to help economically distressed communities along the “inner banks” capitalize on the region’s natural resources and cultural history in ways that are sustainable.

“I can honestly say, it varies from county to county because of the leadership in those counties, but I am working with some counties there and they get it. They get it, and they’re working like crazy to develop a sort of a new economy involving ecotourism sustainably that’s built around the natural waters,” Riggs said.

Riggs said that rather than trying to bring in industry that wouldn’t likely come anyway, the group is working to change the way business is done, to be more adaptive as sea level starts to impact more and more and as storms affect more and more communities.

“Ocracoke was wiped out bad enough that they’re going to come back a little better off for doing it,” he said, adding that villagers who are there are raising their houses and adapting, but the island will probably never become much like other of North Carolina’s barrier islands.

“One of the nice things about Ocracoke was that they didn’t have all the franchises there, because they couldn’t make enough money and it wasn’t guaranteed. Well now, this will make sure that there won’t be a McDonald’s or whatever else, and what’s there, it has to live within that system.

“The old timers that live there, they’ll be there. They’re going to survive. Ultimately,” Riggs said.

Voss said it’s also up to young people to bring the change.

“I hope they realize that they do have the power to affect change in the way we do things, the way we look at things. For their sake, I hope that all of us, young and old, will be considerate, be less greedy and be open to what we need to do to adapt to our changing climate. Yes, I hope the younger generation comes through. We’re counting on them.”

Catherine Kozak and Dylan Ray contributed to this report.

With the Atlantic hurricane season set to begin June 1, Coastal Review Online is examining how attitudes toward climate science in eastern North Carolina have changed during the past decade. This story is the first in a special series that is part of the Pulitzer Center’s nationwide Connected Coastlines reporting initiative. For more information, go to pulitzercenter.org/connected-coastlines.

Start a discussion of climate change, sea level rise and the associated effects with residents of the North Carolina coast and reactions and responses will be mixed, but according to polling, attitudes and perceptions here have shifted over the past 10 years.

A decade ago in North Carolina, a panel of scientists that advises the state Coastal Resources Commission released a report that found sea levels could rise up to 39 inches by 2100. The report, to be updated every five years, was intended to guide North Carolina’s planners and policy makers. The panel’s findings however, created a backlash and prompted the North Carolina General Assembly to pass a law restricting the adoption of any rule, ordinance, policy or planning guideline that defined sea level or a rate of sea-level rise in coastal counties.

“The legislature threw out our 2010 report. They said it’s not acceptable,” Stanley Riggs, a retired coastal geologist at East Carolina University and a founding member of the science panel, recalled in an interview last week.

When it came time for the panel to do its five-year update, the commission restricted the science panel in how far out its projections could go. A 30-year outlook, based on the life of a typical home mortgage, was the imposed limit. Riggs said that despite the limits, the science behind the report didn’t change.

“When we did the 2015 report, it came out exactly the same, except we knew the numbers even better, because a lot more people had been working on it. What the legislature and what the public never understood was, it was the same damn report,” Riggs said.

Now, as the science panel works on its 2020 report, the Coastal Resources Commission, which has new members now, has removed the previous restrictions, with 30 years now set as the minimum outlook going forward.

Christine Voss, an ecosystems ecologist and research associate at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Institute of Marine Sciences in Morehead City, said the reaction to the initial report was the result of a push by real estate and other business interests to discredit the findings.

“I think that when folks felt like their livelihoods could possibly be threatened by acknowledging sea level rise and climate change, I think that there was a public effort of disinformation, quite frankly,” Voss said.

She said that the science panel’s report didn’t necessarily influence what the public thought, but the reaction to it changed the messaging, right down to materials displayed in state museums and aquariums.

“I found it very interesting that there was actually a push to administratively try to not even acknowledge what was happening,” Voss said.

Riggs compared the reaction to the report to the current coronavirus pandemic.

“This divided population, that half is willing to accept the science and believe the science and the other half doesn’t want anything to do with the science, it’s exactly the same issue because what they’re doing is projecting how this system is going to work, and people don’t want to hear that. And it’s an anti-science attitude that goes way beyond sea level rise,” Riggs said. “We’re seeing the same story play out with respect to the coronavirus, and with time, if it gets bad enough, more and more people may come around to accepting, but it doesn’t mean they’re glued to the science.”

According to scientists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the average global change in temperatures over land and ocean surfaces for 2019 was the second highest since recordkeeping began in 1880.

Here on the North Carolina coast, the effects are visible and often disruptive, although some residents attribute what they say they’ve seen to factors other than a changing climate influenced by human behavior. Still, the past few years, with a series of storms that include hurricanes Matthew in 2016, Florence in 2018 and Dorian in 2019, have sharpened the focus for many and possibly changed minds.

“I think that probably one of the biggest things that has changed attitudes along the North Carolina coast regarding climate change was really Hurricane Florence. I think that was a big turning point,” Voss said.

Voss, who studies the environmental changes occurring on the North Carolina coast, said it’s important to realize that for millennia, coastal areas have been dynamic places. She said signs of change such as frequent flash flooding, heavy bouts of rain and rising groundwater elevation, along with saltwater encroaching farther landward, fouling wells, killing forests and changing the landscape in other ways, are compounding with time.

Saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers, the main drinking water supply for much of eastern North Carolina, is potentially a significant result of sea level rise that’s happening now, Voss said. She said the changes are visible when using the historical images feature of Google Earth, which can delineate where saltwater intrusion has affected farm fields.

“If you go up Route 70 (near Beaufort), just south of East Carteret High School, in those areas it’s pretty darn evident,” she said. “In other areas Down East, you can see where the marsh has just kind of encroached, you can see the ghost forests. You can see where that line of trees versus marsh has changed.”

“Ghost forests,” or stands of dead trees, are clearly visible from along the Cape Fear River near Wilmington on the southern North Carolina coast up to the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge on the northern coast. The refuge is a low-lying area, so the effects of sea level rise have been especially dramatic – formerly marshy areas are now open water and once-dry land is now marsh.

On North Carolina’s barrier islands, and on the mainland in coastal Carteret, Pamlico, Hyde, Dare, Currituck and Tyrrell counties, anywhere from a quarter to three-quarters of the land is at sea level, Riggs explained. Here, adaptation options are limited.

“We’re not going to engineer our way out of that,” he said. “We can’t do what the Dutch have done and build dikes around 10,000 miles of estuarine shoreline. You know, we can build it around Swan Quarter. But what do you do with Columbia, Engelhard and all the rest of the towns that are essentially 1-foot above sea level, 2 feet above sea level? They have no place to go.”

Voss said the politicization of science creates the biggest obstacle to the public’s understanding of the changes they are seeing.

“I think people are realizing that, yes, those things that we were told 30 years ago, 20 years ago that we would be seeing, we’re seeing it,” Voss said. “I think we’re gradually starting to realize that climate change isn’t something we’re thinking about as far as the future, but that the climate is changing now and we’re living in it. I think that is hard for people.”

Riggs agreed. He compared the environmental changes to what’s happening with COVID-19.

“It’s just like counting deaths right now. Now that we’ve got the 90,000 deaths in this country, people are starting to realize that something’s really going on,” he said.

But understanding is not the same as dealing with the fundamental, long-term problem, Riggs said.

The state’s worst natural disaster

Hurricane Florence, a deadly Category 1 storm that made landfall near Wrightsville Beach early in the morning of Sept. 14, 2018, was the state’s worst natural disaster, totaling somewhere around $22 billion in property damage. Rainfall and flooding levels across eastern North Carolina were unprecedented because of the slow-moving storm, and not just on the immediate coast.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, a state record rainfall total of 35.93 inches was set in Elizabethtown in Bladen County, breaking the previous record for rainfall from a tropical system of 24.06 inches, a four-day deluge measured during Hurricane Floyd in 1999 in Southport, in coastal Brunswick County. Florence followed another record-breaking storm: Hurricane Matthew in 2016 also made landfall in southeastern North Carolina as a Category 1 storm, was blamed for 25 deaths in North Carolina and caused catastrophic flooding across the coastal and central parts of the state.

USGS hydrologist Toby Feaster said in December 2018 that record flooding during Florence was measured by stream gauges in the state that had decades of data. Feaster led a study that showed 45 stream gauges in North Carolina and four in South Carolina recorded flows that ranked among the top five on record. There was more than 70 years of historical data at some sites with record-breaking flooding. Peak stream levels at nine locations indicated that Florence was a greater than a 500-year flood event.

“Since several of the (sites) we analyzed had more than 30 years of historical data associated with them, it was interesting that a majority of the number one and two records were from back-to-back flooding events,” Feaster said at the time, referring to Matthew and Florence.

For many along the North Carolina coast, the hurricanes of the past few years were the first natural disasters they had experienced. This is especially true for young people, including Daniel Van Skiver of Brunswick County on North Carolina’s southern coast. Van Skiver is one of several Brunswick Early College High School students who submitted essays on their experiences for this series.

“Florence left me in a state of helplessness and, being one of the many people in Brunswick County with financial problems, there was no way out,” Van Skiver writes. “My home was left in an almost unlivable state, my bed was soaked through from a hole in my bedroom roof, and the problem did not stop witha the passing of the hurricane. The water damage brought infestations of bugs and rotted away other parts of the house that had been untouched. If I had not been able to stay with my brother, I would have most likely been out on the streets, a living arrangement that would last the next seven months as me and my dad looked for a house.”

Lindsey Clark, another student at the Brunswick County school, also writes of her family’s experience with Florence, which flooded her home.

“It has almost been a year and a half since it has happened and we still feel the effects of it today,” Clark writes. “It hurt each part of the family differently and was so heartbreaking. We lost all of our old family photos, clothes and our home. It was difficult to build back up again and to try to get back on our feet. We felt stuck and felt like we had nowhere to go and did not know where to turn. You really do not realize how much you have until it is taken away from you.”

Not only young people, others in coastal communities are seeing unprecedented floods during storms.

In a recently compiled series of recordings by the Duke University Marine Laboratory in Beaufort and the Core Sound Waterfowl Museum & Heritage Center on Harkers Island, a partner with Coastal Review Online in this reporting project, Louie Piner of the unincorporated Carteret County community of Davis said Florence was unlike any storm he’d seen. Folks in the low-lying Down East part of the coastal county are accustomed to weathering storms.

“Well, I’ve been through quite a few hurricanes. I’ve lived in Davis all my life. And we’ve had quite a few. But Florence is the only one that the house I live in has ever had water in it. The house was built in 1946. And we’ve seen a lot of storms, but it has never had water in it until hurricane Florence,” Piner said.

A poll conducted by Elon University in October 2018 sought to gauge how Hurricane Florence affected North Carolina voters and how they viewed threats to coastal communities and policy questions related to climate change. The poll found that opinions had shifted since the university conducted a similar poll in 2017. The poll found that 51.5% of North Carolinians believed that climate change is very likely to have negative effects on coastal communities, with 31% saying it is somewhat likely.

That’s compared to 45% who said the negative impacts were very likely and 28% who said they were somewhat likely in the 2017 poll. Pollsters said the shift appeared to be driven by attitude changes held by Republican voters.

The 2018  poll also found that nearly 54% believed hurricanes were becoming more severe and that 62% believed that climate science should be incorporated into local government planning and ordinances.

A year later, Dorian

Almost exactly a year after Hurricane Florence, another Category 1 hurricane made landfall on the North Carolina coast. Again, the wind-speed category was no indication of the damage to come.

Hurricane Dorian flooded the village on Ocracoke Island Sept. 6, 2019, ultimately resulting in the destruction of 47 structures, county officials said earlier this month. The number caught even villagers by surprise, Peter Vankevich, copublisher of the Ocracoke Observer, another partner in this series, said recently.

“The Ocracoke Preservation Society’s museum next to the big (National Park Service) parking lot had never been flooded,” Vankevich noted in October 2019. “’If that building ever gets flooded, this island will be in big trouble,’ someone once remarked.”

The museum suffered extensive flood damage with 5 inches of water inside.

About 400 of the island’s roughly 1,000 residents were displaced and nearly every structure on the island was damaged when the storm surge reached 7.4 feet at 8:30 a.m. Sept. 6, 2019. Ocracoke’s storm surge during Hurricane Matthew was 4.7 feet.

Mike Riccitiello, a structure specialist with the North Carolina Emergency Task Force, was part of six crews on the island after the storm to document structural damage, Connie Leinbach, the other co-publisher of the Ocracoke Observer reported.

“One gentleman I talked to has lived on the island 65 years and said he’d never seen storm surge this bad,” Riccitiello said at the time.

Jade Lopez is a co-owner of Taqueria Suazos on Ocracoke Island. She said that when Dorian came through, her family had to be rescued.

Doug Eifert, co-owner of Dajio Restaurant, on Ocracoke Island also suffered significant damage at his business. He said nobody expected the storm to be so bad.

Charles Temple, an English teacher at Ocracoke School, described Hurricane Matthew as the worst storm to hit Ocracoke since the 1944 Great Atlantic hurricane, and Dorian’s floodwaters in the village reached 18 inches higher. He called the storm’s devastation “a gut shot.”

Despite the extensive damage, federal officials determined that villagers didn’t qualify for individual assistance, the form of disaster aid that provides financial help and services for people to do home repairs and cover costs of temporary housing, clothing and medical needs.

Ocracoke’s economy is tourism. Its restaurants, small shops and accommodations largely remain closed since Dorian. The storm’s damage led officials to keep the island closed to all but residents for more than two months after the storm. Now, the COVID-19 pandemic has compounded villagers’ troubles as they try to rebuild and recover from Dorian.

For those who can reopen, many are apprehensive, and some are choosing to remain closed as summer vacation season begins, Vankevich said.

“First of all, people are going to be coming to a different Ocracoke,” Vankevich said, adding that the many businesses wouldn’t be open, either because of concerns about the coronavirus or because they were damaged or destroyed by Dorian.

“All these kind of wonderful landmarks that have people coming here are not going to be there,” Vankevich said.

Jennifer Allen and Dylan Ray contributed to this report.

Next in the series: Communicating, understanding and responding

This story has been updated to include comments from the state Division of Coastal Management.

A federal judge has dismissed a Maryland couple’s legal fight against North Carolina regulators to replace a house destroyed by fire on the same site, one of the most rapidly eroding stretches of beach on the Outer Banks.

Coastal advocates and others say the decision upholds North Carolina’s doctrine that beaches are in the public trust and reinforces the state’s coastal management strategy and push for resilience in the face of climate change, but the couple’s attorney has vowed to continue the challenge.

Michael and Cathy Zito of Timonium, Maryland, sued the state Coastal Resources Commission in March 2019 in federal court, alleging a taking of their property on East Seagull Drive in Nags Head without just compensation. The commission had backed a local permitting officer’s denial of permits because their planned construction was closer than the minimum allowable distance from the encroaching ocean.

U.S. District Court Judge James C. Dever III on Friday dismissed the Zitos’ complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The judge said precedent required that the court hold that the 11th Amendment bars the Zitos’ Fifth Amendment takings claim. “If the Zitos are to obtain relief on this claim, they first must get such relief from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit sitting en banc (in full court) or from the United States Supreme Court,” according to the judge’s order.

The CRC in December 2018 denied the Zitos’ request for a variance from, or reversal of, a town permitting officer’s denial of a permit under the state’s Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA, that would have allowed the couple to rebuild their vacation cottage on the lot they had owned since 2008. The original home built in 1982 on a 32- by 28-foot footprint was destroyed by an electrical fire in 2016.

The town’s permitting officer denied permits because the replacement house planned for the same footprint as the two-story, piling-supported original wouldn’t meet state coastal setback requirements. The state said that denying permits was necessary because allowing the Zitos to rebuild their home “would constitute inappropriately sited development.”

The judge’s dismissal does not affect the couple’s ability to assert a takings claim in state court, Dever said in his order.

“The Zitos are disappointed but will promptly appeal,” the couple’s attorney, J. David Breemer of the nonprofit Pacific Legal Foundation said in response to a query from Coastal Review Online.

But because the order ultimately rested on the matter of jurisdiction, and because appealing a case is different than taking it to state court, it’s unclear what that could mean, said Sierra Weaver, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center in Chapel Hill and leader of the law center’s Coast and Wetlands Program.

“What’s important here is that the court says the Zitos cannot skip the normal process of going to state court to address those concerns,” Weaver said Monday.

She said the question remains as to whether the Zitos will take the case to North Carolina’s courts. Weaver said the Zitos took the federal court approach was because “North Carolina state law is very protective of these types of regulations to protect the coastal environment and the dynamic nature of the coast.”

The planned construction required a North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA, Minor Permit. CAMA rules and regulations include setback requirements for oceanfront development within the Ocean Erodible Area of Environmental Concern, an area so designated based on a combination of annual erosion rates, the location of the first stable, natural vegetation line and the size of the building.

For CAMA permits, the coastal governments at the local level are the initial decisionmakers. Applicants can seek a variance from the Coastal Resources Commission if their initial permit request is denied. That’s what happened with the Zitos’ request.

The official erosion rate at the Zitos’ property is 6 feet per year. Regulators multiply the erosion rate by 30, as required by CAMA, as based the term of many home mortgages, resulting in a standard setback line of 180 feet from the first line of stable vegetation. The Zitos’ planned home was set back only about 12 feet landward of the static vegetation line, prompting the denials at the local, and then state levels.

East Seagull Drive, near the southern town limits of Nags Head, has been battered by the ocean for years. The section of street the Zitos’ house formerly faced no longer exists, having been washed away years ago along with homes on the ocean side of it. Homes that remain are barely accessible. The area was the focus of a long-fought legal battle over homes that were destroyed or damaged during a coastal storm in 2009.

Weaver said there are other similar cases making their way through the courts, but erosion is not the same as the state taking someone’s property.

“That is really what the Zitos are up against here,” Weaver said. “What they’re up against here is erosion.”

Weaver said that means that, for now, the Coastal Resources Commission’s authority remains intact, and the longstanding regulations intended to protect property, access to beaches and coastal resources “are standing strong” and important.

“These regulations and issues have been really important to state of North Carolina for decades, but they are even more important in the face of climate change,” she said.

The law center had represented the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review Online, advocates for sound coastal management and had sought to intervene in the case on behalf of the commission, a move the Zitos’ had opposed. In his order, Judge Dever denied the federation’s motion as moot.

Federation Executive Director Todd Miller said the federation still has a strong interest in the case and in coastal protection more generally.

“Having this case dismissed by the federal court is good news for all of us who love to go to the beaches. It allows the state to continue to enforce setback requirements for buildings along our oceanfront so that the public’s right to use the beach is protected for generations to come,” Miller said.

Christy Simmons, public information officer with the state Division of Coastal Management, responded Wednesday to Coastal Review Online’s request earlier this week for comment. She addressed the Zitos’ claim that the commission’s action was in violation of the Constitution.

Simmons explained that the commission had moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction on three grounds: First, the 11^th Amendment bars the Zitos from asserting their federal takings claim in federal court since they could have brought a takings claim in state court. Second, and relatedly, the 11^th Amendment provides the commission with 11^th Amendment immunity in federal court because it is an “arm of the state.” Third, Congress has not abrogated, or revoked, the commission’s 11^th Amendment immunity, and the commission had not waived it.

“In granting the motion to dismiss, the US District Court explained that it cannot ignore binding Fourth Circuit precedent and agreed with the Commission that the Fourth Circuit has held that ”the Eleventh Amendment bars Fifth Amendment taking claims against States in federal court where the State’s courts remain open to adjudicate such claims,” according to the division’s statement.

“The Commission is pleased its motion was granted. However, we expect this decision will be appealed and do not have any further comments regarding the litigation.”

North Carolina can expect large changes in climate by the end of the century, much larger than any time in the state’s history, and it’s very likely that temperatures here will increase substantially during all seasons unless the global increase in heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere is stopped.

Temperatures warmer than historic norms, disruptive flooding from rising seas, increasingly intense and frequent rainstorms and more and more intense hurricanes are “virtually certain” in the next 80 years.

That’s according to an independent, peer-reviewed report released Wednesday by North Carolina State University’s North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, or NCICS. As a result of hotter temperatures and increased humidity, the state can face public health risks, more frequent and more intense heavy rains from hurricanes and other weather systems, increased flooding in coastal and low-lying areas and severe droughts that are more intense and that will increase the risk of wildfires.

“Increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are most likely causing much, if not all, of the warming that we have observed,” said David R. Easterling, one of the report’s 15 authors, during a press conference Wednesday.

The institute is a multidisciplinary team of experts collaborating in climate and scientific research. The report was assembled, reviewed and revised over the course of eight months beginning in July 2019 and was prepared in response to a request from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality as part of the state’s response to Gov. Roy Cooper’s 2018 Executive Order 80.

While there were no real surprises in the report, which looks at observed and projected climate change in North Carolina and whose findings are consistent with the U.S. National Climate Assessment, it brings the science to the state level and highlights the specific challenges ahead for North Carolina.

The researchers said 2009-2018 was the warmest 10-year period on record in North Carolina.

“It’s about a half degree warmer than the warmest decade in the 20th century, the 1930s, the Dust Bowl era,” Easterling said, adding that as the report was being finalized, 2019 turned out to be the warmest year on record for North Carolina and the second warmest globally.

Also, the past four years saw the largest number of heavy precipitation events on record for the state.

So what does it all mean for folks in coastal North Carolina?

The researchers said government officials should take the report into consideration when planning for new infrastructure, such as roads that will have to be designed to different standards to withstand the climactic changes. Individuals can also do their part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and concentrations.

State Climatologist Kathie Dello, also an author of the report, suggested that North Carolina residents should talk about the report with their friends, families and neighbors.

“There are so many folks who don’t think about climate all day like we do on the panel, and I’ve heard a number of times from folks, ‘This is the first time someone’s talked to me about climate change or projections or what I should expect in my town.’ So, have the conversation. I think it’s really effective and people trust you as a messenger because they know you, they like you and trust you about other things,” Dello said.

“There are so many folks who don’t think about climate all day like we do on the panel, and I’ve heard a number of times from folks, ‘This is the first time someone’s talked to me about climate change or projections or what I should expect in my town.’ So, have the conversation.”

Kathie Dello, State Climatologist

Reide Corbett, director at the Coastal Studies Institute, dean of Integrated Coastal Programs for East Carolina University, and another author of the report, said coastal residents should be thinking about more sustainable growth, not just after disasters such as Hurricane Dorian’s flooding on Ocracoke Island, but also as high-tide, or “sunny day” flooding becomes more and more an everyday occurrence.

“That’s something that, locally, many of the communities need to start thinking about, preparing for and responding to likely after an event,” he said. “I think Ocracoke is a good example where, as they’re rebuilding, they’re considering the storm that they just had and rebuilding to new standards, not rebuilding to what it was in the past.”

Different responses may be necessary along the North Carolina coast, depending on where a community lies.

Sea level is rising 1.8 inches per decade at Duck on the northern Outer Banks, but only at a rate of 0.9 inches per decade at Wilmington on the southern coast because land along the northern coast is settling or subsiding more rapidly.

Also, the southern coast of North Carolina experiences more tropical storms and stronger hurricanes than the northern part of the state does, said Rick Luettich, director of the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences in Morehead City and a report author.

“That trend in and of itself will certainly be sustained,” he said, adding that as global mean sea level rise accelerates, the differences will be increasingly less obvious.

“As sea level rise starts going up faster and faster, that difference will become smaller and smaller,” Luettich said.

While the latest report deals mainly with the science of climate change, a risk assessment and resiliency plan are under review. Subsequent reports will deal with the consequences, such as the effects on agriculture, fisheries and other natural and economic resources and how to address those issues.

The authors agreed that examining the challenges specific to the state is an important step.

“The idea that science is being incorporated into policy in North Carolina is a huge step forward, particularly from a sea level and inundation perspective,” Corbett said. “I’m very pleased with the direction that we’re going and this report is the first step for North Carolina and really using it in developing science-based policy.”

Learn more

• Read a “plain language” summary
• Read the full report

MOREHEAD CITY – Seawater from Bogue Sound runs through pipes and a filtration system, making its way up into an elevated storage tank before being circulated at a rate of up to 350,000 gallons per day throughout the newly renovated and specialized laboratories at the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences.

“And as a result, we’re one of the few facilities, certainly the only facility at Carolina, that has running seawater and can maintain medium-sized to large-sized extended studies with fisheries and animals,” Rick Luettich, the institute’s director for the past 16 years, said last week during a ribbon cutting and tour of the refurbished labs.

But the saltwater environment that makes possible the numerous types of coastal research here also creates maintenance challenges that had taken a toll on the 4,100-square-foot facility built in the early 1990s, Luettich explained March 4 to about 50 invited UNC alums and dignitaries. Guests included UNC Vice Chancellor for Research Terry Magnuson, Rep. Pat McElraft, representatives for Gov. Roy Cooper and Congressman Greg Murphy, R-N.C., and Beaufort Mayor Rett Newton.

Magnuson, speaking during the event, noted that the institute is the university’s sole field site dedicated to marine science research and the coastal ecosystem since 1947, when a permanent campus was built.

“And why would we build it here? Because obviously we do things here that we could never do up in Chapel Hill. So, it is the ideal place to study ecology and conservation, restoration of cultural resources and developing and applying new technologies,” he said.

“It is the ideal place to study ecology and conservation, restoration of cultural resources and developing and applying new technologies.”

Terry Magnuson, Vice Chancellor for Research, University of North Carolina

The institute’s history here goes back much further. UNC started having classes and programs in Carteret County in 1894, but the site’s value really started becoming clear once UNC established a more permanent presence in Morehead City.

“In the 1950s, we did a lot of work in — and really we were founded to help the state work and develop commercial fishing,” Luettich said. “In the 1950s, research done here at the lab led to the discovery of the brown shrimp industry, which is a major shrimping industry for our state and in fact in the Southeast.”

Luettich said that in the 1960s, the institute expanded to a broader marine science program and, in the following decade, launched what has become a well-known shark research program.

“We have one of the longest data sets that chronicle actually the crash of the apex predators, the large shark species that are off our coast, in the late 20th century and their rebound in the early 21st century, largely due to management actions that we helped discover and helped promote in the ’80s and ’90s,” Luettich said.

Distinguished Professor Emeritus Charles “Pete” Peterson conducted research here that helped boost the state’s scallop industry, Luettich said, and Kenan Distinguished Professor Hans Paerl’s work examining algal blooms and their relationship to dead zones and fish kills in the Neuse River estuary and the Albemarle and Pamlico sounds in recent decades has focused much of the institute’s fisheries work on water quality and coastal hazards.

Magnuson, in his remarks, called the lab a training ground for students to learn to be creative and help the university and the state advance fisheries science, water quality, ecosystems, coastal resilience and human health.

“And it’s very important because it provides expertise to agencies across the state, also to industry, and it helps to inform public policy,” he said.

Magnuson said the renovated facilities would also help expand what faculty and trainees can do here and attract researchers from other institutions.

Collaboration with other universities is already happening here. The single-story building features six labs on the sound side and four on the side that faces Arendell Street. Eight of the labs are reserved for UNC’s use and the other two are for researchers from N.C. State University, including Dr. Craig Harms, professor in NCSU’s Department of Clinical Sciences.

The $795,000 renovation brings the institute’s 10 wet labs up to the latest standards in terms of safety, longevity, accessibility and marine animal welfare. Money for the upgrade came from the UNC Chapel Hill Division of Comparative Medicine, formerly known as the Division of Animal Laboratory Medicine.

Floors that could previously pose a hazard when wet have been replaced with a grate system that allows spills to safely drain away. Lab spaces are now capable of being entirely hosed down as needed or reconfigured to allow for flexibility, different experiments and to meet different researchers’ various needs.

Features prone to rapid decay in the moist, salty air have been replaced with new equipment made of specialized materials designed to better resist corrosion.

The facility has been brought up to the latest Americans with Disabilities Act standards with wheelchair accessibility possible in all parts of the lab.

And marine life studied here are cared for under the semiannual review of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, a group of veterinarians, scientists, ethicists and others that is responsible for oversight of the proper care and use of laboratory animals.

“This really has brought our wet lab facilities up to par with that of the state aquarium system’s in keeping animals in top-notch conditions,” Kerry Irish, who handles communications and outreach for the institute, told Coastal Review Online Monday.

Irish described the work done at the institute as applied science with tangible benefits for the state.

“We’re doing stuff here that yields real results for the people who live at the coast,” she said, adding that students at the institute are regularly recognized for their contributions to the state’s fisheries and ecosystems management in ways that improve coastal residents’ lives.

“The majority of work we do here at the coast pays dividends back to the people who live here,” she said. “The new facility helps us do work better and we, as scientists, are part of the community.”

Because of the nature of the work that happens in the building, there’s a lot of use, Irish said.

“Three decades of hard use on the facility really took its toll — it was mucky, dirty, salty and corrosive. It had given us good use, but it was time to fix it up.”

A rodent in Pennsylvania recently predicted an early spring, and science appears to support Punxsutawney Phil’s latest forecast.

Along much of the North Carolina coast and in other parts of the Southeast, signs of spring may be appearing this year earlier than the long-term average, or climate normal. Here in eastern North Carolina, spring is arriving about two to three weeks earlier, and in some parts of the state almost four weeks earlier than the long-term average.

“Buds are starting to break at this time, almost a month ahead of schedule in some locations,” Theresa Crimmins, assistant director of the USA National Phenology Network, or USA-NPN, in Tucson, Arizona, told Coastal Review Online Monday.

Phenology studies the timing of seasonal plant and animal life cycles, such as when plants flower, fruits ripen, migratory birds begin their flights and insects hatch.

USA-NPN was established in 2007 with funding from a five-year National Science Foundation grant. The U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Arizona set up a national office that coordinates with scientists, agencies, educators and others to share phenological data.

Using mathematical models that incorporate historical climate data from between 1981 and 2010 — a baseline used as the climate normal or long-term average – along with a network of lilac and dogwood trackers and real-time National Weather Service temperature analysis, USA-NPN creates “synthetic measures” of changes to track the appearance of the first leaves on early spring shrubs and other plants across the country.

“We use that period (1981 to 2010) because it’s the climate normal period, which is always a rolling window of the most recent, complete three decades,” Crimmins said, adding that the window will shift next year to 1991 to 2020.

The resulting measures of spring’s onset are the First Leaf Index, which is the “leaf out” of lilacs and honeysuckles, and the First Bloom Index, which is based on when those two plants begin to flower.

By this measure, how early is spring in coastal North Carolina?

“It looks like anywhere from 11 to 12 days up to 24 to 28 days,” Crimmins said.

Lilacs don’t grow on the North Carolina coast but there are other indicators.

“We do have honeysuckle, but I’m not sure if it’s leafed out,” said Shawn Banks, director of the Morehead City-based Carteret County Cooperative Extension. “This is the earliest I’ve seen the Bradford pears blooming and the loropetalums. A lot of things are blooming with the warm weather we’ve had the past week and a half.”

January here was also warm. Despite reports of snow flurries Jan. 20 on the Outer Banks, some of the coldest air of the season, the average temperatures last month were 6 to nearly 8 degrees warmer than normal on the coast, according to a monthly climate review prepared by the National Weather Service’s Newport/Morehead City office.

Hatteras saw an average high of 60.1 degrees, compared to a normal high of 52.2, and Plymouth saw an average high of 61.1 degrees, compared to a normal high of 53.2. Beaufort averaged 7.2 degrees warmer than the normal of 53.3.

Average low temperatures were also well above normal. Williamston’s average low of 38.6 was 8.3 degrees warmer than normal and Bayboro’s average low of 40.8 was 7.9 degrees warmer than normal.

Extremely warm days were measured in New Bern on Jan. 3 when it reached 82 degrees and Bayboro Jan. 4 when it hit 79.

Though it takes more than a warm day or two here and there, the accumulation of early season warmth is a major factor in how early plants leaf out and is used in the USA-NPN’s predictions.

“In most of the temperate parts of the country, what activates plant activity in the spring is the presence of warmth,” Crimmins said. “One of the ways that’s represented mathematically is the daily average temperatures starting Jan. 1.”

Crimmins and Michael Crimmins, a specialist in climate science and professor of environmental science and geography at the University of Arizona, published research last year that, along with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Prediction Center, predicts plant and animal activity will be ahead of schedule in the Southeast and other parts of the country.

“Not a single warm day but a sequence of warmish temperatures for an extended period of time, it is that amount of warmth that can activate cascades of hormones in plants,” Theresa Crimmins said. “Not all plants pay attention to the same cues, but some are more excited to respond.”

Those plants that do respond are most at risk during a subsequent frost but leafing out early can give plants a leg up in terms of being the first to access nutrients in the soil and avoid being crowded out or shaded by other plants, she said.

“It’s competition among plants,” she said.

Banks, with the Carteret County Cooperative Extension, said there’s still plenty of time this winter for temperatures to plunge low enough to damage plants.

“We still have all of March when we can have really hard freezes,” he said.

That means crops that flower early could be vulnerable, including strawberries, peach trees and other fruit trees.

“It happened a few years back with grapevines, we had a really hard freeze at Easter,” Banks said. “Most farmers have system to get through the frosty days, as long as it’s above 28-29 degrees, but for most homeowners, it’s going to be a lot different. Unless they have some way to keep air circulating around the tops of their fruit trees, it can be really difficult to save a crop. Fruit trees, once they bloom, they’re going to be gone — no fruit.”

Fortunately, he said, “most plants around here have enough stored energy they can leaf back out.”

Are plants in coastal North Carolina protected by ocean temperatures from an early onset of spring? Maybe. Crimmins said the heat accumulation maps do indicate a slight buffering effect, at least in some places.

“I definitely see a thin strip along the coastline between Morehead City down to Myrtle Beach where it looks like the start of spring is not quite as early,” she said in a follow-up email response. “I am seeing the date we estimated buds to start breaking in the inland parts of the state to have occurred mid-January; along the coastline, it’s more like the very end of January (about 2 weeks later). Along the coastline, it’s still earlier than ‘normal’ (based on when buds have broken on average 1981-2010), but not as early as the inland portions of the state.”

Bogue Banks is accessible via two bridges, one on N.C. 58 at the west end and the other connecting Morehead City and Atlantic Beach at the east end. Image: Google Maps

MOREHEAD CITY – Carteret County officials have asked the North Carolina Department of Transportation to expedite design work for a proposed third bridge, possibly a toll bridge, to Bogue Banks to help relieve congestion and improve hurricane evacuation.

The proposed project was discussed Wednesday during the Carteret County Transportation Committee’s meeting at the Crystal Coast Civic Center. The committee advises county commissioners on transportation issues and acts as a liaison to regional transportation planning organizations, or RPOs, and NCDOT.

Don Kirkman, director of the county’s economic development department, said NCDOT was asked to add the project to its queue for express design, a process that’s essentially an abbreviated feasibility study that estimates costs and environmental effects.

Diane Hampton, corridor development engineer for NCDOT Division 2, said the project is now in the queue but behind other proposed projects and subject to budget constraints and other considerations.

“Getting it into the queue for study is the first step.” Hampton said during the meeting.

Hibbs Road, a roughly 3-mile, two-lane stretch between U.S. 70 and N.C. 24, was discussed as a possible mainland connection for the bridge. Where the bridge would connect to N.C. 58 on the Bogue Banks side of Bogue Sound has town officials in both Indian Beach and Pine Knoll Shores worried.

Tim White is town manager in Indian Beach. He told Coastal Review Online that the town board had expressed numerous concerns, including the effects the project would have on property owners in town.

“Our concern is where is it going to locate? It’s going to come in our back door,” White said Thursday. “What’s it going to do to property owners here?”

Pine Knoll Shores Town Manager Brian Kramer said his community’s concerns are the same ones expressed a decade ago when a third bridge was proposed during creation of a countywide comprehensive transportation plan.

“The feeling 10 years ago among island towns was opposition to a third bridge and widening 58,” Kramer said Thursday. “At the time, the widening of 58 was connected to adding that third bridge. With the traffic impacts and the commercial development in Indian Beach, Salter Path and Pine Knoll Shores, it would be a pretty significant game changer in the central part of the island.”

White echoed the concerns.

“Does 58 need to be widened? I don’t know if 58 can handle another bridge. And a toll bridge? That’s not going to go over well.”

Hampton, with NCDOT, noted that the long process of planning and public discussion was just beginning, but now is the time to prepare for an expected doubling of traffic volumes in the area over the next 25 years.

The project was submitted a few weeks ago for express design, a process that usually takes less than a year once work begins. The timeline for construction, assuming the project gets approval and funding, is harder to estimate, but the earliest would be seven to 10 years, Hampton said.

“Right now, it’s just an idea. There’s no funding, no plans,” she said. “But we need to start thinking about it because of the traffic growth in the area and evacuation routes are very important.”

For the project to move to the construction phase, it would first have to be evaluated and scored according to the state’s prioritization process, which weighs factors such as traffic volumes, safety and local support as well as cost.

“Right now, it’s just an idea. There’s no funding, no plans.”

Diane Hampton, NCDOT

“If it’s not scored it will just sit there on the back burner,” Hampton said.

The idea for making the bridge a toll route was “tossed around” as a way to potentially speed the process, she said.

“Tolls are controversial but the benefit to cost ratio is great and makes it more likely to get scored higher, get funding and more likely to get built,” she said.

The process would look at both toll and nontoll alternatives, with each scored and treated separately as two different projects, as well as various siting and design alternatives, and then “let local input drive the decision making,” she said.

The process would also entail a lengthy environmental review as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA.

“A project of this magnitude might need an environmental impact statement, which is quite an ordeal,” Hampton said.

One of the biggest challenges with the project is that the central part of Bogue Banks is across the widest part of Bogue Sound.

“That’s another reason environmental issues will be looked at very closely,” Hampton said.

She noted that one suggestion for the project would be making the bridge a three-lane span with one lane dedicated for pedestrians and cyclists and protected with a removable barrier. Removing the barrier could allow all three lanes to be used to get people off the island rapidly, such as during a hurricane evacuation.

“I think that would be a big help,” she said.

Limiting traffic to two lanes during normal times could also allay concerns about N.C. 58’s capacity on Bogue Banks. The portion of the highway on Bogue Banks is mostly two lanes, except for turn lanes.

Kramer, with Pine Knoll Shores, said the discussions never got to the point of capacity when the third bridge was proposed a decade ago.

“We never got there as to what they were going to widen it to or how would you do that. We’re concerned again and will be keeping an eye on it,” he said.

RALEIGH – A legislative committee has approved a draft bill that would require the state’s environmental agency to make further changes to its organizational structure.

The bill approved Monday by the North Carolina General Assembly’s Joint Legislative Program Evaluation Oversight Committee would require the state Department of Environmental Quality to study ways to further eliminate narrow spans of control, or supervisors who oversee three or fewer employees.

The bill would also require DEQ to develop a business plan and return-on-investment analysis for its ongoing project to streamline the environmental permitting process.

The Joint Legislative Program Evaluation Oversight Committee oversees the Program Evaluation Division’s analysis of state agency programs.

The proposed changes come from a Nov. 20, 2019, report prepared by Program Evaluation Division staff that examined DEQ’s organizational structure and the department’s processing of complex agricultural and industrial permits. The report, which was a follow-up to a similar one done in 2016, found that DEQ’s span of control and organizational layers in 2019 remained similar to 2016 levels.

DEQ already instituted changes effective Jan. 1 that merged two units of the department’s Division of Marine Fisheries, its Administrative Services and Maintenance and Construction units. The changes addressed most of the issues identified in the previous report, decreasing the number of organizational layers from 11 to 10 and lowering the number of narrow supervisory spans within the two subunits from seven to four.

The Program Evaluation Division did not find evidence of duplication in DEQ’s processing of complex industrial and agricultural permits. But it did find that the lack of a permit performance management system “invites concerns.” DEQ’s recently launched Permitting Transformation Project could address the deficiencies “but needs adjustments,” according to the report.

Reports required by the bill must be submitted to the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Agriculture and Natural and Economic Resources no later than February 2021.

This story has been updated to include a response from Duke Energy.

The Trump administration moved last week to rewrite part of Obama-era regulations addressing coal ash disposal, which entails risks that a Duke University researcher says are all too familiar in coastal North Carolina.

But a Duke Energy spokesperson said the proposed changes will have no effect on the utility’s handling of the residuals from coal-fired power plants and ongoing closure of coal ash basins. And the utility said Tuesday the researcher is distorting the facts surrounding coal ash at the its Wilmington facility.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced Nov. 4 proposed changes to the 2015 regulation of how electric utilities manage their coal combustion residuals, or CCRs, which are also known known as coal ash, fly ash, bottom ash and boiler slag, and guidelines for handling effluent from steam electric power plants.

“Today’s proposed actions were triggered by court rulings and petitions for reconsideration on two 2015 rules that placed heavy burdens on electricity producers across the country,” said EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler in the announcement.

In 2015, the EPA had hailed the rule as the first national regulation covering the leaking of coal ash-related contaminants into groundwater, the blowing of contaminants into the air as dust and the catastrophic failure of coal ash impoundments. The rule also set out record-keeping and reporting requirements and mandated each coal ash facility to post information to a publicly accessible website.

The EPA said the rule was the culmination of extensive study on the effects of coal ash on the environment and public health. But there is no scientific merit for the current administration’s regulatory rollback, said Avner Vengosh, a professor at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment, whose research focuses on the environmental implications of coal ash disposal and storage.

Together with his students and colleagues Vengosh has been researching coal ash and its environmental effects for about 10 years.

Vengosh told Coastal Review Online that the EPA’s latest decision goes beyond just kowtowing to the industry.

“It’s even more than that. It means that the cost (of contamination and cleanup) is going to be moved to the public, rather than being covered by the industry. I think that is something that the people are not really understanding,” Vengosh said.

The proposed changes would set a new date of Aug. 31, 2020, for facilities to stop placing coal ash into unlined surface impoundments and impoundments located near aquifers or to retrofit them.

Vengosh said any delays of deadlines would lead to more and worsening problems as the companies responsible for the pollution are granted more time to potentially fold, go bankrupt or otherwise avoid their responsibility.

“So, by the end of the day the public will have to deal with it rather than the industry. They’re basically saving the industry from their own doing,” he said. “It’s sad that EPA became so political.”

Vengosh submitted written comments opposing the rule change, saying that his motivation to get involved was related to his scientific research on the environmental implications from coal ash disposal and storage. “Together with my students and colleagues at Duke University, I have been conducting research on the subject of coal ash and its environmental effects for about ten years,” Vengosh wrote.

His research projects have included investigation of the environmental effects of the Tennessee Valley Authority coal ash spill in Kingston, Tennessee; sources of mercury in river sediments from TVA spill sites; discharge of effluents from coal ash impoundments to waterways in North Carolina; developing isotope methods to detect coal ash contaminants in the environment; leaking of coal ash ponds in the Southeast; radioactivity of coal ash; possible links between hexavalent chromium and coal ash ponds in North Carolina; and leaching of arsenic and selenium from coal ash.

“Overall, I have published 13 scientific articles on different aspects of the environmental effects of coal ash,” Vengosh wrote.

Vengosh said the EPA’s proposal would considerably weaken existing federal regulations, reducing environmental protection and safeguards, and severely exacerbate environmental effects associated with coal ash storage and disposal.

He said the changes would undo important safeguards in the 2015 Coal Ash Rule, including the required comprehensive and long-term monitoring of groundwater in the vicinity of coal ash impoundments, including those no longer in use. The changes would allow states to set different standards for coal ash contaminants in groundwater and make groundwater quality and air quality data less transparent.

Also, the proposal would “backtrack” from the 2015 rule’s requirement that the operators of unlined coal ash ponds in areas where there’s contamination of underlying groundwater install liners or close the storage ponds by a certain date. The proposed amendments would allow state agencies or utilities themselves to decide on closure or installation of liners and make the now-required cleanup of contaminated groundwater “discretionary.”

All coal ash ponds are located near major rivers. That’s because water is needed as a coolant for coal-fired plants, so all coal plants and their coal ash facilities are near waterways.

Vengosh said research, his and others’, has shown that nearly all coal ash ponds leak and contaminate the underlying groundwater and nearby surface water. “Basically, everywhere there is a coal ash pond there is leaking – period,” he said.

He authored a 2016 study that looked at archived water chemistry data from 156 wells monitoring groundwater below all 14 coal ash ponds in North Carolina between 2010 and 2015. The evidence suggested that closing coal ash ponds does not necessarily eliminate the leaking of contaminated water from ponds to the environment.

Coal Ash in the Cape Fear

The coal-fired units at Duke Energy’s Sutton Plant in Wilmington were retired in 2013, when the utility switched to natural gas-fired generation, and the coal units were demolished about four years later. And the utility says that during the first half of this year, it completed excavation of the ash basin at the plant and two others in North Carolina, Dan River Steam Station in Eden and Riverbend Steam Station in Mount Holly.

But during Hurricane Florence in 2018, rising water levels in the Cape Fear River breached the plant’s cooling lake, known as Sutton Lake, flushing its contents into the river. In the days following the storm, Duke Energy said water samples from upstream and downstream of the site showed “little to no impact to river water quality” and all results were “well within” state water quality standards.

“There is little difference in river water quality when comparing samples taken upstream above the facility and downstream below the facility,” the utility announced, sharing its test results online.

The 1,100-acre lake is open to the public and the state Wildlife Resources Commission manages a boat ramp there.

Vengosh in June published a paper that concluded there was evidence for multiple spills of coal ash into Sutton Lake, with concentrations of metals that far exceeded state regulations for freshwater lakes. Also, tissue from fish in lake – a popular fishing spot for nearby residents – contain an isotope fingerprint of coal ash, he said.

“Sutton Lake represents a case where the handling of coal ash near drinking water or freshwater resources is causing the mobilization or transport of coal ash into the lake and contamination of the lake. Sutton Lake is really kind of an example of why the 2015 ruling is so important,” Vengosh said.

A Duke Energy spokesperson said in June that Vengosh’s findings were not unexpected and not relevant to anyone’s health and that the wastewater facility performed as designed, serving as a buffer between the coal plant and the Cape Fear River to protect the public and the environment. The company also produced a graphic that noted that levels of selenium, which is often associated with coal ash, in Sutton Lake were far below the state’s recreational human consumption advisory level.

“To me, this was stunning, because they never said it before and the fact that they admitted they put coal ash into the recreation lake, it’s crazy, and I’m actually stunned why nobody sues them,” Vengosh said.

In a response Tuesday, Duke Energy rejected the notion that it had intentionally put coal ash in the lake and dismissed Vengosh’s conclusions.

“Vengosh’s blatant misrepresentation of our statements about Sutton Lake is irresponsible. We operated the Sutton facility in compliance with all permits and approvals and transparently communicated that the Sutton cooling pond was permitted to receive wastewater discharges from the retired steam station, which may have included trace amounts of CCR. This is very different from his previous speculation that we have had significant unreported releases of coal ash into the lake, followed by his implication that we intentionally ‘put’ ash into the lake – an accusation of wrongdoing and a shocking distortion of the facts. Vengosh’s latest fabrication – and subsequent speculation based on a fabrication – is yet another example in a recurring pattern of him seeing things he wants to see and leaping to conclusions not based on facts,” Duke Energy said.

Vengosh said concentrations of coal ash-related metals in Sutton Lake bottom sediment were higher than those measured after the TVA coal ash spills and higher than the Dan River coal ash spill in North Carolina.

“People living in the area should be shocked,” Vengosh said. “It’s not the putting of coal ash into a pond that’s designated for coal ash only, it’s putting coal ash into a lake that’s used by the public. Maybe it’s not unique to Sutton Lake, but we don’t know.”

Bill Norton, the Duke Energy spokesperson, said Thursday that the proposed EPA rule changes would not affect the utility or its Sutton Plant.

“While we are still reviewing EPA’s proposal, we do not expect Duke Energy will be impacted because we are already far down the path of closure,” Norton said.

Norton also disagreed with the conclusions Vengosh and his colleagues reached.

“Their paper was fundamentally flawed for a number of reasons, in particular because it made broad generalizations, assumptions, and conclusions based on an inadequate study design and a very small, limited data set. It appears that the authors had a conclusion in mind before going through a full and robust research process,” Norton said.

He said decades of fish tissue tests of catfish, sunfish and black bass for selenium, the primary tracer used to detect potential influences from coal ash, have consistently demonstrated selenium levels far below the state’s rigorous recreational human consumption advisory level.

“In regard to flooding, even after Hurricane Florence’s historic storm, several days of testing – including split samples with the state – showed results well within rigorous state water quality standards. Even inside Sutton Lake immediately after the storm, the results for coal ash constituents were well within the strict water quality standards that protect people and the environment,” Norton said. “Most importantly, nearly 40 years of rigorous study and sampling proves the fish are thriving and the lake remains safe to use for recreation purposes like fishing and boating.”

No effect on closure plans

Norton said the proposed CCR rule changes will not impact Duke Energy’s timelines for closure.

“We made the commitment to close all coal ash basins across our system, and that is unchanged. We holistically planned upgrades to safely manage coal ash and comply with both state and federal regulations. Those upgrades included dry ash handling systems, new wastewater treatment systems and new lined landfills. That work was necessary to take ash basins out of service,” Norton said.

Norton described the Sutton site as an example of the company’s progress. Duke Energy completed excavating the coal ash basins at its Sutton facility in June.

“We continue to excavate a small quantity of ash from a low-lying area adjacent to the original plant site, and that work is expected to be complete in the coming months,” Norton said, adding that the utility’s groundwater monitoring will continue with no change in public access to the data from the resulting data.

“In addition to federal compliance, all our work must comply with very strict state groundwater and surface water standards designed to keep the public and environment safe,” Norton said.

Separately, Duke Energy continues to appeal a decision earlier this year by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality requiring its nine remaining unlined coal ash basins on Lakes Norman and Wylie, on the Broad River, and in Stokes and Person counties to be closed by excavation. Duke Energy is challenging the timing of the state’s mandate, saying that DEQ has chosen the most expensive, disruptive and time-consuming closure option for several basins without measurable benefit when compared to other approaches and ignoring the costs that customers will bear. The Southern Environmental Law Center is representing more than a half-dozen community groups opposing Duke Energy in the Office of Administrative Hearings proceedings.

Featured Image

Sarah Bodin, front right, of the North Carolina Coastal Federation assists students from the Career Management class at Swansboro High School in building a rain garden Tuesday at Swansboro’s town hall. The work to capture rainwater and reduce the amount of polluted runoff reaching nearby waterways is part of a larger project funded in part by the Section 319 Grant Program of the Clean Water Act.

The Onslow County Soil and Water Conservation District provided the local funding match for the project, along with funding two cisterns that will be attached to the town’s public works building and the fire station to collect roof runoff for later use. Funding for the project to date has been about $4,000 for cisterns and about $2,000 for rain gardens. Photo: Mark Hibbs

A legislative study finds that the State Ports Authority lacks a system for managing the environmental footprint of maritime port operations, a shortcoming that the evaluation said threatens the ports’ sustainable operations.

The North Carolina General Assembly’s Program Evaluation Division presented its findings Monday, also concluding that the authority should be required to update legislators on its progress in developing and implementing a system that integrates environmental considerations into day-to-day decisions and operations to, “at a minimum, maintain compliance with environmental regulations,” and improve its environmental performance via pollution prevention and best management practices.

According to the report made to the Joint Legislative Program Evaluation Oversight Committee, maritime ports must contend with numerous environmental challenges that pose risks to operations and sustainability, risks that an environmental management system can address.

The authority is in the beginning stages of developing a system to address issues such as dredging, water quality, waste disposal and recycling, noise, air quality, collaboration with community groups, hazardous material transportation and energy conservation, according to the findings.

The report also concluded that the state ports are, overall, effective and efficient, but mainly because of improved productivity and declining costs. “However, increased efficiencies are entirely attributable to operations in Wilmington and not Morehead City,” according to the report. Further, the division finds that authority “does not operate in accordance with all state law,” because it doesn’t maintain container shipping operations at both ports, only Wilmington. The Port of Morehead City does not conduct container operations, “nor is it situated to develop such operations without investments in improved truck mobility.”

Alherd Kazura, the authority’s chief financial officer, said port management didn’t entirely agree with findings, particularly regarding metrics used regarding business performance and customer service.

Kazura said management didn’t oppose the division’s recommendations regarding the development of an environmental management system but he appeared to take issue with the proposed required periodic reporting on its status.

“We prefer to remain within the current reporting structure of our management team going up through the board of directors and reporting to the House and Senate transportation committees,” he said.

BEAUFORT – A company recently denied state permits to conduct seismic surveys for oil and natural gas off the North Carolina coast is appealing to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce to override the decision.

The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Coastal Management found in June that WesternGeco’s proposal to conduct geological and geophysical surveys in the Atlantic was incomplete, inconsistent with the state’s enforceable coastal management policies and would harm fish and other marine life and put at risk coastal habitats and the coastal marine economy.

WesternGeco, a Texas-based firm, filed its appeal to the Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross July 11, DEQ Division of Coastal Management Director Braxton Davis said Wednesday during a meeting of the Coastal Resources Commission in Beaufort.

The appeal of the state’s decision is allowed under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, and the Division of Coastal Management is working with the state attorney general’s office to map out the legal process and next steps, Davis said during the meeting at the at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Beaufort Lab on Pivers Island.

Davis explained that WesternGeco was the fifth company to seek a federal consistency certification for seismic exploration off the state’s coast. WesternGeco and the four other companies each received from NOAA authorization for unintentional harm to marine mammals under the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act. WesternGeco’s and the other companies’ Incidental Harassment Authorizations were approved in November 2018.

“And that along with the other four companies that have IHAs,” Davis said, “those are all in court, in litigation right now. So, this fifth company, their permit would be depending on that litigation but also on our federal consistency review.”

In March, North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein and state attorneys general from Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Virginia joined the case filed in December in South Carolina seeking a motion for a preliminary injunction to block seismic testing off the East Coast.

The lawsuit claims that the National Marine Fisheries Service violated the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act when it issued Incidental Harassment Authorizations in November.

The North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review Online, along with the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oceana, One Hundred Miles, Sierra Club and the Surfrider Foundation joined to file the lawsuit. The Southern Environmental Law Center is representing South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Defenders of Wildlife, North Carolina Coastal Federation and One Hundred Miles. Earthjustice is representing Sierra Club and the Surfrider Foundation.

Seismic exploration uses an array of airguns, usually steel cylinders charged with high-pressure air, to emit acoustic energy pulses into the seafloor at a firing pressure of about 2,000 pounds per square inch. The blast generates a signal that reflects or refracts off of the seafloor and subsurface layers with the return signal recorded and later analyzed to create maps that are used to depict the location of any oil or gas reserves below the seafloor.

Opponents and marine scientists say the blasts can disturb the normal behavioral patterns of marine mammals, including dolphins and endangered North Atlantic right whales, and other marine life.

“We remain vigilant in our opposition to activities related to oil and gas exploration off the North Carolina coast,” said DEQ Secretary Michael S. Regan in a statement. “WesternGeco’s proposal for seismic airgun blasting poses too many risks to our commercial and recreational fishing economy, marine life and overall coastal environment and economy that our state cannot afford to take. We will use any available avenues to fight WesternGeco’s appeal.”

Regan’s statement explains that the appeal process allows the company and the state to file briefs presenting their arguments and documentation to Ross for his decision. Federal rules for overriding the state’s decision require Ross to find that WesternGeco’s must further the national interest in a significant manner; that this national interest must outweigh the adverse coastal effects, when those effects are considered separately or cumulatively; and no reasonable alternative exists that would permit the activity to be conducted in a manner consistent with the state’s enforceable policies.

Before any companies can begin seismic testing, they must also receive permits from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

Also Wednesday, Davis reminded the Coastal Resources Commission that the next step in the development of the 2019-2024 national leasing program for offshore oil and natural gas could still be released in the near future, with a 90-day public comment period commencing with the announcement.

“It’s not yet known if North Carolina will continue to be part of the proposed program. If it is, proposed lease areas could be identified as soon as this fall with possible lease sales to follow soon after,” Davis said.

The first of three proposals for 2019-2024, the Draft Proposed Program, was released on Jan. 4, 2018, with a 60-day comment period that ended March 9, 2018.

Coastal Review Online Assistant Editor Jennifer Allen contributed to this report.

This story has been updated.

BEAUFORT – The state Coastal Resources Commission is expected to hold a closed-door discussion next week during its public meeting here to discuss a lawsuit pitting private property rights against state oceanfront setback rules, specifically as they pertain to a storm-battered, erosion hot spot on the Outer Banks.

The closed session to consult with the CRC’s attorney about the case is allowed under the state’s open meetings law. The remainder of the meeting that begins at 9 a.m. Wednesday at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Beaufort Laboratory/North Carolina National Estuarine Research Reserve Office, 101 Pivers Island Road, is expected to be open to the public.

The case involves Michael and Cathy Zito of Timonium, Maryland, who had tried to rebuild their vacation cottage on the lot they had owned since 2008 on Seagull Drive in Nags Head after fire destroyed it in 2016. State and local governments denied building permits because the replacement house planned for the same footprint as the two-story, piling-supported original built in 1982 wouldn’t meet state coastal setback requirements.

Homes on Seagull Drive have been the subject of years of legal fights over property rights. But unlike eight other Seagull Drive homes that have been destroyed by storms and erosion during the past decade, an electrical fire was to blame in the case of the Zito’s house. State officials contend that denying permits is necessary because allowing the Zitos to rebuild their home “would constitute inappropriately sited development.”

The Zitos filed the complaint March 6 in the U.S. District Court for Eastern North Carolina, naming the Coastal Resources Commission as defendant. They’re being represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit formed to fight “government overreach and abuse,” and seek damages of $700,000 for the taking of their private property without just compensation, legal fees and other relief. Pacific Legal, which takes on property rights cases free of charge, says on its website that if the government wants to make private property useless so the public can enjoy it as open space or a beach area, it must pay the owners just compensation. It says the government shouldn’t use a natural disaster to justify cleansing an area of development it doesn’t like or want.

David Breemer is the senior attorney representing the Zitos. He said state officials never had a problem with the Zitos’ home being near the ocean before the fire, and the Coastal Resources Commission had no issue with other homes just as close or closer to the water than the Zitos’ lot.

“So the only risk the Zitos apparently had is apparently the unexpected one that the CRC would use the happenstance of a fire to get rid of a coastal home it otherwise must accept and has accepted as (a) normal coastal structure,” Breemer told Coastal Review Online Wednesday.

The property is designated as part of an Ocean Erodible Area of Environmental Concern, according to the state Division of Coastal Management, where the average annual erosion rate is 6 feet. Over the life of a 30-year mortgage, the ocean could be expected to carve out 180 feet of beach at the site.

Setback rules are geared toward “minimizing losses to life and property resulting from storms and long-term erosion, preventing encroachment of permanent structures on public beach areas, preserving the natural ecological conditions of the barrier dune and beach systems, and reducing the public costs of inappropriately sited development,” according to the division.

Rebuilding in the same spot means the southeast corner of the house would be about 12 feet landward of the static vegetation line, the setback delineation the state uses, and the northeast corner would be about 20 feet landward of the line.

Division of Coastal Management staff contend that while the property is located among other properties that don’t conform to current setback rules, that has no bearing on whether the Zitos face an unnecessary hardship – the basis for granting a variance from the strict application of the rules.

“For them not to be able to rebuild is just really tough for a lot of folks to understand,” said Cliff Ogburn, Nags Head’s town manager.

Ogburn said Wednesday that it’s especially hard to grasp when considering the two other houses in the same area that are closer to the ocean than where the Zitos’ house would be. That the Zitos lost their home through no fault of their own compounds the frustration. Ogburn said the Zitos would likely have many more years to enjoy their home if allowed to rebuild – as long as beach renourishment continues in the area.

“In my opinion, before it burned, the Zitos’ house would have a lot more life left in it than the other houses,” he said.

Although a beach renourishment project in 2010-11 offered some erosion relief in the Seagull Drive area, it was temporary – the vegetation line has since retreated landward and is now roughly where it was prior to renourishment, according to the Division of Coastal Management. The division says granting a setback exception would be inconsistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the rules.

Ogburn agreed.

“The ill effect of allowing the Zitos to rebuild would be less than allowing the two houses that are farther seaward to remain, but the other ill effect is that if you have a property that doesn’t meet the setback requirements and it’s damaged beyond repair and if you let it go back, then you’re allowing the problems to persist,” Ogburn said. “This property doesn’t meet the setback and, in my understanding, that’s the deal breaker.”

Ogburn explained that since 2008, along that stretch of road, eight homes had been destroyed by storms and erosion. Only two houses remain on the east side of Seagull Drive and five more lots that may have had homes before that time had long been vacant. He said that no matter how unfair it may seem, the state’s coastal management rules exist for a reason, and the town, as the local enforcers of those rules, has much at stake.

“The town’s position has been pretty strong going back to the ’80s. We’ve been dealing with erosion for a very long time,” he said. “People here, at least since 1980 and beyond, they’ve seen the ocean was coming. We’ve been dealing with these houses on Seagull since at least 2008, and it hasn’t gotten any better.”

An attorney who represented the Coastal Resources Commission in the Zito’s variance proceeding, citing state policy, declined to comment on the ongoing litigation but noted that, in federal court, the state and its commissions must be represented by the attorney general’s office.

Other CRC Business

Also on the agenda for Wednesday, the commission is set to hold a public hearing on proposed changes to sandbag rules to allow more flexibility in using sandbags for erosion control around state port inlet areas.

A public comment period is scheduled for 11:45 a.m. The chairman may limit comments to three minutes per person.

Two requests for rule variances are on the agenda as well with one from Robert Stallings IV, who seeks to dredge in Pittman Creek, a primary nursery area in Pamlico County, to provide an access channel to a proposed upland basin with boat ramp and dock, and the other from the N.C. Department of Transportation, which seeks to use sandbags for erosion control at the northern ferry dock on Ocracoke Island.

The commission is to consider a fiscal analysis for a proposed rule change to allow a general permit for temporary structures within coastal shorelines and ocean hazard areas of environmental concern, or AEC, to accommodate scientific research needs.

The commission is also expected to consider a petition for rule-making to change the exceptions to nonwater dependent uses within the 30-foot buffer area of the rules for the coastal shorelines AEC by expanding the reference to “landscaping” to include the use of impermeable materials or “hard landscaping.”

The commission is also expected to hear reports on CRC science panel member appointments and discuss developing a rule to formalize criteria whereby structures and gear associated with a shellfish aquaculture leases are exempt from Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA, permit requirements.

Learn More

• Meeting agenda

BEAUFORT – A judge has allowed the state attorney general to intervene in a case in which a Morehead City property owner seeks to remove deed restrictions put in place when the land was set aside for conservation.

Judge William W. Bland, who presided Monday over Carteret County Superior Court, granted Attorney General Josh Stein’s motion to intervene on behalf of the defendants in the case filed by Beverly Pham of Morehead City against Blair Pointe LLC, the now-dissolved development company that donated the undeveloped Morehead City parcel, Coastal Hunting Land Group Inc., the nonprofit group that received the 12.6-acre donation, and Carteret County.

Bland ruled that the attorney general had grounds to intervene because of the state’s “substantial interest in the outcome” of the decision on Pham’s request to extinguish conservation restrictions on the property.

Officers with the development company received tax credits for the donation in 2003, but the principal with the nonprofit that received the land died without having received tax-exempt status for the property. The county foreclosed for non-payment of taxes in 2016 and Pham’s husband purchased the property in an upset bid 10 days after Morehead City had placed the high bid. The city had planed to create a park with water access at the site on Calico Bay.

Pham contends that the foreclosure and auction effectively extinguished any restrictions on the property, which her husband purchased for $44,742. The parcel had been for sale since March 2017 with an asking price of $575,000.

The judge gave the attorney general 10 days to file its response to Pham’s complaint.

BEAUFORT – The state attorney general’s office has entered a motion to intervene in a civil case a property owner filed to allow development of a Morehead City parcel that was sold at auction in 2016 after being set aside for conservation more than 15 years ago.

The state contends that the public’s interest in the property was not voided by the sale of the property and that the attorney general is the appropriate party to protect the public’s rights.

The case was scheduled to be heard March 25 in Carteret County Superior Court but was taken off the calendar to allow the parties to review the state’s motion. The case is now scheduled to be heard April 29, said an official with the attorney general’s office.

At issue is 12.6 wooded acres that a Morehead City developer had donated in 2003 to satisfy wetland mitigation requirements. The development company owned by David Horton, formerly of Morehead City, donated the land to a nonprofit organization whose founder died without completing the process to exempt the property from local taxes.

Horton’s company received tax credits for the donation under a program that was repealed by the North Carolina General Assembly in 2013.

Beverly Pham of Morehead City, whose husband had purchased the property in a county tax foreclosure auction in 2016, had filed the case seeking a court declaration that would remove the conservation deed restriction so that the property could be developed. Pham contends that such restrictions were extinguished as a result of a tax foreclosure sale.

The state attorney general’s office, in a letter to the clerk of court dated March 21 and filed the next day, asked the court to allow the state to intervene as defendant “in order to protect and maintain the conservation restriction placed in perpetuity for the benefit the benefit of the people of North Carolina …”

The state Department of Coastal Management did the initial assessment that determined the land had conservation value.

Federal officials say North Carolina will benefit from a new partnership that brings together local and regional fishing interests with federal regulators to collaborate on the science and process of offshore wind energy development.

The National Marine Fisheries Service announced Tuesday that it had signed an agreement with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, and the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance, or RODA, to collaborate with fishing interests on offshore wind energy development on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Fisheries Service is the primary federal regulatory agency in charge of marine life and habitats. BOEM, part of the Interior Department, issues leases for energy development. RODA is a membership-based coalition of fishing industry associations and fishing companies.

The 10-year memorandum of understanding says that NOAA, BOEM and RODA have mutual interests, including the responsible planning and development of offshore wind power and other offshore development that could affect fisheries, habitats and the industry they support. The agencies and the coalition agreed to collaborate and forge further agreements on issues of mutual interest.

The collaboration agreement comes at a crucial time in wind energy development, said Chris Oliver, assistant administrator for NOAA Fisheries. “This Memorandum of Understanding will help achieve NOAA Fisheries’ strategic national goal of maximizing fishing opportunities while supporting responsible resource development.”

The NOAA Fisheries Greater Atlantic Regional Office’s geographic scope spans fisheries from Maine to North Carolina. NOAA described fishing as an integral part of the region’s culture and economy going back hundreds of years, and said that offshore wind is an abundant, domestic energy resource near major areas of demand on the coast. Wind is an alternative to long-distance transmission or development of electricity generation in these land-constrained regions, the agency said.

“Any development on the Outer Continental Shelf must consider how these activities can affect current ocean users and the marine environment,” said BOEM Acting Director Walter Cruickshank. “That is why working with federal, state, and local agencies, fishing communities, and the public is such an essential part of our renewable energy program. We look forward to working with NOAA and RODA through early and constant communication to ensure that the most recent information is available to decision makers.”

Project in the Works

So far, only one company is working to develop wind energy off the North Carolina coast.

In March 2017, BOEM held an auction for the Kitty Hawk Wind Energy Area off the coast of North Carolina. Avangrid Renewables, LLC bid more than $9 million and was the winner of lease OCS-A 0508, which covers 122,405 acres. The lease went into effect Nov. 1, 2017. In May 2018, BOEM approved a request to extend the preliminary term for the lease from Nov. 1, 2018, to Nov. 1, 2019.

Paul Copleman, communications director with Avangrid, said fisheries interests are being considered as the company moves toward development off the North Carolina coast.

“Over the past six months, we have met with fisheries stakeholders and others to discuss our plans to survey the Kitty Hawk wind energy area more than 24 nautical miles off the coast of North Carolina’s Outer Banks,” Copleman said in an email response. “Those meetings and conversations will continue as surveys progress and data are shared with all stakeholders, fisheries included. We are still very early in our due diligence, environmental studies, and meteorological analysis. We anticipate submission of the Site Assessment Plan in the third quarter, which would clear the way to deploy meteorological ocean buoys in early 2020. If all goes well moving forward, we could be online in 2025.”

Fishing Industry Concerns

Under the agreement, RODA is to work with NOAA Fisheries and BOEM to compile, develop and deliver the best available science and information necessary to address offshore development, fisheries management and ecosystem health.

“The fishing industry has expressed its concern about the potential impacts of rapid large-scale wind energy development to coastal communities and sustainable fishing practices,” said Annie Hawkins, executive director of RODA. “This agreement paves a way forward for fishing communities to give meaningful input to federal regulators in determining the future of our ocean resources.”

“The fishing industry has expressed its concern about the potential impacts of rapid large-scale wind energy development to coastal communities and sustainable fishing practices.”

Annie Hawkins, executive director, RODA

Hawkins told Coastal Review Online that the agreement will allow those involved in fishing to stay informed on offshore development without having to attend countless meetings.

“We have members in North Carolina and members with the North Carolina Fisheries Association,” she said, adding that the agreement “documents that we’re working together with these agencies to protect regional fishing interests. It helps provide that level of coordination and working with these agencies lets us take better approaches on how they take data and make decisions, which hasn’t been done in any comprehensive way.”

The process will help fishing interests in all states included in the agreement by bringing into the conversation issues such as economic effects, displacement and restricted transit areas offshore.

“It can be hard to identify who to talk to if you’re a developer or if you’re BOEM,” she said. “This way they can work through our channels without fishermen having to go to infinitely more meetings. We can work with the fishing industry and we have been working with the agencies to do that in a reasonably efficient and inclusive way.”

Hawkins said RODA’s membership is “really all across the board” on the issue of offshore wind development. “We have people who don’t want to see wind farms and we have people who want to work with wind farm developers, but they want to make sure (decisions are) based on good science. There’s much that isn’t known, and we can work together to develop better scientific information.”

Working together to engage local and regional fishing interests early and often throughout the offshore wind development processes will help develop a collaborative regional research and monitoring program and lead to scientifically sound decisions, NOAA said.

“This unified approach will help ensure the best possible science and information is used to inform offshore energy development planning, siting, and operations,” said Jon Hare, science and research director for the Northeast Fisheries Science Center. “Tapping into the expertise and the knowledge of the fishing industry is essential to this process.”

Engagement, Research, Monitoring

The federal government has 15 active leases covering nearly 1.7 million acres of the outer continental shelf for potential offshore wind development. Collectively, these leases could generate more than 19 gigawatts, or 19 billion watts, of energy. NOAA said that’s enough to power more than 6.5 million homes.

NOAA Fisheries manages more than 42 species important to commercial and recreational fishing as part of 14 fishery management plans. In 2016, about 4,600 vessels landed more than 1 billion pounds of key fish species, supporting roughly 140,000 seafood jobs. The region is also vital for numerous endangered and threatened marine species, including the North Atlantic right whale.

“NOAA is committed to assessing the impacts of offshore wind energy projects on these resources,” said Michael Pentony, regional administrator for the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office. “The development of offshore wind energy projects must be done in ways that support the protection and sustainable management of our marine trust resources, fishing communities, and protected species.”

In addition to planning, siting and developing offshore wind power, the agreement cites collaboration on regional research and monitoring to ensure decisions are based on the best available science.

NOAA said the collaboration with BOEM, states and fishing industry interests throughout the renewable energy leasing process will help improve compatibility of offshore wind with other ocean uses and create an effective regional research and monitoring program that will help improve understanding of potential ecological, economic and social effects related to offshore wind development.

This story has been updated.

WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH — Town officials are exploring how to meet demand for drinking water after stopping use of a well found to be contaminated with GenX and other per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, which also showed up at lower concentrations in other town wells.

The town announced Tuesday that its only mainland well, No. 11, which is about 2,500 feet from the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority’s aquifer storage and recovery, or ASR, injection well, had not been used to supply water to the town since late January. The “immediate” action taking the well offline came after a meeting Jan. 31 with CFPUA representatives who expressed concerns that the town’s mainland well could be contaminated, based on the authority’s testing.

Sampling from the well showed GenX levels had remained stable, compared to prior testing, at about 37 parts per trillion, lower than the state’s health goal of 144 ppt, but also indicated that other PFAS were present at the well site.

The town also tested its two wells near the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway and others. Test results were positive for lower PFAS levels at wells that remain in use. The town said it had tested other wells but had not received results.

“Wrightsville Beach continues to meet all State and Federal drinking water standards,” the town said in a statement. “Additional public outreach will occur, as other information is made available.”

CFPUA announced Wednesday that its board of directors had approved a special temporary bulk water rate for Wrightsville Beach. The board also authorized Chairman William Norris and CFPUA staff to negotiate an interlocal agreement with the town regarding terms of the special rate.

The special rate, 65 cents per 1,000 gallons, is designed to be a short-term option, providing a supplemental water source to address a regional issue. It would be available to Wrightsville Beach during the summer season over a three-year period.

The normal bulk water-resale rate is $3.48 per 1,000 gallons. The special mutual-aid rate will be recalculated annually to account for changes in prices for inputs such as chemicals and energy.

An interconnect already exists between CFPUA’s and the town’s water systems, for use in case of emergencies.

CFPUA said in February it was still working with state regulators to determine the extent of effects on the community from decades of PFAS compound releases by Chemours and DuPont, including its ASR well, of which testing had shown “varying levels of PFAS” after the authority had stored PFAS-tainted water from the Cape Fear River.

Wrightsville Beach on Jan. 31 joined the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority and Brunswick County in a lawsuit against DuPont and Chemours over the contamination. The plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive relief to abate the nuisance allegedly caused by the defendants and other relief.

“As has been widely reported, Du Pont, and its successor Chemours, used the River as the dumping ground for countless chemicals while assuring the E.P.A. and state agencies that they were doing no such thing,” the plaintiffs allege.

The compounds contributing the “overwhelming majority” to the PFAS concentrations detected have been found only downstream of Chemours’ Fayetteville Works plant, CFPUA said. The compounds are referenced in a proposed consent order that would settle pending claims against Chemours by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and Cape Fear River Watch.

CFPUA’s ASR well was designed to store in the Upper PeeDee Aquifer treated drinking water from the Sweeney Water Treatment Plant on the Cape Fear River. During periods of high demand, that water was to be used to supplement CFPUA’s river water supply.

CFPUA suspended its pilot program to inject water into the ASR in 2017, after GenX from Chemours was detected in water from the well. The authority later pumped about 50 million gallons of water from the ASR to reduce GenX concentrations below the state Department of Health and Human Services’ health advisory for GenX in drinking water.

Last year, the North Carolina General Assembly appropriated $450,000 to CFPUA for work related to addressing PFAS in the ASR. As part of that work, CFPUA said that in late January it sampled water from the ASR to test for levels of more than three dozen PFAS compounds. At the same time, CFPUA paid to sample and test water from eight other nearby wells and released the results Feb. 12, after Wrightsville Beach had decided to stop using its No. 11 well.

MOREHEAD CITY — The owner of more than 12 wooded acres on Crab Point Bay that was set aside for conservation in 2003 has filed a civil case in Carteret County Superior Court seeking to remove deed restrictions on the property to allow the land to be sold and developed.

Beverly Pham of Morehead City seeks a court declaration that would remove the “uncertainty” of the status of a conservation deed restriction on the undeveloped 12.6-acre property adjacent to the Blair Farms neighborhood. Pham’s husband Andy Nguyen purchased the property for $44,742 on Jan. 25, 2016, via an upset bid in a county tax foreclosure auction held 10 days earlier and transferred his interests to her.

Nguyen’s bid upset the auction’s high bid of $42,611.50, which Morehead City and the county had placed in a move to conserve the property and use part of it for a park with public water access.

Pham, in her complaint, contends that because the foreclosure for nonpayment of county property taxes complied with certain state requirements, “it was effective in extinguishing the conservation restriction.” Her complaint also cites as precedent a 1985 case that found, “The effect of a judgment foreclosing a tax lien on real property is to extinguish all rights, title and interests in the real property subject to foreclosure …”

Pham’s attorney, Taylor Avioli of the firm Narron Wenzel P.A. of Raleigh told Coastal Review Online that Pham would not agree to selling the land to a conservation group with the deed restrictions left in place.

According to real estate listings, the property has been for sale since March 2017 with an asking price of $575,000. The parcel has a tax value of $68,020, according to county records.

Conservation Interests

The property, which was donated for conservation to satisfy wetland mitigation requirements related to the development of the Blair Farms residential subdivision, was previously held by a nonprofit corporation that did not exempt the land or pay property taxes on it.

The nonprofit, Coastal Hunting Land Group Inc. of 300 N. 35^th St. Morehead City, was incorporated Oct. 16, 2003. Morehead City accountant Leonard W. Jones, who died in 2009, was the registered agent on the incorporation filing and the corporation is listed as “current-active,” according to documents on file with the North Carolina Secretary of State’s office.

Pham’s complaint names as defendants Blair Pointe LLC, the Coastal Hunting Land Conservation Group Inc. and Carteret County, which “are joined out of an abundance of caution as the only parties with a possible interest in the status of the conservation restriction.”

David Horton, formerly of Morehead City and now living in Raleigh, was an owner of Blair Pointe LLC, the now-defunct company formed in 1996 to develop Blair Farms. Blair Pointe LLC conveyed the wooded property to Coastal Hunting Land Group in December 2003 with the intent that it be used for conservation purposes as defined by federal tax codes.

Horton said he’d like to see the deed restrictions remain.

“I hate the thought of it being developed,” Horton said last week.

Horton, whose partners in the development company were John Gainey, Larry Land and Dean Wagaman, all of Morehead City, said removing the deed restrictions should require action by the state legislature because people had taken tax benefits from the property’s conservation status. He said Blair Pointe LLC, which was dissolved in December 2010, had donated the property and received in return favorable tax treatment.

Horton said that Jones, his accountant before his death, had organized the nonprofit hunting club to which the land was donated, but Jones died before the property received tax-exempt status.

“Nobody really knew much about it except Leonard,” Horton explained. “There shouldn’t have been taxes because of its conservation status, but it never got set up as zero.”

A total of more than $13,856 in county property taxes had gone unpaid between 2006 and 2014, according to court documents.

Horton said he was made aware of the case when Morehead City attorney Doug Goins, who had been the registered agent for Blair Pointe LLC, contacted him about the property owner’s desire to void the restrictions. Horton said he understood the property was under contract, contingent upon the deed restriction being removed.

Goins is not a party to the Pham case, but he told Coastal Review Online Monday that Blair Pointe LLC officials had acted properly in claiming any tax benefits that arose from donating the land for conservation.

“If the restriction is removed without any complicity by the developers, which is the case, I don’t see how it can be held against them after the fact,” Goins said. “The situation is not their fault.”

“If the restriction is removed without any complicity by the developers, which is the case, I don’t see how it can be held against them after the fact.”

Doug Goins, attorney

Goins said the state may have an interest in the case, adding that state officials were aware of the situation.

He noted that Coastal Hunting Land Group Inc. had “disappeared” and “there’s no one that anybody’s been able to find who claims to be a director or officer regarding the thing.”

Goins said he was unsure whether Pham’s contention that the foreclosure extinguishes previous conservation restrictions would indeed accomplish that.

Horton said the deed restriction should continue to be honored because people who had purchased homes and lots in Blair Farms did so with the understanding the land was not to be developed. “The people bought property with that in mind,” he said.

Horton added that the property is not “swampland,” as he said some have characterized it.

“It’s good land, elevated, on a peninsula. It’s uplands with marsh around the edges, not swampland. We had it delineated and we knew exactly what it was,” he said.

Plans for a Park

About 10 years ago, the Morehead City Council held what was apparently the first of several closed-session meetings to discuss, among other things, purchasing the property from the hunting club, “for public interests,” according to the subsequently released minutes from those meetings.

Horton was at the time a member of the city council.

At first, it appeared the city was in position to acquire the land by donation, so that the area could “‘remain natural’ for future generations,” according to minutes from a closed meeting on Sept. 8, 2009. Later, the homeowners association for Blair Farms also became interested in purchasing the land, which had an assessed value of $20,000 at the time.

Mayor Jerry Jones said at the time he would be more comfortable with the city acquiring the property rather than the Blair Farms Homeowners Association. Jones said the HOA could “always sell the property later,” according to the Dec. 14, 2010, meeting minutes. “The property would be more protected if the City acquired it.” Then-councilman Demus Thompson agreed, noting that the city would be more apt to leave the land as “undeveloped, undisturbed open space,” according to the minutes.

City attorney Derek Taylor told the council at the time that he would advise the HOA’s attorney that the city would pursue buying the land and that he had notified the county to proceed with its foreclosure.

The city held another closed-session discussion about the property the following month. According to the minutes from that January 2011 meeting, the council discussed options for the property should the city acquire it. The board also discussed ways to keep the property from being developed.

Randy Martin, the city manager at the time, advised the council “to be careful in how restrictions would bind the property for future use.” Martin further advised that when the property was originally brought to his attention, it was identified as an opportunity for Morehead City to have a recreational area in that part of the city for “water access or bird watching, etc.”

The council and city attorney discussed working toward a compromise with the Blair Farms HOA, rather than competing for the property. It appeared the HOA lacked the proper nonprofit status to hold a conservation deed, according to the minutes. Horton, as city councilman, supported the HOA in its desire to acquire the property and was not in favor of “going against” the HOA.

Then, during another closed-session meeting July 12, 2011, Taylor advised the council that the HOA would cooperate with the city on a deal to purchase the land, but that the property would never qualify for title insurance without a condemnation process. Taylor said at the time he had advised county officials to go ahead with the condemnation proceedings and have the property go through the tax foreclosure and auction, which ultimately happened in 2016.

Taylor responded last week that if any members of the nonprofit hunting club that received the donated land were ever identified, he no longer recalled their names.

Tom Outlaw is treasurer of the Blair Farms Homeowners Association and also chairman of the city planning board. He said the homeowners association has no formal opposition to development of the property but there is concern among residents.

“Nobody wants something different over there and they could put whatever, condos or whatever, over there. But I don’t think they can do a lot to make money on it,” Outlaw said.

CHARLESTON, S.C. – A group of conservation organizations this week asked a federal judge to block the start of any seismic exploration for oil and natural gas off the East Coast until after a pending legal challenge is heard in court.

The groups, which include the North Carolina Coastal Federation, publisher of Coastal Review Online, filed Wednesday in federal court in Charleston, South Carolina, a motion for a preliminary injunction to block seismic surveys from beginning until after a separate lawsuit is resolved.

Sixteen South Carolina coastal communities and the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce filed that lawsuit in December seeking to prevent seismic testing. That challenge has since been merged with that of the conservation groups, and 10 attorneys general from East Coast states, including Josh Stein of North Carolina, have intervened in the combined lawsuits.

The seismic companies that applied for permits and two industry groups, the American Petroleum Institute and the International Association of Geophysical Contractors, intervened on behalf of the federal government to defend the permits.

The conservation groups also include the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oceana, One Hundred Miles, Sierra Club and the Surfrider Foundation. The Southern Environmental Law Center is representing South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Defenders of Wildlife and One Hundred Miles. Earthjustice is representing Sierra Club and the Surfrider Foundation.

The motion for a preliminary injunction contends, among other things, the Trump administration’s approval for five companies to harm marine life with seismic operations violates the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

The conservation groups say that without an injunction, seismic exploration could begin before the case, over which Judge Richard Gergel presides, is resolved. That would put at risk dolphins, whales and other animals as seismic air guns create one of the loudest sources of noise in the oceans, according to the groups.

“The government failed to consider the combined effects of overlapping and simultaneous surveys, which are greater than the effects of individual seismic-blasting boats,” the groups said in an announcement released Wednesday. “The government erroneously determined that only a ‘small number’ of whales and dolphins would be harmed. Should it go forward, this blasting will irreparably harm marine species, from tiny zooplankton — the foundation of ocean life — to the great whales.”

The issuance of permits was delayed earlier this year during the partial government shutdown over border wall funding. Gergel has since lifted the stay he imposed to prevent the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management from issuing seismic permits during the shutdown.

The National Marine Fisheries Service in November 2018 issued multiple incidental harassment authorizations, or IHAs, to five companies that applied to incidentally, but not intentionally, harass marine mammals during geophysical survey activities in the Atlantic Ocean from Cape May, New Jersey, to Cape Canaveral, Florida. The effective dates for the authorizations are to be determined but must not be later than Nov. 30 of this year.

The filing also claims seismic testing could irreparably harm the remaining population of North Atlantic right whale, a critically endangered species. The groups cite research showing there are only about 400 right whales remaining in the Atlantic. Also, seismic testing’s effects would be concentrated on the world’s densest population of acoustically sensitive beaked whales off the Outer Banks.

Wildlife Federation: Abandon Drilling Plan

Also this week, conservation groups and eastern North Carolina elected officials weighed in on the Trump administration’s new five-year plan for offshore drilling, pointing to the risks posed to the environment and coastal economies and citing adamant local opposition.

The administration says it seeks to maintain the nation’s position as “a global energy leader and foster energy security and resilience for the benefit of the American people,” according to the draft 2019-24 proposed National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program released Jan. 4, 2018. It proposes dramatically expanded drilling off the nation’s coastlines. This includes the Mid-Atlantic planning area from Delaware to the North Carolina-South Carolina line.

“The potential costs to wildlife, our communities, and our way of life are too high. This bipartisan and bicoastal outcry should serve as a wake-up call, and spark a reconsideration of the planning underway now.”

National Wildlife Federation

In a letter dated Feb. 18 to Interior Department Acting Secretary David Bernhardt, the National Wildlife Federation and more than two dozen of its affiliates, including the North Carolina Wildlife Federation, urge the administration to abandon its plans for expanded offshore drilling and instead work with governors and residents of coastal states. The letter contends that the environmental risks are too great in coastal regions that depend on oceans and marine wildlife to support billions of dollars of economic activity and sustain tourism, outdoor recreation and fishing.

“Republican and Democratic leaders from coastal states have stood united in opposition to the unilateral pursuit of maximum offshore oil and gas drilling,” according to the Wildlife Federation’s letter. “The potential costs to wildlife, our communities, and our way of life are too high. This bipartisan and bicoastal outcry should serve as a wake-up call, and spark a reconsideration of the planning underway now.”

The Wildlife Federation writes that coastal wetlands and dunes protect communities and shelter birds and mammals. “That’s why every single governor from Maine to Florida and from Washington to California opposes offshore drilling off their coasts,” according to the letter. The group urges the secretary to reconsider the department’s stated commitment to opening nearly all coastlines to oil and gas development.

Oceana Responds to Tillis

Earlier this month, Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., requested additional information on the recent decision to open the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf for review under a new oil and gas leasing program.

Tillis’ letter to Bernhardt and the secretary of the U.S. Department of Commerce, the acting director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the assistant secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere at the Department of Commerce, requests more information about the plan to ensure there are adequate protections for North Carolina’s coastal communities. Tillis also invites the administration officials to visit North Carolina “for listening and education sessions across our coastal counties on the topic of offshore energy exploration.”

The ocean advocacy group Oceana joined with officials from Dare and Carteret counties this week in a response to Tillis’ letter. The letter, provided to Coastal Review Online by Randy Sturgill of Oceana and published Tuesday in the News & Observer, was signed by Sturgill, Nags Head Mayor Ben Cahoon, Beaufort Mayor Rett Newton, Dare County Board of Commissioners Chairman Bob Woodard, Environment North Carolina Director Drew Ball and Outer Banks Surfrider Foundation co-chair and small business owner Matt Walker.

The letter praises Tillis’ “newfound interest” in how drilling and seismic testing could affect tourism and commercial fishing, but notes that “the information he seeks has been available for quite some time.” The groups go on to cite state figures on coastal tourism, which supports more than 30,000 jobs and generates more than $3 billion in annual revenue in North Carolina, and commercial and recreational fishing – an additional 22,500 jobs and $787 million in revenue each year.

“Where offshore drilling exists in the U.S, between 2001 to 2015, there were over 700 offshore petroleum spills that discharged at least 4.93 million barrels. One of the primary causes was hurricanes. The fact is, drilling is inherently risky and there is no way to guarantee against spills,” according to the letter.

SURF CITY – The annual membership meeting for the nonprofit volunteer group that supports the 1,175-mile Mountains-to-Sea Trail and a planned weekend of excursions are expected lure to the area this spring hundreds of visitors from across North Carolina.

Friends of the Mountains-to-Sea Trail announced that registration is open for the 2019 MST Gathering March 22-24.

The Mountains-to-Sea Trail is a footpath from Clingmans Dome in the Great Smoky Mountains to Jockey’s Ridge on the Outer Banks. The trail, according to the MST Friends, represents a partnership involving local communities and trail groups, land trusts, federal and state land agencies, private landowners, the North Carolina Division of Parks and Recreation and the Friends. The trail is part of the state parks system, but segments of it are managed by different agencies and local governments.

The Friends’ mission includes trail building and maintenance, promotion of the use and care of the trail and providing information such as printed trail guides, trail improvements, advocacy and fundraising. The event is planned as a mix of showcasing for the first time coastal segments of the trail and the historic and natural attractions here, promoting the trails and the Friends’ organization, and providing help for the community.

Betsy Brown is the outreach manager for the Friends of the Mountains-to-Sea Trail. She said this will be the third year of the organization hosting a weekend-long gathering, but the first in a coastal setting. The first two events, including the kickoff for the trail’s 40^th anniversary celebration in March 2017, were held in Elkin, which Brown described as “a great example of a trail town.” The celebration’s success, drawing 350 Friends that first year, sparked the idea of an annual gathering.

“We realized it was a really great way to show the trail off to our membership,” Brown said.

In Pender County, the trail route crosses what the Friends call “special places,” such as Moores Creek National Battlefield, the Holly Shelter Game Land and the beach attractions in Surf City.

The event, however, is more than just a showcase for the roughly 270-mile Coastal Crescent Trail, which was designated as part of the Mountains-to-Sea Trail by the North Carolina General Assembly in a unanimous vote in June 2017, it’s also an opportunity for the Friends to serve. Because of the timing of event, amid the ongoing recovery from Hurricane Florence, organizers said they have an opportunity to be “purposeful partners in the rebuilding of our trail communities.”

Brown said the group was still putting together plans for service excursions during which attendees can work to repair or improve segments of the trail, such as those at Moores Creek Battlefield, or other nearby areas. There could be as many as 30 to 40 sawyers arriving for the event to clear the trails and help with whatever is needed, she said.

“Our trail workers love working on the trail, but they just want to be helpful,” Brown said.

Pender County was selected from a dozen communities across the state who responded to a request for proposals to host the event. Brown said site visits helped narrow the choices.

“The Surf City-Pender County area was the right place this time around,” she said, adding that much work had gone into developing trails in the eastern part of the state, both the long-planned Neuse River segments and the more recently realized Coastal Crescent Trail, which traverses the southeastern part of the state. She said that for more than 40 years, the trail was envisioned as a route along the Neuse River, until 2017 when the General Assembly agreed to add the Coastal Crescent Trail.

“The Surf City-Pender County area was the right place this time around.”

Betsy Brown, Friends of the Mountains-to-Sea Trail

“It’s on an equal standing with Neuse River route,” Brown said. “The timing (of this year’s gathering) was perfect to bring as many folks as we can to the coast and showcase what makes this area so beautiful and special.”

She added that hikers who have walked the entire trail from the mountains to the coast often become emotional when they reach the crest of the dunes. “We’ve had so many hikers who have just burst into tears when they see the ocean. They’re really moved by it.”

Tammy Proctor, tourism director for Pender County, said the site selection for this year’s event was important in various ways.

“It means a lot to us that they selected us,” she said. “It shows we have a lot to offer. We view the trail, the Coastal Crescent segment, as an economic development driver. This is the first time that the gathering has been on the coast, so we’re real excited about the folks that will come to the coast, instead of the mountains.”

Proctor said that the Friends’ desire to help rebuild trails and offer other help was also significant for the community.

“We have a lot of folks who love the trail but haven’t built a trail before,” she said. “The fact that they are coming in to build and rebuild and train, they are offering us a lot in return.”

Proctor noted that the coastal trail may also offer more for trail enthusiasts of all abilities. She said some of the more challenging trails in the mountains are better suited to “billy goats” and climbers rather than walkers, whereas in Pender County, “The Surf City bridge is probably the only elevation they’ll see.”

But the attractions here are worth seeing and several are planned excursions during the event, including the Friday, March 22, reception at the Karen Beasley Sea Turtle Rescue and Rehabilitation Center, where members are to meet Director Jean Beasley and learn about the center’s work to protect, rescue and rehabilitate sick and injured sea turtles, educate the public about the plight of sea turtles and meet a few turtle patients.

Also, a portion of Coastal Crescent Trail is called the Land of History, which winds through the Moores Creek Battlefield, the only national park in southeastern North Carolina.

And visitors can choose to paddle parts of the trail, either on kayaks or stand-up paddleboards, she added.

“We have so many natural resources that you can take advantage of,” Proctor said.

The Friends announced their selection during the Pender County Board of Commissioners’ meeting in May. Hurricane Florence slammed the coast in September. In Surf City, about three-quarters of homes were damaged in some way and the town hall was destroyed.

The Friends coordinated with county officials after the fall storms to be sure the community was still able to host the event.

Proctor said the state of local accommodations had improved since the storms and several were ready to open immediately afterward.

“We’ve got the accommodations,” she said, adding that bed and breakfast inns as well as hotels and motels are open. “It’s not what we would have had last year at this time, but a lot of folks like to camp, and we have some excellent campgrounds on the Intracoastal Waterway.”

The Friends’ annual meeting is set for 10 a.m.-3 p.m. Saturday, March 23, and is to include reports on progress to build, maintain and promote the MST, various workshops and recognition of hikers who have completed the trail and outstanding volunteers. Walker Golder, director of the National Audubon Society’s Atlantic Flyway Coast Initiative, is the planned keynote speaker.

Also, at sunset that day, the Friends plan to hike as a group over the new bridge to Surf City.

At 9 a.m. Sunday, March 24, a guided hike in Holly Shelter with the Coastal Plain Conservation Group’s Andy Wood, who has spent decades working to protect rare and imperiled plants, is planned that will highlight the transformation after a devastating peat fire in 2006 and explore the longleaf pine savannah.

Other events include the following:

• Guided hikes in Stone’s Creek with lead volunteers that work in that area.
• A hike on the beach section of the MST with the 2018 class of trail “completers.”
• Demonstrations on how to build a bowstring bridge with lead volunteers from Onslow County and how to do geographic information system mapping with Surf City’s GIS technician Mike Dickson.
• A journey along Topsail Island with Surf City Mayor Doug Medlin as he shares the island’s history.
• A paddle along the Intracoastal Waterway with guide George Howard.

Also, members are to work with Surf City Parks and Recreation staff to build a kiosk and trailhead for a trail at the town’s community center and help with a beach sweep cleanup.

Most of the excursions require pre-registration but all are included in the registration fee, except the Intracoastal Waterway paddling trip.

The Gathering is a membership event, Brown noted, but new members are welcome. Membership fees start at $35 and the weekend event fee is $75 with additional, lesser fees for spouses and children.

Learn More

• Friends of the Mountains to Sea Trail
• Register for the Gathering

Front page featured photo: Danielle Marple/Friends of the MST

A scathing new report from the Rachel Carson Council examines the wood pellet biofuel industry, specifically the industry leader’s operations in North Carolina, and its “severely adverse” environmental and health effects.

Wood pellet producer Enviva called the report misleading and factually incorrect.

The report, “Clear Cut: Wood Pellet Production, the Destruction of Forests, and the Case for Environmental Justice,” highlights what it calls “the fallacies and economic and political injustices surrounding the industry,” specifically Enviva and its North Carolina operations. The council released the report Jan. 7, a week before Enviva secured a state air quality permit to produce more pellets than originally planned at its plant under construction in Hamlet in Richmond County.

Founded in 1965, the Rachel Carson Council is a national environmental organization envisioned by Rachel Carson to carry on her work that focuses on environmental justice, climate change, toxic waste and chemicals and industrial farming, according to the group’s website. “Clear Cut” is the Rachel Carson Council’s fourth report.

“North Carolina is unique because it houses more Enviva facilities than any other part of the country,” according to the report, which notes that the soon-to-be four wood pellet plants in the state are among the largest in the world with an annual production capacity of about 2 million tons, or more than 15 percent of the total U.S. annual production capacity. “This level of production, though, has put a severe strain on the environment and communities in North Carolina.”

The “Clear Cut” report says that the industry is driving massive clear-cutting of U.S. forests in the Southeast and harms the health of surrounding communities. The report describes “the unjust economics” and political forces allowing the industry to continue its adverse effects.

“‘Clear Cut’ demonstrates that the industry is unnecessary and harmful, particularly to poor communities of color,” according to the council.

Enviva Vice President and Chief Sustainability Officer Jennifer Jenkins, in response to Coastal Review Online’s request for comment, called the report “an agenda-driven piece designed and written to discredit the environmental and economic benefits of the forest products industry.

“The piece is full of misleading and argumentative claims that are supported not by peer-reviewed literature, but by informal reports from the organizations themselves that perpetuate these false claims.”

Rachel Carson Council President and CEO Bob Musil said the report authors “paid very serious attention” to the science related to wood pellet production and its use as biofuel as well as the “human story” associated with the industry.

“It wasn’t agenda driven because the Rachel Carson Council, like Rachel Carson, follows the science,” Musil said. “We’re working with people who over the years have been paying very close attention to the wood pellet industry because they live there, they work there in these communities. What’s important is, in any big solution to any energy question, we all need to make sure that the people who live and work in and around these facilities have a say in what’s going on in terms of environmental justice. We offer instructions on how to get involved.”

Enviva produces pellets at three North Carolina facilities: one in Ahoskie, which began operations in November 2011; another in Northampton County, near Gaston, Roanoke Rapids and Garysburg; and a third in Sampson County, near Faison and Clinton. The fourth pellet facility planned for Hamlet is set to commence operations early this year.

Jenkins, while not addressing the specifics in the report, characterized the biomass industry as an integrated part of the forest products industry. “The forest products industry, inclusive of timber income, is responsible for $29.4 billion of economic activity in the state of North Carolina, is one of the state’s largest exports and accounts for 145,000 jobs,” Jenkins said in the company’s response.

Enviva exports the pellets via its terminal at the North Carolina Port of Wilmington, as well as ports in Alabama, Florida and Virginia. Most pellets are destined for the United Kingdom, which under renewable energy directives from the early 2000s had large carbon-reduction goals but few options for renewable energy in replacing its coal infrastructure. Wood pellets can be burned to generate electricity with coal in coal power plants or without coal in converted coal power plants to achieve the U.K.’s carbon-reduction commitments, the report notes.

“Though touted as a clean, environmentally safe alternative to fossil fuels, wood pellets are a carbon-intense, destructive and polluting industry based in flawed carbon accounting in international agreements,” according to the report. “Wood pellet material sourcing leads to massive deforestation of critical habitats, and Enviva alone is responsible for 50 acres a day of clear-cut land. Pellet production facilities release dangerous air pollutants including particulate matter and volatile organic compounds putting surrounding communities at higher risk for health complications.”

Environmental Justice Communities

Enviva operates seven processing plants in the southeastern United States that produce 3.5 million metric tons of wood pellets yearly. Half of the company’s plants are in North Carolina and all of those are in environmental justice communities, including the one under construction.

“These communities directly suffer three-fold from wood pellet production,” according to the report. “First, as wood pellet plants source within a 70 mile radius, the communities experience higher rates of tree loss leading to lower air and water quality and increased risk of flooding. Second, wood pellet production plants in North Carolina until recently have skirted Clean Air Act requirements, freely emitting dangerous pollutants into the communities. Third, and finally, these communities sit on the coastal plain of North Carolina and are under direct threat from climate change which wood pellet production and consumption contribute to.”

Enviva mills the wood, dries it and forms the pellets in a press. “During the extrusion process, the lignin in the wood plasticizes forming a natural ‘glue’ that holds the pellet together after production,” according to the company.

Wood pellets, according to the report, release carbon dioxide and pollutants when first chipped in mills. When oven dried and compressed to form the product, volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide are released.

The company’s Hamlet plant was initially permitted to produce up to 537,625 oven-dried tons, or ODT, per year of wood pellets using up to 75 percent softwood. The new permit authorizes increased production to 625,011 ODT per year with the installation of new milling and pollution-control equipment.

The report notes that nearly half of Hamlet’s 6,000 residents are black, Hispanic and Native American, and about three in 10 residents live below the federal poverty level. The Hamlet plant is next to a neighborhood where four out of five residents are black and more than a third live below the federal poverty line.

Jenkins said the report falsely portrays the process and status of air permitting and Enviva’s compliance efforts. She said Enviva is currently awaiting issuance of air permits for the installation and operation of state-of-the art equipment to significantly reduce airborne emissions.

“After the installation of these controls, almost all of our facilities will be minor sources of emissions. We are also seeking to expand our production and utilize more softwood to meet our growing customer requirements in conjunction with reducing and controlling air emissions from our facilities,” Jenkins said.

She said that in the few instances where Enviva’s facilities will remain major sources of emissions, the company has applied for or obtained permits that require the installation of equipment to reduce air emissions in accordance with all federal and state laws and regulations.

“Enviva chooses its particular site locations because we see a great opportunity to grow our business, to create employment in economically disadvantaged areas and to assist in the positive growth of local communities,” Jenkins said, adding that the report fails to mention the company’s community engagement efforts and the positive impact in the communities.

Enviva’s North Carolina operations directly employ about 350 workers. For every job created at an Enviva facility, more than two additional domestic jobs are created in the community, Jenkins said.

Enviva supports about 2,500 private landowners who choose to maintain their property as sustainable, working forests rather than converting it to commercial, agricultural or residential development, Jenkins said.

Enviva’s North Carolina operations generate more than half a billion dollars in investment and support more than 1,100 direct and indirect jobs, Jenkins said, adding that the company expects that number to grow by 25 percent in 2019. Enviva’s 2017 payroll totaled more than $20 million and the company contributed nearly $3.5 million in tax revenue and generated nearly $500 million in economic activity in North Carolina.

The report claims the economic growth comes at the expense of surrounding communities. Opponents have called for a state study of the environmental justice implications for the Hamlet facility.

Deforestation Claims

The company harvests wood from what it describes as low-grade wood fiber, or wood that’s unsuitable for other uses because it’s too small or has defects, disease or infestation, as well as tops, limbs or parts of trees that can’t be made into lumber. It also uses weaker or deformed trees felled to promote the growth of higher value timber, known as “thinnings,” and mill residues such as chips, sawdust and other wood industry byproducts.

But each of these sources is at some point reliant on the practice of clear-cutting forests or cutting down all of the trees in a given area of land, according to the report. “Nevertheless, many still consider the industry as ‘green’ since it claims that it predominantly uses sources that would otherwise be thrown away.”

The report says that by 2015, it had become clear that residual wood waste would not be enough to supply the wood pellet market. “So, Enviva had to turn to whole wood sources. The corporation primarily consumes pine trees found in softwood forests as well as a mixture of bottomland and upland hardwood trees. The softwood tree supply is often sourced primarily from pine plantations that are abundant in North Carolina, but the bottomland and upland hardwood trees generally come from older growth, biodiverse regions critical to the environmental health of North Carolina. Unfortunately, nearly half of all bottomland hardwoods lie within the sourcing perimeters of Enviva’s three operational plants in North Carolina,” according to the report.

The report states that, given increasing demand in European and Asian markets, Enviva will increasingly need to clear-cut forests, threatening the state’s human population and biodiversity, exacerbating flooding and putting at risk ground water and surface water quality.

“Forests are critical in mitigating the threats of climate change, and it is more urgent than ever to invest in nature to protect our country against the damage that Hurricane Florence and storms like it pile onto our most vulnerable communities in years to come,” according to the report.

Jenkins responded that Enviva accepts only the lowest-quality wood from a harvest and only wood from working forests, while the rest of the wood goes to other forest products markets. She called the report’s harvest statistics unsupported and misleading. Enviva does not agree to purchase wood coming from land that will not stay as forest, she said.

“Every year in the Southeastern United States overall, and indeed in Enviva’s supply areas, forest inventory and carbon stocks increase year over year. In other words, for every ton that is removed from the forest through harvest, more than one ton grows back,” Jenkins said, adding that forest inventory has doubled since 1953. That can be attributed to robust markets for forest products, which encourage landowners to invest in their forests, Jenkins said.

“Floodplain forests are precious, and we agree they should be protected,” Jenkins said. “We have robust systems in place to ensure that we do not take from sensitive forests, and we have made substantial investments in forest conservation via our Enviva Forest Conservation Fund. We should note that landowners have choices, however, and so our decision to walk away rarely keeps the forest standing.”

Global Effects

Privately owned Enviva was founded in 2004 to develop a cleaner energy alternative to fossil fuels, according to the company’s website. “In particular, we wanted to offer electric utilities a fuel to replace coal, enabling them to generate power without interruption while reducing their greenhouse gas emissions.”

The Rachel Carson Council’s report states that burning wood pellets releases 65 percent more carbon dioxide than coal per megawatt hour. “Industrial-scale production of wood pellets is entirely unnecessary to combat climate change,” according to the report, and it steers subsidies and resources away from renewable sources such as wind and solar.

The U.K.’s Drax Power Station, which receives much of Enviva’ s pellet production, burns 13 million tons of wood pellets to generate electricity each year, emitting up to 23 million tons of carbon dioxide, according to the report. “Such a huge amount could only be sequestered if 60 million tree seedlings were planted and allowed to grow for a full decade. Instead, each year these emissions are compounded by additional burning, pushing carbon neutrality further out of reach for the industry.”

Jenkins, in her response, referred to her blog on Enviva’s website, where she states that bioenergy provides significant and immediate greenhouse gas savings, compared to coal. “This effect is most appropriately calculated at the landscape scale, which is the scale at which forests are managed: every year 2 percent of the forest in the SE US is harvested while the remaining 98 percent of the forest continues to grow and store carbon. In fact, every year there is more wood stored in the forest than there was the year before, and so any emissions from harvest are more than compensated – immediately – by sequestration. When bioenergy is used to replace coal, we’re reducing GHG emissions even further by allowing that coal to stay underground.”

According to the report, the Drax Power Station’s transition from coal to wood will ultimately increase CO₂ emissions, but because of what the report calls “accounting errors” in the EU Energy Directive, Drax avoids tens of millions of dollars in fees for pollution, while receiving hundreds of millions in subsidies.

Europe accounts for more than 75 percent of global wood pellet demand, of which a third goes to power plants to be burned for electricity generation. Japan and South Korea are among the countries increasingly incorporating wood pellets into their renewable energy mix.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – As the Trump administration continues its push to open more U.S. coastal waters to offshore drilling, House Democrats introduced this week a barrage of bills that together would block new drilling for oil and natural gas on nearly all of the outer continental shelf.

Seven Democrats in the House each introduced anti-drilling measures Monday, the same day that lawmakers from nine states filed bills in their legislatures blocking or limiting new drilling off their coasts.

The wave of opposition comes amid the federal government shutdown over the border wall fight that appears to have halted the permitting process for proposed exploration for oil and natural gas off the East Coast, one of few aspects of the petroleum industry affected by the impasse, Bloomberg reported.

Bills in Congress

Rep. Donald McEachin, D-Va., reintroduced a measure he first put forward in June 2018, the Defend our Coast Act of 2019, which two North Carolina congressmen, Republican Walter Jones and Democrat David Price co-sponsored last year.

“I am re-introducing the Defend our Coast Act as my first bill of the 116^th Congress because I am determined to do everything I can to protect our coastal communities,” McEachin said in a statement. “History has shown us that offshore drilling accidents can threaten public health, military operations, and marine life. The potential toll from a spill — in terms of damages, injuries, deaths, and other harms — is incalculable. Offshore drilling has no place off the coast of Virginia. Our jobs, tourism, ecosystems, and local economies are not worth the risk that comes with offshore drilling. We need to invest in clean renewable energies that do not damage our one Earth.”

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., also an original co-sponsor of McEachin’s bill, said offshore drilling is a “direct threat” to her district. “It has the potential to hurt our environment, our military, and our economy. As a 20-year Navy veteran who trained off the Virginia coast, I know that having to dodge oil platforms would disrupt operations, impact readiness, and undermine our national security. And as an oceanfront small business owner, I know what offshore drilling could do to Virginia’s shorelines, tourism industry, and aquaculture. I’m proud to work across state lines and party lines to ensure that we can ban offshore drilling in the Hampton Roads region and beyond.”

The suite of legislation also includes the following:

• Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, introduced the Clean Ocean and Safe Tourism, or COAST, Anti-Drilling Act of 2019.
• Joe Cunningham, D-S.C., introduced the Coastal Economies Protection Act of 2019.
• Salud Carbajal, D-Calif., introduced the California Clean Coast Act 2019.
• David Cicilline, D-R.I., introduced the New England Coastal Protection Act of 2019.
• Kathy Castor, D-Fla., introduced the Florida Coastal Protection Act of 2019.
• Jared Huffman, D-Calif., introduced the West Coast Ocean Protection Act of 2019 and the Stop Arctic Ocean Drilling Act of 2019.

State Efforts

Introduction of the bills was timed to coincide with similar state-level legislative announcements Monday by the nonprofit National Caucus of Environmental Legislators, or NCEL. Legislators from Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon and Rhode Island announced Monday bills that would limit any new offshore drilling capabilities off their coasts.

“These state legislators are committed to protecting the coastlines of the United States, and the safety and livelihood of their constituents,” said NCEL Director Jeff Mauk. “They understand the economic and environmental importance of our coasts and are standing together against this proposal.”

In addition to worries about oil spills and their effects on the environment and coastal economies based on tourism and recreation, the state legislators said offshore drilling means more greenhouse gas emissions that exacerbate the effects of climate change on their constituents.

“In Georgia, we understand that climate change is real and that we are elected at the state level to protect good jobs, clean water, and breathable air,” said Georgia Rep. Park Cannon.

New Jersey was the first state to ban offshore drilling within state waters in 2018. Similar measures soon followed in Delaware, Maryland, California and Florida.

“With global climate change continuing to accelerate, expanding offshore drilling is the last thing we should be doing,” said Maine State Representative Mick Devin. “Not only will it pose an unacceptable risk to marine life and all those who depend on it for work, but it will also perpetuate our dependence on dirty fossil fuels, threaten our way of life and endanger countless species.”

Legal Action

Also on Monday, South Carolina’s Republican attorney general announced he had joined a lawsuit filed in December by 16 South Carolina municipalities and the S.C. Small Business Chamber of Commerce to block seismic testing off the East Coast.

“Once again the federal government seeks to intrude upon the sovereignty of the state of South Carolina,” S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson said in a statement. “Such action puts our State’s economy, tourism and beautiful natural resources at risk. We are bringing suit to protect the State’s economy and the rule of law.

“We understand the need to have a long-term, reliable energy supply. However, any comprehensive energy strategy must comply with the rule of law. While oil and gas exploration could bring in billions of dollars, doing it without adequate study and precautions could end up costing billions of dollars and cause irreversible damage to our economy and coast.”

The lawsuit states that seismic surveys “would irreparably harm marine life, in large numbers and with a large impact, and the communities and businesses that use and enjoy this marine life and rely on it for their economic livelihoods.”

North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein in December joined attorneys general from eight other states in a lawsuit conservationists had filed against the National Marine Fisheries Service, or NMFS, and federal officials challenging incidental harassment authorizations, or IHAs, under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, approved last year for five companies that applied for seismic testing permits off the East Coast.

NMFS granted the companies’ applications for IHAs in November 2018.  The attorneys general claim that approval of the permits violated the Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, National Environmental Policy Act and Administrative Procedure Act.

The opposition efforts come as the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management readies its Proposed Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program. The draft of the program was released in January 2018 and would have opened more than 90 percent of American waters to oil and gas development. Its release prompted governors from several coastal states to request exemptions, including North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper. Only Florida has been granted an exemption, so far.

BOEM’s proposal is expected to open at least portions of the Atlantic, Pacific and eastern Gulf of Mexico and some Alaskan waters to leasing.

Oil Industry Cites Support

Mike Sommers, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, a national trade association representing the natural gas and oil industry, speaking this week during the group’s ninth annual State of American Energy address in Washington, D.C., told more than 400 government, labor and industry leaders that the results of a poll conducted late last year show strong support for increased development of oil and natural gas resources.

According to the poll, 84 percent of respondents support increased development of the country’s energy infrastructure, 83 percent see natural gas and oil as important to the future and 78 percent of voters support increased production of natural gas and oil resources.

The survey was conducted Nov. 27- Dec. 4, 2018, by telephone by The Harris Poll among 1,000 registered voters across the U.S., with a sampling error of +/- 3.1 percent.

WILMINGTON — The Army Corps of Engineers’ Wilmington District announced this week that it had completed its required environmental study of Carteret County’s proposed long-term plan for re-nourishing beaches affected by erosion along Bogue Banks.

The Corps said Wednesday it had released the federal record of decision and the permit was issued for the Bogue Banks Master Beach Nourishment Plan, which is described as a comprehensive approach to protect the oceanfront and inlet shorelines. The process included the National Environmental Policy Act review, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act analysis and public interest review of the beach-management plan for the roughly 25-mile barrier island.

Greg Rudolph, Carteret County’s shore protection manager, said approval of the 50-year plan that was in development for about eight years was well timed as officials turn to re-nourishment needs exacerbated by Hurricane Florence in September.

“By having this we are poised to do these post-storm projects,” Rudolph said Friday, noting that after Hurricane Irene caused severe erosion to county beaches in 2011, each beach town needed separate permits and separately identified sources for sand and funding, a process that took two years. That delay won’t be necessary in future storms.

“This way we’ll have the permits in our back pockets,” he said.

Components of the plan include the use of an offshore borrow area for periodic re-nourishment along about 18 miles of beach in Pine Knoll Shores, Salter Path, Indian Beach and Emerald Isle, with potential supplemental re-nourishment along about 5 miles of the strand in Atlantic Beach, if needed. The plan also includes maintenance of the Bogue Inlet ebb tide channel within a “safe box” zone to protect the inlet shoreline of Emerald Isle. The approved plan is Carteret County’s preferred alternative of those described in the final environmental impact statement dated February.

The county’s first project under the plan was to be started this winter, and county officials were set to seek bids around the time Hurricane Florence headed toward the North Carolina coast. The targeted stretch of beach in eastern Emerald Isle and the Salter Path-Indian Beach area was to receive about 910,000 cubic yards of sand, an area that ended up losing about 955,000 cubic yards during Florence.

Bogue Banks beaches lost about 3.6 million cubic yards of sand during Florence, with the 18-mile stretch of beach that includes Pine Knoll Shores west to Emerald Isle losing 3.2 million of the total.

“That’s about three times what we lost in Irene,” Rudolph said, adding that a dump truck holds about 12 cubic yards of sand.

Beach re-nourishment in Carteret County is funded in part through the county’s occupancy tax on hotel and motel rooms and rentals of cottages and condos. Some municipalities also levy special property taxes to fund sand projects. The county is seeking Federal Emergency Management Agency reimbursement related to beach erosion caused by the storm.

The county Beach Commission decided in the late 2000s to create an island-wide plan for re-nourishment that looks ahead 50 years, identifies in advance all funding and sand sources and negotiates all environmental issues related to re-nourishment.

“This has been the most important thing the Beach Commission has done over the past decade,” Rudolph said.

Because the permit for the project has been issued, the Corps is not seeking comments on the decision, which is posted online.

NEWPORT – Gov. Roy Cooper made an appearance here in Carteret County Wednesday following a tour of storm-ravaged Craven County with President Donald Trump earlier in the day.

Cooper, who visited the town fire station Wednesday with state transportation and emergency management and federal officials, said he and the president spoke at length about North Carolina’s needs in the wake of Hurricane Florence. Cooper said he told the president that the state needs significant resources to recover and will for some time.

“After the cameras leave, after the hot-white focus leaves this area, people will still have flooded homes and people will have businesses that aren’t started up and roads will still be closed and damaged. So, we’re going to need significant resources to recover and I emphasized that to him over and over again. He promised 100 percent support and we’re going to hold them to it,” Cooper said at a podium placed just outside the firehouse’s bay doors.

Cooper said he told the president that the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s help could address immediate needs and temporary housing. “We also talked about long-term housing, both through FEMA, and through other federal funding,” the governor said. “We talked about (the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s) Community Development Block Grant disaster relief funding to help with housing. And we also talked about highway, bridge construction where we know we have significant infrastructure issues to address.”

Cooper said he had also been in close contact with members of Congress and state legislators. He also talked about the continuing effects of the storm and ongoing efforts to ensure the public is safe.

“I know the people of North Carolina are still suffering from this horrible storm that has taken so much of a toll,” Cooper said. “Even as we speak we have 13 rivers in North Carolina at major flood stage. So we’re continuing to work to get people safe and secure. Our first responders are out there making sure people are safe and secure and that will continue to be a priority.

“I also know that communities like this one have been stunned at the breadth of the damage that has been done. I’ve talked to people that have lost their entire home, people who really don’t know what to do with the fact that their business has been washed away, farmers who had a majority of crops in their field that they were not able to harvest in time. We know that we’re a state that is hurting. But one thing I know is that North Carolinians are strong. North Carolinians are resilient.”

Cooper said that he had seen so many working to help one another, in addition to the government assistance already in action.

“Our local, state and federal partners are pulling together and working in a coordinated way to make sure we help people, and neighbors are helping neighbors,” Cooper said. “Communities of faith are stepping up. I talked to one woman whose house had been destroyed. She was out serving meals to other people.  That is the spirit of North Carolina and that is the spirit that I am witnessing across this state.”

The governor said shelters remain open across affected areas of the state, including some here. He said there are about 7,800 people in those shelters.

“We still have close to 200,000 who are without power, some of them in this community. I’ve been assured by the electric co-ops and by other utilities that they are going to work as hard as they can to get power back as quickly as possible,” he said.

Cooper said the North Carolina Department of Transportation is working to clear routes to make sure that food, supplies and other help can get to those in need.

Director of Emergency Management Mike Sprayberry joined Cooper and others at the podium. Sprayberry said the state Emergency Operations Center remains activated at Level 1. “That means we have all of our federal, state, private-sector and volunteer partners activated on a 24-hour basis. We know you’re hurting out here, it’s been a tough time. It’s been unprecedented,” he said.

Widespread search and rescue operations were continuing in southeastern North Carolina and up the coast, Sprayberry said. The N.C. National Guard and U.S. Coast Guard as well as task forces from other parts of the state and other states for search and rescue had assisted in many of those operations.

So far, five mass-feeding kitchens were in place and teams were about to set up four more. All 911 centers are operational, Sprayberry said.

State Deputy Secretary of Transportation Bobby Lewis said that NCDOT had made significant progress in clearing roads blocked by storm debris. At the peak more than 2,200 roads were closed, he said. Now fewer than 900 remain, but some areas are still experiencing major flood conditions, including U.S.70 and U.S. 258 in Lenoir County, conditions that are expected to continue through the weekend.

“We’re not out of the woods yet,” Lewis said. “And we’re still committed to provide as much as access to the transportation network as possible, but I still caution everybody on trying to return back to their homes.”

All state ferry routes are open but are running on restricted schedules, as posted online.

Two state ferry division vessels laden with recovery supplies and fuel departed Cherry Branch Tuesday for Southport to help Brunswick and New Hanover counties, Lewis said.

Going Door to Door

Albie Lewis, federal coordinating officer with FEMA, was also on hand Wednesday. He said federal resources were on the way.

“You will see disaster survivor assistance teams out on the street going door to door, making sure that folks are registered, those heads of household and those renters that need assistance,” Lewis said.

He urged those who need assistance to call 1-800-621-FEMA,

Already more than 40,000 are registered in North Carolina with more than $400,000 approved for survivors, Lewis said.

“We’re here for the long haul,” he added.

Sprayberry said there would also be door-to-door efforts on the part of the state to get people to register for assistance. “You’ll see that aggressively in the coming days,” he said.

Cooper added that there had also been door-to-door search and rescue operations, particularly in flooded locations to be sure no one had been left behind.

“I’m glad that many people abided by the evacuation orders. I have no doubt that saved many lives for people not being where this water came.”

County Response

Carteret County Board of Commissioners Chairman Mark Mansfield was also at the governor’s appearance. He said the county has many needs, but some services were already back in operation.

“We finally got trash back up and operating, that’s been a big deal. We’ve been without that, but we got those sites opened up yesterday,” Mansfield said Wednesday. “We’re going to have a ton of storm debris. We’ve got a lot of people who’ve taken a lot of roof damage, and we’ve had a lot of people who had flooding come up in their house and we’ve had a lot of people flooded 30 inches through their house. There are trees down everywhere, half the county is still without power – for almost a week half the county was without power. That affects septic tanks, wells.

County Vice Chairman Robin Comer agreed. He said Hurricane Florence wasn’t like storms of the past.

“In looking at past storms, everybody relaxes when it’s all over. They take a sigh of relief,” Comer said. “This storm, you’re not going to be able to do that. With power being gone for weeks, you’re going to have sanitation issues, you’re going to have elderly getting sick, you’re going to see pneumonia – I mean the worst is yet to come. We’re going to have to stay on this thing and now it’s time to kick it up a notch and not relax.

“This recovery is going to be a marathon, not a sprint,” Mansfield added.

Commissioner Jonathan Robinson said he was pleased to see how county residents had responded.

“I appreciate the good-heartedness of our neighbors and the fact that we’re all pulling together,” he said.

NEWPORT – We’re trying. As this Carteret County community struggles to get back to normal we’ve been trying to get a report on conditions here posted at Coastal Review Online. Wednesday was our first opportunity to publish.

Power has been restored to more and more homes and businesses each day since Florence moved on, mobile phones work in some places some of the time, but internet service has proved elusive until now.

Florence left a large swath of damage and destruction, but residents here have begun putting the pieces back together. It’s going to take a while. Each day, we hear about more who lost everything. The extent of the destruction is just becoming clear for those of us left isolated by the storm.

Like most lifelong coastal North Carolina residents, I’ve lived through many hurricanes. But unlike some, this is the first disaster I’ve experienced firsthand. For days, news and information have been courtesy a barely web-connected radio station or two, leaving us essentially cut off from the rest of the world. That’s just how it felt.

Saturday morning, the Newport River rose above the bridges and into neighborhoods, leaving Newport temporarily isolated from the rest of Carteret County. Much of the Down East community, we’d heard, was underwater and things weren’t much better to the west, especially in New Bern.

What we’ve heard most has been the obnoxious but welcome roar of generators that for days have kept folks going with some level of comfort – charging mostly useless mobile phones and preserving what little food remains in refrigerators. Conversations, both in person and by phone, are best had a few yards away from the din. Gas stations began making scarce supplies available Sunday, but lines for gas were long and at first and $30 was each customer’s limit. Gas has become more easily available as power is gradually restored across the area.

Recovery began at daybreak Friday, even as Florence continued to thrash the coast. Sunrise revealed broken or toppled trees had penetrated homes, mangled trucks and cars and stretched or snapped power lines every so many doors up and down each street. Near the Newport River, floodwaters had trapped some on the highway, who apparently abandoned their vehicles and found safety, and reached the doorknobs or higher in homes. Many homes were lost entirely.

Phone calls only occasionally connect. In Newport, connections are sometimes better if you walk out to the street and pace back and forth until you find a sweet spot. Sending text messages has been like throwing electronic darts that lack feathers. Few reach their targets. Receiving them sometimes happens in spurts, like around midnight when you’ve finally managed to drift off despite the uncomfortably muggy stillness and then your phone starts dinging like a pinball machine. Internet and email? Forget about it. Hence the missed publication schedule for Coastal Review Online.

During the storm, mobile phones became a chorus of emergency warnings directing us to “check local media” for details on tornadoes, flash floods and other calamities. But at the height of the storm, much of the local media were like Coastal Review Online and much of the public, off the grid. This is a big flaw in the public warning system, one that should be addressed before the next storm. Details should accompany alerts. Referrals are not so helpful.

What appears to have worked was the early-warning sounded in the days before Florence arrived.

Forecasters warned of relentless rainfall, dangerous storm surge and flooding at levels most coastal residents had never seen – and even the old-timers were unlikely to have experienced – and wind speed estimates that prompted visions of exploding structures and airborne roofs.

The apparent weakening that followed initial reports gave some hope for the typical, less destructive reality that followed the early alarming forecasts of countless previous hurricanes. But Florence wasn’t like previous storms.

Making landfall as a Category 1, Florence didn’t really “weaken.” The storm instead shifted into low gear, grinding to a near halt to slowly pummel the barrier islands along Onslow Bay, drenching nearly all of eastern North Carolina with driving and persistent rains and forcing a massive wall of water into inland communities along sounds and rivers.

Following the storm, curfews were enacted or extended to deter criminal or just plain stupid activities. But storm-related incidents appear to have been few and mostly unrelated to bad behavior, despite a fistfight in a local grocery store parking lot Sunday morning.

Mostly there have been examples of shining humanity.

Large convoys of bucket trucks operated by local line crews and volunteers from distant towns arrived to help restore desperately needed power as quickly as possible. Fire crews from all over the state brought their various types of apparatus to assist. The National Guard showed up, letting anyone in doubt know this really is serious.

Nonprofit groups, loosely affiliated volunteers and others arrived quickly and provided meals, shelter, cleanup help and comfort to those in need. Neighbors combined what they had on hand and fed one another.

People with chainsaws headed out in the early light and continued wind-driven rain Friday and cleared the streets around Newport of fallen trees. Entire crews, some with heavy equipment, went door-to-door to help those with trees on their homes or blocking their driveways. Neighbors helping neighbors, it was going on almost everywhere you looked.

Florence was not quite the same as any of the historic storms we remember, but Florence was what many had warned: the storm of a lifetime. But that’s an assessment that relies only on what we’d seen in the past. Science says we’ll continue to see more like Florence, more often.

We have work to do.

Featured Photo

An American robin hatchling instinctively responds to sound by opening up as another struggles to emerge from its shell in a nest in a tree on a lawn in Newport. Photo: Mark Hibbs

Robins are fairly common or common in all coastal North Carolina counties, according to the Carolina Bird Club, but are uncommon or rare on barrier islands during the breeding season. Lawns and farmlands are their main breeding habitat, rather than most forested areas, making them as well adapted to man’s presence as any native bird.

Learn More

• Birds of North Carolina: American robin

Featured Photo

RALEIGH – The Neuse River is flowing more naturally now, with its waters and its migratory fish moving in ways not seen in centuries.

That’s since the long-planned removal late last year of the decrepit and dangerous Millburnie Dam, which stood a few miles away from the capital city’s downtown. But the company behind the work says the dam wasn’t simply demolished, it was replaced by a habitat-restoration project known as a mitigation bank.

Advocates say the removal is already bringing ecological benefits to the entire river, which winds from the Piedmont to Pamlico Sound. Milburnie was the last of several dams on the Neuse that impeded migratory fish from the coast and it was since 2001 ranked among state and federal agencies’ top 10 of 5,000 dams statewide as a priority for removal.

“We’ve been working to remove that dam for a number of years now and it’s a tremendous positive thing for the river,” said Upper Neuse Riverkeeper Matthew Starr of the Sound Rivers organization. “Obviously, returning a river to its natural, free-flowing system is a benefit to the entire river.”

Starr said the removal means anadromous fish such as striped bass, American shad and Atlantic sturgeon can now swim to their native spawning grounds upriver of the dam site.

One of the first studies by the organization now known as the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership concluded in 1989 that dams on rivers in North Carolina’s coastal plain were a big factor in the declining population of once-thriving regional fisheries. The removal more than 20 years ago of the Quaker Neck Dam near Goldsboro re-opened about 80 miles of the Neuse and more than 920 miles of streams as spawning habitat and was one of the first such projects nationwide undertaken for ecological reasons. The subsequent removal of the nearby Cherry Hospital dam on the Little River restored another 76 miles of streams for anadromous fish habitat in the Neuse River basin.

Another important benefit is improved water quality, Starr said.

“It already has done wonders – a river’s not meant to be impounded,” Starr said. “It’s an ecosystem approach. It may seem pinpoint, but (removing the dam) contributes to the overall health of the river. And most importantly, it has to do with safety. There have been a number of drownings and this removes that threat.”

Those deaths, blamed on the deceptively powerful hydraulic turbulence that the dam created, along with other potential liabilities and concerns related to the deteriorating powerhouse that hadn’t generated electricity in more than a decade, had prompted the property owners to seek its removal.

The owners, the family of the late Howard Twiggs, a Raleigh attorney, contracted with Restorations Systems LLC of Raleigh, an environmental restoration and mitigation company, for the removal and mitigation project.

“The owners wanted it removed – it was their father’s wish,” said Tiffani Bylow, the project’s manager at Restoration Systems. “After he passed away, his daughters and his sister saw that through.”

Removing the dam opened about 15 miles of river to spawning migratory fish, such as American and hickory shad and striped bass.

“It’s already showing huge success at this point,” Bylow said. She noted several catches of American shad have been documented upriver at the tailrace of the Falls Lake Dam since late April.

That’s cause for celebration. Restoration Systems, Sound Rivers and the national conservation nonprofit American Rivers are joining to host this Saturday the Raleigh River Fest. The organizers hope the planned paddle race, fish fry, fishing rodeo and other festivities at the former dam site now dubbed Milburnie Falls will become an annual event.

River Banks, Mitigation Banking

Planning for the removal project took about 10 years. Because of limited state and federal funds, Restoration Systems determined that the best way to pay for removing the dam – a project that would cost millions of dollars – was to use a provision of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act called mitigation banking. Setting up that banking instrument took a big chunk of the prep time.

The federal regulatory program allows for projects to remove river and stream barriers to generate stream restoration credits. Those credits can then be used to meet the compensatory mitigation – the restoration, creation, enhancement or preservation of natural resources – required for projects that damage the environment.

Permitting the project as a mitigation bank allows for the sale of mitigation credits to offset damage done to other waterways in the region. It’s also a tool that could be used to remove other obsolete dams across the country where funding is an obstacle.

Under Section 404, the Army Corps of Engineers, before issuing a permit, must work with the project’s proponent to first avoid and minimize adverse effects and then to provide compensation for damage that’s unavoidable. The Corps’ regulatory program is based on a policy goal of no net loss of wetlands and there’s no exclusion for manmade wetlands, such as those created by a dam, said Jean Gibby, chief of the Army Corps of Engineers’ Raleigh field office.

“Restoration Systems is generating mitigation credits for impacts to streams,” Gibby explained.

The total number of credits, called stream mitigation units or SMUs, awarded to the bank is determined based on standards detailed in the mitigation plan. If all performance standards are met, the bank will be awarded its maximum credit potential. In North Carolina, the Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Mitigation Services, or DMS, works with companies that set up mitigation banks in the state by selling program credits.

“In 2008, a mitigation rule came out from the Corps and it stated that if you’re going to do a mitigation bank this is how you have to do it,” Gibby explained.

Also that year, the Corps and other agencies issued a rule for dam removal projects in North Carolina. “The documents came out together,” Gibby said. Until that time, there was no set procedure to identify when and how dam removal should be used as compensatory mitigation for loss of streams and stream functions from development projects.

“This mitigation guidance was the first of its kind in the country. We had to think outside the box,” Gibby said. “It couldn’t have happened if we didn’t have this guidance.”

For this project, SMUs are awarded for factors such as creating an appropriate aquatic community that includes mussels, fishes and aquatic insects; habitat restoration for rare, threatened or endangered species; observation of American shad, including their passage upstream of the dam; and scientific research completed and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Gibby said re-establishing some of the appropriate aquatic species will take some time.

“Bugs that indicate a flowing river were not there, but they will come back,” she said. “Critters that live in a lake don’t live in a flowing river.”

The change will also likely bring the demise of some species, but others may adapt, she said.

Regarding the restoration of endangered species, “in this case we’re looking at mussel species,” Gibby said, referring specifically to the dwarf wedgemussel. “If we can prevent a state-listed species from becoming a federal species through habitat restoration, we give credit for that.”

The mussels in question will take three to four years before it’s appropriate to survey for them. “They may already be there, but it’s too detrimental to do survey to find them,” Gibby explained.

Another mussel, the yellow lance, wasn’t a listed species prior to the project but was listed as threatened in 2017 after surveys showed the species had lost 57 percent of its historical range.

But in the case of Milburnie, Gibby said, anadromous fish – “That was the big thing.”

Why are anadromous fish so important? Gibby said shad is a vital fishery resource from a commercial standpoint. Like salmon, they spawn in the rivers they were born in.

Starr, the Riverkeeper, said some anadromous species, such as shad, were faring relatively well, but not striped bass. “Striper is a whole different ball game. The striper fishery long ago was not quite as prolific as shad but the river used to have a significant striper population,” he said.

Also, to satisfy state regulators, wetlands restoration must be at least equal to the damage it offsets. In other words, for every foot of damage, at least one foot of mitigation must be in the form of restoration.

Gibby said that in the case of Milburnie Dam, there were initial concerns regarding wetlands immediately upstream of the structure.

“Mr. Twiggs, who’s now deceased, was very environmentally conscious, he wanted it gone,” Gibby said. “This was a dream of the family to ultimately get the dam removed but you would have to address wetlands drainage no matter what or who removed it. We were looking at up to 15 acres of wetlands that could be impacted.”

Some of this change would affect nearby property owners, folks who’d built homes and docks on the lake-like area upstream of the dam. Many responded when the 30-day public notice for the project was issued.

“There was a public backlash,” Gibby said. “Everybody came out of the woodwork that didn’t want the pond gone.”

Gibby said there was nothing in the comments that would have resulted in the denial of the project. “They have to have some pretty good reasons to deny the permit.”

Also, the opposition came from what Gibby described as a vocal few. One of the early opponents owned a pontoon boat that would be left high and dry by the dam removal. The owner eventually had a change of heart and Restoration Systems purchased his boat and donated it to the Sound Rivers organization.

According to a history of the dam provided by Sound Rivers, the Milburnie Dam dates to the 1700s when the earliest known river barrier at the site was used to power a grist mill. Later, in the 1850s, the site was home to a paper mill that Union troops destroyed in 1865. A sawmill operated at the location until 1880. About 20 years later, the Raleigh Ice & Electric Co. built a stone dam at the site that was later purchased by Carolina Power and Light. The property has been in the Twiggs family since 1934, which leased the site in the late 1970s to a Pennsylvania company that built a new hydroelectric plant that operated from 1984 until sometime between 2006 and 2009. Since then, the structure had fallen into disrepair, becoming what many described as a dangerous eyesore.

Restoration Systems began draining the 6-mile impoundment behind the dam last September. The dam removal happened in November. Starr said the it was a big step toward improving the Neuse River’s overall health.

“We’re a long way from having a truly healthy river but we’ve made a lot of progress from where we were in the ’90s,” Starr said. “There are many, many pollution threats, however, we’ve done a good job as a river basin to remove some of those threats and make some threats less. But the emerging contaminants issue is an example of how we can remove one threat, but we still have to deal with another. There’s still a tremendous amount of work to do.”

Learn More

• Restoration Systems’ Milburnie Dam page
• Anadromous fish monitoring
• Sound Rivers’ Milburnie Dam page

RALEIGH – A newly created panel will help change the way the state approaches and integrates environmental protection and social justice, Department of Environmental Quality Secretary Michael Regan said Wednesday.

Regan introduced his 16-member Environmental Justice and Equity Advisory Board during a ceremony in Green Square. The open, sunlight-filled space is in what he called “the people’s environmental house,” the DEQ headquarters on West Jones Street.

Officials described the board as a first step toward ensuring that DEQ considers disadvantaged and minority populations in its decision making. It’s an important endeavor Regan said, “One that will help ensure that no North Carolinian is overlooked or left behind as we tackle some of the toughest environmental issues our state will face.”

Regan said those tough issues include GenX, landfills, coal ash and animal feeding operations.

“We drink the same water, we breathe the same air that we test all across North Carolina. And that’s why this particular board, the Environmental Justice and Equity Advisory Board, is so important to us.”

A Missing Component

Veronica Carter of Leland, a member of the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s board of directors and a 20-year Army veteran, is one of the new board’s members. Carter, whose interest in environmental justice was fueled about 15 years ago by a proposal to build a 750-acre landfill near her then new home in Brunswick County, said there is a need for environmental justice on North Carolina’s coast and across the state.

“Every organization, every group that we run into needs an EJ component,” Carter said following the ceremony. “I’m so proud that the Coastal Federation picked that up a while ago and I’m so thankful to be a member of this board because it seemed like every major issue that we were trying to advocate for, for the Coastal Federation and other groups, had an EJ component that was somewhat missing, that it wasn’t being examined or addressed. We were looking at the environment, but we weren’t looking at the people and especially the least of these, as I like to call them, the communities of least resistance, the communities of color and the communities of a low socio-economic (status), that really didn’t have the means to fight back.”

The human aspect was something that Regan said had been diminished in his department’s mission under the previous administration, which sought to frame the agency as more business-friendly.

“It downplayed the protection of people and no, it did not reflect my vision and the governor’s vision for inclusivity,” Regan said. “Governor Cooper and I wanted a mission statement that would better reflect the values we represent every day in protecting the health and welfare of all people we serve.”

He said DEQ’s new mission statement is to provide science-based environmental stewardship for the health and prosperity of all North Carolinians. That’s not just a feel-good exercise but an achievable goal, Regan said, adding that all state residents should have the same access to a healthy and prosperous life.

“That means clean air, clean water and protections from the harmful impacts of climate change, whether that be sea level rising or more frequent and intense storms that leave our most vulnerable populations at a higher risk, or ensuring the jobs and the economic security of a better educated, cleaner and healthier future is available for those in our rural and poorest communities,” he said.

Regan said environmental protection and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive but go hand in hand.

“This mission for me is just as much personal as it is professional obligation,” he said, adding that his beliefs were based on his personal faith and upbringing.

Members of the advisory board share that vision, Regan said.

“The good news is, we are not starting from scratch, folks. This is in North Carolina’s DNA,” Regan said, referring to a battle in Warren County in 1982 in which hundreds of residents were arrested in a long, unsuccessful fight against a state landfill for cancer-causing PCBs in their predominantly black community.

“They sparked a national movement and a dialogue that continues today. And like many voices in our state’s rich history of pursuing equity, they took it upon themselves to try and right a wrong and seek fairness and justice, just like those from my beloved A&T State University who also sought equal and fair treatment at the Woolworth lunch counters in Greensboro, North Carolina. Though Warren County protesters lost the battle, they did not lose the war. Environmental groups began to see justice as a necessary part of their mission and that created a crack in the door.”

Regan said members of the DEQ staff are also members of the communities they serve.

“Some of our detractors would have you think that we’re disconnected regulators that don’t care about the people and don’t care about the economy. But I’m here to tell you, we care about the environment, we care about our communities, we care about the economy that supports our families.”

He said the agency also cares deeply about diversity and has been working to diversify the staff to reflect the state’s communities and their interests.

Community Branding

James Johnson Jr. of Chapel Hill, professor of strategy and entrepreneurship and director of the Urban Investment Strategies Center at the University of North Carolina’s Frank Hawkins Kenan Institute of Private Enterprise, is the advisory board’s chairman. Johnson said during the ceremony that the panel’s work was about maintaining and enhancing North Carolina’s competitiveness in a global marketplace.

“Research confirms that firms and people are consumers of place,” he said. “Today, quality of life factors are far more important than traditional drivers of economic development and locational decisions of both firms and individuals and families. Communities that pursue equitable and inclusive economic land use and environmental policies, practices and procedures are far more attractive and therefore, I would argue, competitive than communities that do not embrace this paradigm shift.”

Johnson said communities that brand themselves as sustainable places must strive to protect the environment and natural resources, adhere to principles of social justice and equity and return shareholder value.

“From a global perspective, sustainability is about the planet, people and profits. It is indeed possible to do good and to do well at the same time,” he said.

Vice Chair Marian Johnson-Thompson of Durham, a retired biology and environmental sciences professor at the University of the District of Columbia and adjunct professor in the School of Public Health at UNC, explained that the underserved and underrepresented have been overly affected by negative environmental influences and the advisory board reflects a new seriousness in the state’s approach.

“To have an appointed state committee consisting of such a diverse group of individuals representing racial and ethnic minorities, environmental and health scientists, health professionals, clergy, academia, the legal community, underserved groups, activists, policymakers, educators and private sector representatives is indicative of our state’s leaders’ commitment to addressing environmental justice inequity,” she said.

Carter expressed similar appreciation.

“I’m glad that the governor and the secretary are now forming a really impressive board – I’m really humbled – a really impressive board to address those issues and be able to bring them directly to him as we see them affect our folks on the coast,” she said. “We talk about GenX, we talk about coal ash but there are communities that are even more vulnerable within that big subset of all of us. And so, we’ve tried to address this as individual groups, individual organizations, but now hopefully we’ll have the secretary and the governor aware of it when they’re making policy, when they’re trying to come up with plans to address it.”

How the board may function when it comes to actual policymaking remains unclear, but Carter said the move opens the lines of communication for people whose voices may have been drowned out in the past.

“We’re brand new so it’s still somewhat of an experiment,” she said. “If nothing else, we bring things directly to the table. We have that access to the secretary and to the DEQ staff. They hear many things from many people but now it can be more of a structured meeting. I think that’ll work well.”

The 16 members of the board are:

• James Johnson Jr. of Chapel Hill – Chair.
• Marian Johnson-Thompson of Durham – Vice Chair.
• Danelle Lobdell of Chapel Hill.
• Naeema Muhammed of Rocky Mount.
• Jamie Cole of Raleigh.
• Susan Jakes of Raleigh.
• Randee Haven O’Donnell of Chapel Hill.
• Angela Esteva of Cary.
• Jeff Anstead of the Haliwa-Saponi Indian Tribe, Warrenton.
• Joseph Owle of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, Cherokee.
• Rodney Sadler Jr. of Charlotte.
• William Barber III of Durham.
• Marilynn Marsh-Robinson of Knightdale.
• Mercedes Hernández-Pelletier of Fuquay-Varina.
• Veronica Carter of Leland.
• Yu Yang of Cary.

Featured Photo

HOLDEN BEACH – The town board of commissioners has voted to put on hold all work toward getting a permit to build terminal groin and to seek more time for public comment on the proposed structure.

The action comes just days after the Army Corps of Engineers released the final environmental study for the project that’s been in the works for the past two and a half years.

The board voted Wednesday during a special meeting to direct attorney Clark Wright to submit a request for a 30-day extension to the comment period related to the final environmental impact study, or FEIS, for the town’s proposed terminal groin. The Corps released the study March 15. Public comments were to be received for 30 days, or until April 16.

“My thinking is the more time we have for comment, the better,” said Mayor Pro Tem Mike Sullivan, who offered the motion to extend the comment period. He said the extension would also give the town board additional time to consider the report.

Commissioner Pat Kwiatkowski said the extension would allow for discussions during three already scheduled commission meetings “to get everybody’s input.”

The board also approved in a unanimous vote a motion that no town employee, agent, contractor, subcontractor or person representing the town before any federal or state agency shall take action that advances or terminates the current application process related to the terminal groin prior to a vote of the board of commissioners that restores such authority. The motion excludes work by Wright, the attorney who is working as a consultant to the town on the project.

Kwiatkowski called the action “a time out” on use of time and money on the permit application process until the board is ready to proceed. “And then when everyone is on the same page and we have heard everyone and there is an opinion that can be formed, there will be a vote taken,” she said.

The project was proposed to address chronic erosion at the eastern end of the 8.1-mile-long barrier island. Erosion has led to dune breaching and flooding along the east end of town and has resulted in the loss of about 27 oceanfront properties since 1993. Average long-term erosion rates along the most affected area ranges from a loss of 3 to 8 feet per year, among the highest in the state, according to the study.

The town had sought a permit to build a 700-foot-long terminal groin with a 300-foot shore anchorage system to be supplemented with a long-term plan for beach re-nourishment. The structure would also include a 120-foot-long “T-head” segment centered on the seaward end of the main stem to help minimize potential rip currents and sand losses during extreme wave conditions.

Critics have said the $34.4 million project would benefit only a handful of homes, protect less than $1.2 million in tax revenue over 30 years and push chronic erosion at the east end of Holden Beach to spots farther down the beach.

Town Manager David Hewett said the board’s action was a reflection of public concerns with the project. Three of the five town commissioners, Sullivan, Kwiatkowski and Commissioner Joseph Butler, were elected to their first terms in November in a race in which the terminal groin plan was at issue.

“It’s a matter of record that a number of folks ran on that platform,” Hewett told Coastal Review Online Thursday. “The fact that they’re providing an extended period to gather more information is part of a larger desire to serve the public will. Calling a time out in the middle of a game is evidence that something is important.”

Learn More

• Listen to audio from the meeting

ATLANTIC – Drinking water samples from 26 private wells near the Marine Corps’ outlying landing field in this Down East Carteret County community have detectable levels of man-made compounds described as emerging contaminants, but only two of the wells sampled so far have tested at amounts at or above federal health recommendations for a lifetime of exposure.

The sampling is part of an ongoing Navy investigation into whether property owners near Atlantic Field have been exposed to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, in their drinking water and to identify potential sources of the contaminants. The Navy has tested 223 wells in the area around the airfield since November when the investigation began.

Navy officials hosted an informational meeting Feb. 21 in the school gym at Atlantic Elementary to share the results of the investigation, which they stressed is in its preliminary stage. Officials are also encouraging more property owners in the area to volunteer to have their well water tested for the contaminants, which share similarities with the compound known as GenX that has been detected in the Cape Fear River near Wilmington and elsewhere around the Chemours Co. manufacturing plant in Bladen County.

“Aircraft firefighting foam is one of the things that these compounds have been used in,” said Mike Barton, director of public affairs at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point. “They’ve been commonly used in commercial products since the 1950s, including things like Teflon and a lot of different products out there. The Navy is conducting this investigation to determine if our airfield has introduced any of these compounds into the local water. They’re doing this all over the country at different airfields.”

Permission Needed

Barton noted that the community gets its drinking water from private wells rather than a municipal system, but permission from homeowners is needed to allow sampling to determine if any PFAS compounds can be detected. A similar, initial meeting was held here Nov. 8.

“This is not something we’re required to do, but the Navy is just trying to get ahead of it now to make sure that we’re looking out for our neighbors because we’ve always been close neighbors and they’ve always been good neighbors to us out here,” he said.

Emerging contaminants are compounds that have no Safe Drinking Water Act regulatory standards or routine water quality testing requirements. The Environmental Protection Agency is studying PFAS to determine whether regulation is needed. The EPA in May 2016 released lifetime health advisory levels for two PFAS, perfluorooctane sulfonate, or PFOS, and perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA. The advisory levels aren’t regulatory standards but are supposed to provide a margin of protection from adverse health effects resulting from exposure to PFOS and PFOA in drinking water.

Officials have not determined whether Atlantic Field is a source for the compounds, but since Navy scientists determined that aircraft firefighting foam had contained them, new, safer foams are being developed.

There are no reported releases of aqueous film forming foam, or AFFF, at Atlantic Field, and no PFAS were detected in drinking water supply samples taken here in September 2016, but officials said that doesn’t mean groundwater hasn’t been affected by past operations.

The two samples from private wells in the area around the airfield that showed levels of PFAS that exceeded the EPA’s health advisory of 70 parts per trillion were not identified in order to protect the property owners’ privacy, Barton said.

The Navy is trying to sample as many wells as possible. There are more than 600 drinking water wells in the community, but officials are unsure how many are in use.

“We don’t know how many of them are being used because some of them are sitting on properties where there’s not even a house,” Barton said.

For households where sampling shows levels above the lifetime health advisory, the Navy is dispatching within 24 hours a team to contact the property owners and let them know and arrange delivery of bottled water as soon as possible. If levels are below the advisory, the policy calls for no further action.

The investigation and response could take several years, depending on complexity of any contamination found, officials said.

Health Risks

Sue Casteel, a health educator with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry in Atlanta, said drinking water in the Atlantic community is being tested for PFOA and PFAS, which are both common compounds that can come from numerous sources.

Scientists believe that these compounds can cause increased cholesterol levels, affect hormone levels, increase the risk of certain types of cancer, decrease fertility, cause immune system changes and can affect fetuses and the children of nursing mothers. Exposure can come from contaminated food, water and soil and breathing air that contains contaminated dust. Levels can build up in the body until exposure stops. Blood tests don’t provide clear answers for possible health effects and are not a routine screening that health care providers offer.

These compounds, which don’t occur naturally, can last a long time in the environment and can be found in people, animals and fish around the world. In addition to aircraft firefighting foam and non-stick cookware, they can be found in paints and stains, water-repelling fabrics, stain-resistant carpets and food packaging.

“The good news in all this is that the PFAS levels in people are dropping all the time because a lot of PFAS-containing products have been taken off the market,” Casteel said.

Molecules in all PFAS chemicals contain carbon and fluorine atoms. Some also include oxygen, hydrogen, sulfur or nitrogen atoms. The PFAS used in the firefighting foam is composed of a longer chain of carbon atoms in the molecule, compared to GenX’s shorter chain, Casteel said.

“They’re both under the PFAS group of chemicals but right now we know a lot more about the long-chain PFAS substances and how they affect health. We don’t know as much about the shorter chains,” she said.

PFAS and perfluorononanoic acid, or PFOA, substances have been around longer, she said.

C8, the compound in Teflon that GenX replaced, is an example of a PFOA with eight carbon atoms, hence the name.

Get Your Water Sampled

The sampling period was to continue in the Atlantic community through March 1, but officials said more time may be provided as necessary. The sampling takes less than an hour and an adult resident, 18 or older, must be present. Results are expected in March.

To schedule an appointment for sampling a drinking water well in Atlantic, contact NavyAtlanticWater@usmc.mil or call 1-877-626-5317.

Learn More

• Updates on the Atlantic Field investigation
• EPA’s PFAS website

HUBERT – The North Carolina Department of Transportation is touting its first passenger-only ferry, a high-speed, aluminum-hull catamaran being built here, as a way to provide a higher level of service to coastal travelers and boost tourism on the state’s Outer Banks.

State and company officials hosted last week an open house for media at US Workboats’ manufacturing plant on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Hubert, an unincorporated community in Onslow County near Swansboro. The company is building the 92-foot-long, 26-foot-wide Ocracoke Express passenger ferry that will operate from Hatteras Island to Ocracoke Island’s Silver Lake Harbor. Officials expect service to begin by mid-summer.

“Our goal is to get those tourism levels back to where they were,” White said.

In 2013, shoaling in Hatteras Inlet prompted the Ferry Division to switch to a longer, deeper route between Hatteras and Ocracoke, the most heavily used route in the state’s ferry service. What was once a 35- to 40-minute, 4.5-mile crossing for the Hatteras-Ocracoke vehicle ferry is now about an hourlong, 9-mile trip.

The effects of the change were “dramatic,” according to the state’s feasibility study. Daily crossings in each direction were reduced from 53 to 36, and fuel and labor costs increased by more than $7,000 each day. The change also created long queues at the ferry terminals, making it difficult for visitors to the Outer Banks to make a day trip to Ocracoke. Local business owners blamed their lost business revenue on fewer day-trippers.

“The projected loss of between 31,000 and 50,000 visitors to Ocracoke in the peak months could be attributed to the lower levels of service caused by the longer route,” according to the study.

Almost all Ocracoke business owners surveyed for the study said that long wait times at ferry docks were a major challenge to their business.

Plans call for the 100-passenger ferry to use Rollinson Channel to access the Pamlico Sound and Big Foot Slough to access Silver Lake, making four round-trips daily with the first departure from Hatteras at 10 a.m. and the last departure from Ocracoke at 8:30 p.m., May through September. The round-trip fare will be $15 per passenger.

White said the Ocracoke Express will offer guaranteed boarding, with less wait time at the ferry terminals, compared to vehicle ferries, which will also continue service after the passenger ferry runs begin. The new ferry will also offer amenities such as an air-conditioned passenger cabin with open-air seating on the top deck, concessions and bike racks for passengers wanting to bring their bicycles to Ocracoke.

“You can do the entire thing without a car,” White said, adding that the plan has already sparked private business investment in Ocracoke Village. Some locals are buying golf carts to make available for rent to visitors, she said.

“Entrepreneurs in Ocracoke are seeing this as a wonderful way of experiencing Ocracoke,” she said.

The state in June 2017 awarded the $4.15 million contract to build the ferry. It’s part of an overall $9 million passenger ferry project that also includes parking improvements and visitor facilities at the Hatteras and Ocracoke-Silver Lake terminals. Money for the project is from a grant from the Federal Lands Access Program and an appropriation by the North Carolina General Assembly.

In addition to a faster crossing, the Ocracoke Express will arrive at Silver Lake Harbor in the heart of the village, rather than at the north ferry terminal about 20 minutes and 13.5 miles away, where vehicles from Hatteras Island arrive.

Unlike the vehicle ferries, the shallow conditions in Hatteras Inlet and Pamlico Sound won’t be a problem for the Ocracoke Express. Speed and a shallow draft were the basis for the new ferry’s catamaran design, which drew inspiration from a ferry the division tested in Provincetown, Massachusetts, said Ferry Division spokesman Tim Haas.

“The catamaran hull is perfect for the environment it’s going to be operating in,” Haas said.

The new 95-ton ferry will feature water jet propulsion and four 803-horsepower Caterpillar C18 ACERT marine engines that are advertised as meeting the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2017 Tier 3 emissions standards.

Sheila Pierce Knight, executive director of Jacksonville-Onslow Economic Development, said at the media open house that US Workboats has been “a great success story for eastern North Carolina.”

The Port Angeles, Washington-based company, formerly known as Armstrong Marine, specializes in welded aluminum boat manufacturing. The company in late 2013 announced it would invest more than $8.4 million in the facility in Hubert. Originally a Tiara Yachts manufacturing plant, the site was most recently owned by Brunswick Corp., which built Hatteras Yachts here from 2005 until 2008.

Armstrong Marine completed its first boat made entirely in North Carolina in 2015, a search and rescue boat made for Sullivan’s Island Fire Department in South Carolina.

US Workboats has 24 employees and is adding about three each week, depending on work and space for workers on the vessel, said the company’s Tracy Gable.

Securing the state contract to build the ferry in Onslow County is a source of pride for the community, Knight said.

“It makes sense to have a boat being built for North Carolina Citizens by North Carolina citizens,” she said. “It keeps our tax dollars at home.”

The passenger ferry is one of two builds underway for the Ferry Division. The other vessel is a new river class ferry being built in Louisiana and slated for launch in 2020. The addition of two new vessels is intended to reduce delays and travel times, Haas said.

“Hopefully, we’ll get summer wait times down to a reasonable level,” he said.

The state in October 2017 awarded a $9.7 million contract for construction of the new river class vehicle ferry. That vessel will be 183 feet long and have room for 38 regular-sized vehicles.  It will serve as a replacement for the 22-year-old M/V Thomas A. Baum, a Hatteras-class ferry that carries 26 vehicles.

Once built, the new vessel will be the Ferry Division’s first new car ferry since the M/V Sea Level was christened in 2012.

Learn More

• US Workboats

BEAUFORT COUNTY — Conservation groups and area residents are celebrating a recent victory in the six-year-long fight to protect Blounts Creek, a popular fishing spot and recreation area, from becoming a wastewater dump for a mining operation.

A superior court judge has vacated a state water quality permit that would have allowed the discharge every day of millions of gallons of wastewater from a proposed Martin Marietta Materials Inc. mine into the creek. Judge Joshua Willey Jr., who heard the case in Carteret County in October, issued his ruling Dec. 18, reversing a previous ruling by an administrative law judge. Willey found that the state Division of Water Resources had not ensured reasonable compliance with the biological integrity standard, or required protection of the creek’s aquatic species, and that permit challengers had sufficiently established that they were affected.

While enjoying the win, opponents of the company’s plan are bracing for another appeal.

The Southern Environmental Law Center fought the Division of Water Resources’ permit on behalf of the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review Online, and Sound Rivers, which monitors and protects the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico Rivers and watersheds. Blounts Creek is vital habitat to a diverse community of fish, including red drum and river herring, according to a statement from the law center.

“This ruling affirms the fundamental requirements of our state and federal water quality laws that require state agencies to protect the biological integrity, fish, and wildlife of our coastal creeks and sounds,” said Todd Miller, executive director of the Coastal Federation.

In order to develop a 649-acre limestone mine within a 1,664-acre quarry east of Vanceboro, Martin Marietta planned to pump up to 12 million gallons of groundwater daily from the open pit, mostly  from the Castle Hayne aquifer, through miles of ditches, mixing with stormwater runoff on its way into Blounts Creek’s headwaters. The result would transform the swampy, slow-moving headwaters habitat into a fast-flowing stream of mostly mine wastewater, which would permanently alter the creek’s habitat and diversity of fish.

Heather Deck, Sound River executive director and Pamlico-Tar Riverkeeper, noted that the campaign to save Blounts Creek had continued six years and “never once did the community waver in their commitment to ensure the creek is protected for future generations.”

“This is a win to be shared by many,” she told Coastal Review Online. “The community members were very pleased with the outcome. Their work has been to ensure the creek is protected in its current, high-quality state and this ruling does that.”

Biological Integrity

Blounts Creek is tributary to Blounts Bay, which flows into the Pamlico River.

Bob Daw, one of the founders of the community organization, Save Blounts Creek, said the creek’s brackish waters attract fishermen from all over the state to catch saltwater fish such as speckled trout, flounder and puppy drum.

“I estimate that 75 percent of all fish caught by sportsmen and women in Blounts Creek are saltwater fish,” Daw said, adding that 12 million gallons of groundwater pumped into the creek every 24 hours for 50 years “would destroy what God intended to offer us with our Blounts Creek.”

Martin Marietta had noted in its permit application that the creek, altered by the proposed discharge, would no longer support its existing diversity of fish species and would no longer be considered swamp waters because of the increased flow, increased alkalinity, reduced salinity and other changes to the creek that would result from the discharge.

The Division of Water Resources’ lead biologist found that the creek with the wastewater would be unlike any creek naturally found in eastern North Carolina. Under federal and state law, North Carolina cannot authorize discharges that will violate water quality standards by changing the natural mix of species in a water body.

Judge Willey noted that state environmental regulators had concluded that the discharge into the creek would have minimal effects without first evaluating species and conditions in the creek, and then used that conclusion as a basis for not making the required evaluations.

“The Biological integrity standard is clear; DWR must protect the indigenous community by determining reference conditions in terms of evaluated impacts on the community’s species composition, diversity, population density and functional organization,” according to the ruling. “Reference conditions must be specific enough to allow the agency to apply the biological integrity standard properly. Therefore DWR did not ‘reasonably ensure compliance with’ the biological integrity standard. Consequently, the agency exceeded its authority and erred as a matter of law when issuing the permit.”

The Public’s Right

The reversal also included recognition of the public’s right to challenge the permit.

In the previous ruling, Judge Phil Berger Jr., son of N.C. Senate leader Phil Berger, held that a local marina owner’s business was a hobby and that residents who boat and fish on the creek lacked legal standing to challenge the state’s permit.

The Beaufort County Superior Court reversed that decision on appeal by conservation groups and granted a formal hearing. After the formal hearing, Berger again held that the citizen groups could not challenge state water quality permits and that the permit was lawfully issued.

Conservation groups again appealed.

“This court decision is a victory for the people, affirming citizens’ right to protect the waters we love and use every day when our state fails to do so,” Geoff Gisler, senior attorney at the law center, said in a statement. “We’re pleased that the court overturned the permit that violated the core requirement of the Clean Water Act: to protect our waters as they exist naturally. The community that uses Blounts Creek deserves the protection that the law provides as affirmed by this court decision.”

Capt. Bob Boulden with Miss Bea Charters is also part of Save Blounts Creek. Boulden was pleased with the ruling.

“Having the decision in favor of the Blounts Creek community, with many thanks to Sound Rivers and the SELC (Geoff Gisler and Blakely Hildebrand), Jimmy and Pam Daniels (Cotton Patch Landing) and my business Miss Bea Charters will continue to grow and we will be able to share with others what makes Blounts Creek so special,” Capt. Boulden responded in an email. “It was especially appreciated that Judge Willey overturned what Judge Berger failed to see as inconsistencies in the erroneously issued permit to Martin Marietta Materials Inc.”

Boulden said that if the ruling had been in favor of Martin Marietta they would continue to have the support of Sound Rivers and the SELC.

“Sound Rivers is committed to finding a solution that works for all involved; but certainly will continue to work to ensure that Blounts Creek is protected for the long term,” Deck said. “This win is not only critical in protecting special places, like Blounts Creek, but to also maintain the public’s right to access the courts when our regulatory agencies get it wrong. That is something we fought hard to protect.”

Coastal Review Online Assistant Editor Jennifer Allen contributed to this report.

Learn More

• Read the Court Order

MOREHEAD CITY – Whatever preconceived notions one may have about environmental activists, Dick Bierly probably doesn’t fit any of them, and he’s OK with that.

Bierly, a retired corporate manager who recently turned 85, is president of the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which is celebrating this year its 35^th anniversary. He’s a Republican with a passion for preserving the coastal environment. He rejects the idea that opposing political philosophies must divide folks who otherwise share common dreams and goals, especially when it comes to protecting the natural features that draw so many to the area and drive the economy here. His is a business-minded approach that considers the environment a vital business asset and its stewardship everyone’s responsibility. Bierly says building trust, even when there’s disagreement, is key.

“That’s currency in the bank: trust,” Bierly said. “If people trust your word, there’s nothing more useful in life than that. If your word is good and you’re doing something controversial, that’s money in the bank.”

Bierly was reared in upstate New York and moved to North Carolina from the Westchester County, New York, area. He and his wife Mary became enamored of the North Carolina coast back in 1965, soon after his employer, IBM Corp., first opened in the Triangle region. Bierly was the business machine company’s first personnel manager in Raleigh.

“Everybody kept talking about coming to Emerald Isle and what a great place Emerald Isle is,” Bierly explained. “We spent the Fourth of July weekend in Atlantic Beach. I was impressed with the sense of place – the people, the beaches, the climate – the fact that was a real place, not a manufactured place.”

The Bierlys continued spending their vacations here and eventually, in 1971, they purchased property at 8½ Marina, a new at the time soundside development in Atlantic Beach, which was built in what’s now considered an environmentally sensitive area.

“That was my Shangri-La, my escape,” Bierly said. “Then when Mary and I retired, I wanted a house where I could have my boat out back, so we bought a house on Webb Court (then just outside of Morehead City).”

It was while living there on Webb Court that Bierly started noticing how poor development decisions could put at risk the natural features that make the area a place where people want so much to be. It was a case of “not in my backyard” that became an education in activism.

Bierly and his neighbors had caught wind of a plan to build a waste-treatment facility just down the street, overlooking Bogue Sound. The plant was to serve a proposed condominium complex along the canal that flows into Spooners Creek. Bierly said nearly all his neighbors in the area known as Mitchell Village were upset about the project and many came together to form a committee.

“We had plenty of emotional people, but I didn’t know what the rules were,” Bierly said, referring to requirements of the Coastal Area Management Act of 1974.

The act, better known as CAMA, was created to protect the state’s coastal lands and waters. Bierly gleaned that there was a CAMA permit request related to the project and that the permitting in this case was an extensive bureaucratic process. Someone else on the committee knew that Todd Miller, founder and director of the fledgling North Carolina Coastal Federation, knew well the ins and outs of CAMA.

“Todd came and briefed us one night, and that’s how I met Todd Miller,” Bierly said. “Todd had a booklet. He said, ‘It’s up to you – you’re really affected.’ So, I got familiar with CAMA and the county’s land-use plan. I got involved with studying people and the divisions and I made an effort to really understand: What does the bureaucracy have to say about this?”

The neighborhood association hired a lawyer and eventually reached an agreement with the developer to build single-family homes, rather than condos. After about a year, the city annexed the neighborhood and extended municipal sewer service, eliminating the need for a soundfront waste-treatment plant.

“That took away the one big problem, but it probably took two years,” Bierly said, adding that the fight was a learning experience that could be put to more good use in the community. “I said, ‘What am I going to do with all this newfound knowledge?’ So, I started going to public hearings.”

Eventually Bierly met Irv Hooper of Beaufort, who was a founding member of the Carteret County Crossroads environmental group. Hooper, who died in 2013, was a scientist who worked for 30 years at Bristol Laboratories in Syracuse, New York. After his retirement, Hooper worked part time for 10 years as a chemist at the Duke Marine Lab near Beaufort. Hooper was impressed with Bierly’s grasp of relevant issues.

“He said, ‘How do you know all this stuff?’ Come to Carteret County Crossroads,” Bierly said. “That led to me joining Crossroads and becoming a board member, eventually president.”

Bierly left his job at IBM in 1983 but stayed busy focusing on coastal issues, writing letters to the editor and essays for the Crossroads newsletter. He also got involved with the Outer Banks Wildlife Shelter, the Beaufort Historical Association and other groups. Mary was involved too, volunteering with the North Carolina Maritime Museum in Beaufort, where Dick also volunteered as a tour guide.

“You get to meet a lot of people doing that, and you learn how much they find Beaufort really unique,” Bierly said. “I watched the community grow.”

That growth continued to bring challenges, which Bierly was eager to take on, armed with his newfound activism skills, business mindset and a “non-local’s perspective” on development issues.

“My personal political ideology had nothing to do with it,” Bierly said. “It always troubled me that, at least in Carteret County and in other places, the local officials and the environmental community were adversaries. I was trying to be a voice for reason all through the years.”

It was an approach Bierly drew largely from his experience with IBM. “I’m an old corporate guy,” he said.

That was a different perspective than most developers who had run into environmental opposition were used to, an activist with understanding of their business, Bierly said.

After a few years Miller asked Bierly to join the federation’s board of directors, which eventually made him president.

“Dick got very engaged in the meat of our work after he observed directly how vulnerable our coast was to unplanned and poorly regulated development,” Miller said recently. “He became a serious student of coastal management laws, rules and science, and used his past experience in business and his diverse community connections to apply those lessons. He is exactly the type of volunteer on which the work of the Coastal Federation thrives.”

Local governments up and down the North Carolina coast increasingly turn to the federation for help with stormwater and growth issues. Bierly said that 15 or so years ago, that wouldn’t have been the case. The change came through trust, he said.

“I do think Todd’s leadership style has resulted in greater acceptance. He has great acceptance in Raleigh, more than before, and more and more counties see the federation as being helpful,” Bierly said.

But it was also Bierly’s suggestion that the federation create a president’s council that includes what he called “distinguished prominent people outside the coastal area” that helped build trust.

“It’s given us visibility and credibility. It’s a corporate approach,” Bierly said.

Through his work with the federation, Bierly has become active with the state Coastal Resources Commission issues and public drinking water supply protection. He’s also watching how the North Carolina General Assembly handles matters such as vegetative buffer requirements meant to protect water quality and the ongoing fights over renewable energy. These are areas where Bierly often parts ways with others in his political party.

“The biggest challenges we face include the makeup of the General Assembly and the attitude a lot of them have, getting carried away on these deregulation, rules-reform acts that are throwing well-crafted rules away. It’s a constant battle and every time you get a new array of people in the General Assembly it starts all over again,” Bierly said. “Having effective communications with political leaders is critical, it doesn’t matter which party you’re from.”

And it’s not just the state legislature that’s the problem, Bierly said.

“Trump is guilty of the same thing, throwing the baby out with bathwater. There are no gradations to what they’re doing,” Bierly said of the federal-level push for deregulation and scrapping of environmental protections.

Bierly said he is also confounded by state Republicans’ opposition to renewable energy, especially wind power. It’s not the federal government behind it and it’s not the military, Bierly said. Obviously, the big utilities would rather not see new competition, but there’s big opportunity in renewable energy.

“Policy is written by lobbyists, by special interest groups. (Lawmakers) turn to people in industry and that’s how legislation is drafted, all of it. What I don’t understand is why doesn’t someone jump on the bandwagon. The pro-wind crowd isn’t mobilizing,” Bierly said.

Solar farms and wind farms are desirable, especially in cash-strapped northeastern North Carolina counties, because they produce jobs, rental income and tax revenue and the agricultural land where they are typically sited can still be farmed. And renewables are advancing America’s energy goals, Bierly said.

“I believe strongly that the country should be self-sufficient and we’re getting to the point where we actually export natural gas,” Bierly said. “We have to pursue self-sufficiency and we are close to that. Then we can feel comfortable objecting to offshore drilling, because it’s not essential to the country’s profile and the risk is too great, but it’s going to take a while.”

That risk includes damaging or losing the scenic beauty, ecological diversity, the people and the sense of place that lured him to the coast years ago, all of which, Bierly said, rely on a healthy coastal environment.

“It’s the Karen Amspachers (Amspacher is director of the Core Sound Waterfowl Museum and Heritage Center on Harkers Island), the fishermen, the pilots that bring the ships in at the port. It’s the real thing here and it should be only carefully changed,” Bierly said. “That’s what I tell the real estate agents: ‘We’re trying to protect what you want to sell because it’s why people want to be here.’”

ATLANTIC BEACH – Flanked Thursday by mayors of a half-dozen eastern North Carolina communities, Gov. Roy Cooper cited the threat to the “robust coastal economy” from proposed offshore drilling and seismic exploration for oil and natural gas off the state’s coast and pledged to lead the renewed fight against it.

During an appearance at Fort Macon State Park, Cooper framed his opposition in terms of protecting the state’s coastal environment and economy that it supports from the “unacceptable risks” offshore drilling and exploration could bring, risks that the governor said would outweigh any benefits to the state.

“I can sum it up in four words: not off our coast,” Cooper said to enthusiastic applause from those gathered in the education and visitor center, including representatives of various environmental groups, local officials and others opposed to offshore drilling and seismic exploration.

“We have consulted with experts and we’ve examined carefully what we know about this,” Cooper said. “It’s clear that opening North Carolina’s coast to oil and gas exploration and drilling would bring unacceptable risks to our economy, our environment and our coastal communities and for little potential gain for our state.”

President Trump signed an executive order in April aimed at removing restrictions on oil drilling off the Atlantic and Alaskan coasts put in place during the final months of the Obama administration. In June, the Trump administration opened the public comment period for a new, five-year energy leasing program for the outer continental shelf, a move toward opening East Coast waters to oil and gas exploration and drilling. The program for oil and gas development sets a schedule for proposed oil and gas lease sales off the coast.

Public comments on the proposed program continue to be accepted through Aug. 17. Friday is the deadline for public comments on incidental harassment authorizations during seismic surveys as required by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Cooper said Thursday that the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality would submit formal comments opposing offshore seismic testing.

Cooper’s announcement marks a complete reversal for the executive branch on state energy policy. His predecessor, Pat McCrory, had championed offshore exploration even suggesting at one point that drilling in state waters, those within 3 miles offshore, would be worth studying.

While highlighting the threat to the coastal economy, including the $3 billion generated annually by coastal tourism, the more than 30,000 jobs it supports and the $95 million commercial fishing industry, Cooper described the risk in personal terms.

“I grew up a few hours east of here in Nash County and, like many other North Carolinians, I have wonderful memories of coming here with my parents and my brother, staying up the road there at the John Yancey Motor Hotel and, because it didn’t have a restaurant, walking over to the Sea Hawk for breakfast that morning,” Cooper said, referring to the former oceanfront lodging in Atlantic Beach that was renamed in 1993 and eventually closed.

The governor said the state park and surrounding area are “steeped in history” with an unspoiled coastline that he and others had long enjoyed.

“This place is part of who I am, as it is for many of you, whether you grew up in this state or the state attracted you to come and live here,” Cooper said. “Here in North Carolina, it’s pretty clear that our coast is part of our identity.”

It was a message similar to the one delivered by Atlantic Beach Mayor Trace Cooper in his introduction of the governor. “I’m here to talk to you today not just as mayor but also as a citizen of the coast and as a businessperson. I own and operate businesses in both the hospitality and real estate industries and, along with fishing, those are really the pillars of our economy here on the coast of North Carolina,” the Bogue Banks town’s mayor said. “That clean, natural environment is what attracts literally millions of people to our coast every year.”

The governor said there is no offshore drilling method that’s 100 percent safe and the risks of catastrophic events such as oil spills come with the industry.

“Oil spills bring devastating long-term damage to every place they touch,” Gov. Cooper said.

Cooper noted that the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 cost more than $60 billion in cleanup and economic recovery, an amount equivalent to the state budget for more than two years. The risk comes with little promise of financial benefit to the state. North Carolina is unlikely to get the jobs, revenue sharing or state port business that drilling proponents have touted.

“That’s a bad deal for our state,” Cooper said.

The Interior Department earlier this month announced reduced royalty rates for Gulf Coast states to encourage drilling by oil companies that have been reluctant during a yearslong period low oil prices. Revenue sharing with Atlantic coast states is not allowed by federal law.

The environmental risks to North Carolina are greater, Cooper said, with the current push for deregulation in Washington. “They are slashing funding for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Interior. That means fewer safeguards for the environment and ultimately offshore drilling,” Cooper said. “It is simply not worth it.”

Cooper also cited improving renewable technologies and the abundance and lower cost of natural gas in recent years.

“Our state is a national leader in solar energy, an area that has boosted our economic recovery. Natural gas is cheaper and plentiful now. We simply don’t need to take the risk of drilling for oil off of our coast because there are too many reliable energy options,” he said.

The governor acknowledged the more than 30 coastal communities that have passed resolutions opposed to offshore drilling and seismic testing and the more than 200 businesses and community groups that have come out against the proposal. Cooper also noted that a bipartisan mix of the state’s congressional delegation and legislative members had voiced opposition as well.

“I am proud to lead this effort,” Cooper said.

The board of commissioners in Carteret County, which is home to Fort Macon, is one of two coastal North Carolina county boards that passed resolutions in favor of offshore drilling. Brunswick County is the other. The Carteret County Chamber of Commerce, the county’s largest business organization, has since approved a resolution opposed to offshore drilling and seismic testing in the Atlantic.

Tom Kies is president of the Carteret County chamber and vice-chair of the Business Alliance to Protect the Atlantic Coast, or BAPAC, a multi-state business organization opposed to drilling off the Atlantic coast. Kies was pleased the governor came here to make the announcement.

“His aides told me, before he arrived, that BAPAC had been in no small part an influence in the decision-making process,” Kies said. “In the governor’s speech, he specified how important tourism is to this coast and how many jobs it supports. He pointed out the economic risks to both tourism and commercial fishing. This is precisely the story that BAPAC has been telling.”

Conservation groups were also quick to praise the governor’s announcement.

“We want to thank Gov. Cooper for taking a bold and necessary step toward protecting our state’s coastline from the environmental and economic threats posed by offshore drilling. We look forward to working together with his administration and the communities along the North Carolina coast to protect our beaches, wildlife and local economies from harm,” North Carolina Conservation Network Executive Director Brian Buzby said in a statement issued shortly after the governor’s appearance.

Audubon North Carolina also applauded the announcement and cited the economic benefit the state enjoys from birders who visit the coast.

“Migrating birds count on our coast each year to feed and nest, particularly along the Outer Banks,” said Audubon North Carolina Executive Director Heather Hahn. “North Carolina’s birds, beaches and people should not have to live in fear of an oil spill.  The bottom line – birds and oil don’t mix.”

North Carolina Petroleum Council Executive Director David McGowan issued a statement in response to Cooper’s announcement, saying the policy stifles scientific and geological research that’s vital to government, educators and the business community.

“Today’s announcement takes North Carolina in the wrong direction and misses a significant opportunity for our states’ workers, consumers, businesses, and economy,” said McGowan. “The oil and natural gas industry supports over 140,000 jobs in North Carolina, contributes over $12 billion to our state economy, and impacts businesses all across the state. Our state is uniquely positioned to add thousands of additional jobs and increase local revenue through safe and responsible offshore energy development – all of which is disregarded by Governor Cooper’s announcement.”

Learn More

• Submit comments on incidental harassment authorizations
• Submit comments on the proposed five-year energy leasing program

CRO legislative reporter Kirk Ross contributed to this report.

SWANSBORO – Preliminary plans for new public amenities at Hammocks Beach State Park were presented in two forms Thursday, one with a controversial proposed motorboat launch area and one without. The public’s say will help shape a single, final draft management plans for the park’s mainland area that includes 290 acres of new property.

The two versions of the plan were unveiled during a “drop-in” public meeting at the visitor center. Each included features identified through a survey conducted in September 2016, which resulted in 672 responses. Most said preserving the park’s natural features was their preferred approach in putting the new land to use.

Sara Burroughs, a landscape architect and owner of Sage Design in Wilmington, the company working on the plans, said the two concepts, labeled “A” and “B” on materials at the meeting, were “very preliminary” and created as diagrams to give the public a general visualization.

“It’s to let people understand the results of the survey,” Burroughs said.

Attendees at the session on Thursday were asked to write down what they liked, didn’t like and what they thought was missing in the plans presented. Their comments are to be considered in developing the single, final draft plan expected to be complete in April. More than 145 attended the meeting Thursday.

The proposed motorboat ramps in Plan B and the proposed recreational vehicle, or RV, camping areas in Plan A were among the most-disliked features, according to the comments sheets attendees were asked to fill out at the meeting. The additions would change the nature of the park and surrounding neighborhoods, attendees said.

“I’d like to keep this area as quiet and peaceful as we could,” said Janet Theriault, a Swansboro resident who lives near the park. Theriault said ramps for launching motorboats would bring “a ton of traffic” to the narrow, residence-lined roads to the park, especially on weekends and holidays.

“It will be wall to wall boats and trailers,” she said.

Theriault said she was unsure about RV camping, as indicated in Plan A. Primitive camping would be “more in keeping with the park,” she said.

Others expressed similar worries.

“We have concerns with what it’s going to do with traffic,” said retired Marine Corps Col. Ronald Peduzzi, also of Swansboro, adding that the proposed amenities will also change the character of the park.

Carl Friebel, also of Swansboro, agreed. “It’s such a nice tract of land,” he said. “We want it preserved in its natural state.”

“We want it left as natural as can be,” his wife Rita Friebel added.

Wayne Herbert of Swansboro said boat launch opponents are being “hypocritical,” and Plan B, which includes the boat launch, offers “a good balance.” Boat ramps with parking for 50-100 trailers would be a “winner” for the community, which needs more boating access, he said.

“Right now, in Swansboro, the friendly city by the sea, I can’t launch my boat,” Herbert said.

There are other boat launches in the area, but Herbert said they are often operating beyond their capacity, “borderline dangerously,” he said.

Launch fees should be charged at the park to help cover maintenance and policing expenses, he said, and the amenity would bring economic benefits to the community and its hotels, restaurants and stores.

There are 24 public boat ramps within a 25-mile radius of the park, according to information on display at the meeting. But some attendees said that number seemed low and that the list of ramps, with corresponding dots on a satellite photo of the area, appeared incomplete.

Supporting economic development is part of the state park service’s system-wide plan, according to information provided at the meeting. Other objectives include improving community health and wellness and stewardship of natural and cultural resources. Other plans reviewed while creating the concepts presented at the meeting include Swansboro’s comprehensive parks and recreation plan and bicycle plan, a statewide outdoor recreation plan and a general management plan for Hammocks Beach State Park.

According to a summary of the public survey responses provided at the meeting, the most requested features were trails, camping facilities, non-motorized boating access, a fishing pier and educational programs at the park. Among proposed fishing amenities a pier and kayak fishing access were the most popular ideas.

Of the 672 respondents, 145 said they’d prefer the park be left in its natural state. Fifty-two requested a boat ramp.

Both sets of proposals include a variety of types of new camping areas; non-motorized boat access; paved and unpaved trails; a fishing pier and access; recreation areas; wildlife observation areas and overlooks; shelters for gatherings or covered outdoor classroom space; and living shorelines. Both concepts also include improvements around the existing visitor center.

There were differences in the concepts, other than the absence or inclusion of a motorboat launch and parking area for trailers in the area east of the visitor center now used for park maintenance and operations, which would have to be relocated. Locations of proposed camping areas and a new network of roadways in the park were among the differences.

Attendees said they liked features such as primitive campsites, added biking and hiking trails – especially unpaved trails – and the concept of making use of existing roads, as indicated in Plan A.

Many didn’t like the RV campsites in Plan A.

Attendees indicated both plans were missing features such as a dog park area and protections of old-growth live oak trees and forests and living shorelines, including those where the proposed boat ramps could go, according to Plan B. But the living shorelines and other environmental work at the proposed site were paid for with state and federal grants and may be protected by perpetual easements.

State officials have maintained throughout the planning discussions that including the boat ramp, or any other feature, hinges on public support. The final draft plan will be a combination of the two concepts presented Thursday, Sage Design representatives said.

“I don’t think one plan necessarily has all the answers,” Nicole Whiteside of Sage Design told attendees gathered around a table where aerial photo representations of the two concepts were displayed.

Learn More

• Hammocks Beach Mainland Area Plan

WASHINGTON, D.C. – North Carolina’s top wildlife official told a U.S. Senate committee this week that he supports the federal Endangered Species Act but agrees with those who say the law enacted in 1973 should be “modernized” with increased management authority at the state level.

Environmental groups, however, say “modernization” is a euphemism for rolling back protections and the Senate hearing on Wednesday was a step toward gutting or repealing the act.

Gordon Myers, executive director of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, testified Wednesday before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, during the hearing on modernizing the act that was last amended in 1988. Myers said much had been learned since that time on conservation and recovery of listed species and “how to facilitate, not proscribe, private landowner involvement” in the process.

“We support the ESA but believe that it should be modernized to meet today’s restoration challenges,” according to the transcript of Myers’ testimony at the hearing.

Myers also serves as president of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and he sits on the executive committee of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, or AFWA, of which all 50 states are members. Myers said his testimony also represented the views and positions of the associations and the AFWA committee.

Myers outlined a half-dozen “priority improvements” proposed by AFWA for modernizing the act. He said there should be more opportunities for state fish and wildlife agencies to take a more formal and active role in “all aspects” of implementing the act.

“States should be afforded the opportunity to participate in all implementation aspects of the ESA from listing decisions, to recovery plan development and conservation recovery efforts on the ground, to providing guidance to private landowners in the use of federal incentive programs that provide them more certainty, to decisions regarding down-listing and de-listing of recovered species,” Myers said during the hearing.

Myers said states also need more flexibility to manage species listed as threatened and endangered differently, and that a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rule enacted in the 1980s blurred the distinction between the two listing categories. He also said the listing process should be improved with new requirements for science-based recovery plans for listed species and a mandate for de-listing once habitat and population goals are reached.

There are 61 threatened and endangered species known to occur in North Carolina, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Myers also noted that the act’s legislative history shows that Congress intended that states with qualified endangered species programs lead in the conservation and recovery of threatened species and receive federal funding to administer these programs, but no money was granted for that purpose.

“Unfortunately, this has created missed conservation opportunities to restore species by state experts who are closest to the species, understand the recovery needs, and have the community relationships necessary to achieve recovery,” according to the transcript of Myers’ remarks.

More constructive and collaborative efforts from interested stakeholders are needed to advance the conservation and recovery of species of interest, Myers said. “We all have an interest in recovering species listed under the ESA and together could do more if concerns and stakeholder interests were directly focused on habitat conservation and recovering listed species rather than redirecting limited federal and state fiscal resources away from on the ground conservation activities,” he said.

‘Great Success’

Defenders of Wildlife President Jamie Rappaport Clark also testified during the hearing, saying the act enjoys widespread public support and didn’t need to be fixed or modernized.

“Simply put, the Endangered Species Act works,” she said.

The act has achieved “great success,” Clark said, adding that only 10 listed species had been officially declared extinct during the act’s 44-year history. That amounts to a 99 percent success rate in preventing the extinction of threatened and endangered species, she said.

The act, however, has become a “lightning rod” for those who seek lessened environmental protection and regulation, she said. Talk of modernizing the act was a “euphemism” for undermining the law, she said.

“In just the past two years in this Congress, we’ve seen over a hundred bills proposed that all, without exception, would have weakened or undermined the act and its purposes,” Clark said.

Clark said the act had been improved by continuous administrative reforms that have made the act work better – both for the species it protects and for landowners and other stakeholders affected by its provisions.

Clark, former director of the Fish and Wildlife Service under President Clinton, said the most important thing Congress can do to improve the act’s effectiveness is to fully fund it.

“The current fiscal starvation must end,” she said.

Other Opinions

Groups supporting an overhaul of the act include the American Farm Bureau Federation, which represents the agriculture industry. The group says the act’s restrictions are especially harsh for farmers and ranchers.

“The (act) is one of the most far-reaching environmental statutes ever passed,” according to the Farm Bureau. “It has been interpreted to put the interests of species above those of people, and through its prohibitions against ‘taking’ of species, it can restrict a wide range of human activity in areas where species exist or may possibly exist. Furthermore, it allows private special interest groups to sue anyone who they allege to be in violation of the Act.”

The group says that less than 2 percent of all listed species have been removed from protection since the law was enacted in 1973.

James Holte, president of the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, also testified during the hearing, saying the act fails to provide adequate incentives for conservation on farmlands and imposes broad regulatory burdens on agriculture.

“Reform of the (act) should include a focus on species recovery and habitat conservation that respects landowners and prioritizes basic human needs over those of endangered species,” Holte said. “Coordination with state wildlife agencies to leverage private, incentive-based conservation efforts can better achieve long-term conservation goals.”

Other groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit conservation organization, say the hearing this week was just the latest in a series of attacks on endangered species protection. The center issued a statement that noted the hearing was chaired by Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., who has a long record of voting against the Endangered Species Act.

“The clear intent of this hearing is to begin the process of gutting the Endangered Species Act,” Brett Hartl, the center’s government affairs director, said in the statement. “Senator Barrasso’s callous attack on this crucial environmental law is totally out of step with the strong majority of Americans who support the Endangered Species Act. Without the Act we wouldn’t have bald eagles, grizzly bears or many other wildlife species we all cherish.”

Barrasso said Wednesday at the outset of the hearing that, “The Endangered Species Act isn’t working today.”

Learn More

• Archived Video* and Transcripts from the Hearing

* Hearing begins about 17 minutes after start of video.

EMERALD ISLE – There’s danger lurking in Bogue Sound, on and around a small, rapidly eroding island just off the end of 24^th Street, where military officials are working to clean up years’ worth of unexploded ordnance and other material left by bombing practice flights decades ago.

The Navy has been working with Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality to investigate, assess the risks and, starting again this month, remove potentially explosive material and inert metallic objects from tiny Wood Island. The effort is part of a sweep that takes place every three years or whenever a hurricane or tropical storm strikes this part of the North Carolina coast. The next cleanup is set to begin Feb. 21 and continue through about March 13.

Wood Island, which is less than 300 feet wide at its widest point and about 1,500 feet long, was used as a Navy bombing target in the 1940s and 1950s. The island is about a half mile north of Bogue Banks and about 1.5 miles south of the mainland. Although military documents refer to the site as the Cat Island Bomb Target BT‐2, the actual target locations were on and near Wood Island. Cat Island is about a mile and a half west of Wood Island and was never used as a bomb target.

Although the island and the waters immediately around it are marked on nautical charts and surrounded with “Danger” signs warning of unexploded ordnance, there’s evidence people are going ashore, said Patricia Vanture of Naval Facilities Engineering Command Mid-Atlantic in Washington, D.C.

“As much as anyone can stay away from the area, they should,” Vanture said.

From 1943 to 1952, BT‐2 was used for bombing practice using inert, target‐practice munitions, according to Navy documents. The Marine Corps periodically removed “munitions and explosives of concern” and “material potentially presenting an explosive hazard” from the surface of the island while the bomb targets were in use in the 1940s and 1950s. The Navy began using live ammunition at the site in 1952, including air‐delivered bombs as large as 2,000 pounds. A report dated 2001 indicates that general-purpose bombs; armor‐piercing bombs; semi‐armor‐piercing bombs; depth bombs; rockets; and .30-caliber to 20 mm machine guns were used for training activities at BT‐2.

The Navy said the site hasn’t been used as a target since about 1955 and there are no plans to reactivate it. Munitions have been periodically removed from Wood Island since 1957, most recently in 2014.

“The Navy and Marine Corps have been investigating out there since the ’60s, so this is a long-term project,” Vanture said, adding that because BT-2 is a closed munitions site, the Navy has a responsibility to clean up.

Investigations have concluded there isn’t a human health risk from any chemicals at the site, “But because there’s certainly the potential safety risk from people coming onto the island, we do surface clearance where all they do is go out and pick up all the stuff they see,” Vanture said.

Explosive ordinance experts remove most material from the island to nearby Marine Corps Auxiliary Landing Field Bogue.

“If they actually find a live bomb, that will have to be detonated in place,” Vanture said. “It’s too dangerous to move.”

She said that in those cases, there will immediate efforts to alert the public before the detonation. Such action has been required in the past.

In 2010, a high-explosive, 100-pound, general purpose bomb was found during a cleanup and was subsequently detonated on Wood Island. Vanture said vibration monitoring was conducted at the time and nearby homes were not affected.

“That would happen again,” she said of the monitoring.

Frank Rush, town manager in Emerald Isle, said officials in the western Bogue Banks community have been notified when cleanups were scheduled.

“It really hasn’t caused any concerns or problems in Emerald Isle,” Rush said. “In my time as manager, I’ve never heard of it causing a problem for anyone there and previous cleanup efforts have gone smoothly. It’s a good thing to get cleaned up and I’m glad they’re coming back.”

In 2009, an aerial mapping survey was conducted over about 10 square miles of Bogue Sound surrounding Wood Island to detect and accurately map the locations of magnetic anomalies. The survey identified about 10,400 magnetic anomalies, with the highest concentrations clustered within about 650 feet of the island.

“This mass of closely spaced magnetic anomalies corresponds to the expected pattern of ordnance distribution for an aerial bombing target,” according to Navy documents.

In October and November 2010, MCAS Cherry Point and the Navy conducted an expanded search and removal effort to identify and remove munitions-related items and other metallic items from Wood Island. About 3,900 pounds of potentially explosive materials were removed from the island, along with 120 pounds of other metallic debris related to recreation and fishing activities in Bogue Sound.

In March 2014, Cherry Point and the Navy did another cleanup, removing about 4,600 pounds of potentially explosive materials.

The ordnance penetrated the ground at varying depths, depending on the type of round, but erosion of the island is constantly bringing buried materials to the surface.

“As the sand shifts and the island erodes away, it uncovers more of these,” Vanture said.

In 2008, 16 warning signs were placed on the shoreline of Wood Island to notify the public of the potential munitions hazard and warn against trespassing on the island. Then, in March 2012, Cherry Point and the Navy placed 20 additional warning signs in the shallow water around the island, about 1,200 feet from its shoreline, to warn boaters of the danger posed by bottom-disturbing activities, such as anchoring, dredging or clamming.

Many of the signs on the island have deteriorated and are recommended for replacement during the upcoming cleanup.

Although, according to Navy documents, the surface danger zone extends 3 miles in all directions from the former target location, warning sings placed in the water around the island mark the boundaries of the highest concentration of bombs that are in the water.

“Outside the sign perimeter, anything that you would normally do while driving a boat should be sufficient,” Vanture said regarding safe travel near the zone, adding that the goal is just to keep people from anchoring nearby or going ashore.

“We’re just trying to keep people away,” Vanture said. “It takes a lot to detonate one of these items, but you don’t want to find out the hard way.”

Learn More

• Read documents related to Wood Island

MOREHEAD CITY — A group of business leaders representing interests up and down the East Coast, including chambers of commerce, restaurant associations, commercial fishing groups and real estate organizations, are urging President Obama to use a provision of federal law to try and permanently block seismic surveying for oil and natural gas off the Atlantic coast.

Tom Kies, president of the Carteret County Chamber of Commerce in Morehead City, was part of a delegation from the newly formed Business Alliance for Protecting the Atlantic Coast that met Monday with federal officials in Washington. The group, which also included representatives of the Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce, hopes to get the president to use his executive powers before leaving office to “withdraw from disposition” any parts of the Atlantic outer continental shelf not already leased for oil or gas drilling. The move, according to the group, would create a permanent ban on offshore drilling that cannot be rescinded.

The alliance says seismic testing and any subsequent drilling, could put fishing, tourism and recreation economies at risk. The businesses oppose seismic testing and the industrialization that would come with offshore drilling. The meetings in Washington were productive, Kies said.

“We had our stuff together,” Kies said Tuesday. “We had facts, we had figures.”

The new group says more than 12,000 businesses and 400,000 commercial fishing families are represented in a letter to the president calling on him not to proceed with allowing seismic exploration. The letter asks the Obama administration to deny all current seismic air gun testing permits for oil and gas in the Atlantic.

“President Obama needs to finish the job protecting coastal economies and use his authority to permanently protect the Atlantic Coast,” the group said Monday.

Along with Kies, the group that met with the Department of Interior and the White House Council on Environmental Quality included:

• Frank Knapp, president and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce.
• Laura Wood-Habr, vice president of the Virginia Beach Restaurant Association and a restaurant co-owner.
• Vicki Clark, president of the Cape May, New Jersey, County Chamber of Commerce.
• Sandra Bundy, broker-in-charge, B&P Inc., a real estate development firm in Bennettsville, South Carolina.
• Karen Brown, president of the Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce.
• Pat Broom of the Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce and president of Phoenix Restoration, a general contractor.
• Tonya Bonitatibus, executive director of the Savannah Riverkeeper for Georgia and South Carolina.
• Kerry Marhefka of Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, a commercial fishermen’s association, and Abundant Seafood of Mount Pleasant, South Carolina.

The alliance says it is dedicated to protecting the long-term health and economic vitality of the Atlantic seaboard through the responsible stewardship of the coastal and ocean waters.  The group contends that seismic testing is a dangerous process that creates one of the loudest manmade noises in the oceans. Those blasts threaten the ocean ecosystem, on which nearly 1.4 million jobs on the East Coast rely – jobs that create more than $95 billion in gross domestic product, mainly through fishing, tourism and recreation, according to the group.

The Obama administration earlier this year reversed its previous decision to allow offshore drilling in the Atlantic. Coastal advocates worry the Trump administration, once in office, could restart the process and add the Atlantic back to the next five-year plan.

The nine alliance representatives were joined by three representatives of Oceana, an international organization focused on oceans. Oceana has also been working to prevent the expansion of U.S. offshore drilling.

“We were with the environmental group Oceana, who helped set up the appointments. They said that it had gone as well as any other lobbying they’d ever seen,” Kies said.

Frank Knapp, of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce, said the groups held three meetings in Washington: one with Interior Department and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, or BOEM, officials, another with the White House Council on Environmental Quality and one with Commerce Department officials.

“There’s a provision of the law that appears to give the president authority to make a declaration that there will never be in the future any seismic testing or drilling off the Atlantic coast,” Knapp said Wednesday.

The groups want Obama to use Section 12(a) of the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Act to permanently protect much of the Atlantic  from future drilling. The provision, which grants presidential authority to remove unleased lands of the outer continental shelf from consideration, has been used in the past, including in 2014 to protect Bristol Bay, Alaska, and in 2015 to protect parts of the Arctic Ocean.

Knapp said the tactic had been questioned, but the presidential authority had never been challenged. It’s the best option available, he said.

“Take advantage of it and let the courts decide, that’s what we’re asking for,” Knapp said. “If we don’t do it, chances are pretty good we’re going to see some seismic testing killing animals and scaring tourists away. Even if there is some skepticism that we can’t do this, he (Obama) should do this and let the challengers take it to court. There’s no provision to rescind in this statute and that’s the key.”

There’s a new urgency, activists say, with the election of Donald Trump as president.

Billionaire Democratic Party activist Tom Steyer is also using the tactic. Steyer’s San Francisco-based NextGen Climate organization characterized the effort as a way to stand up to Trump’s “dangerous agenda” of lifting barriers to the fossil fuel industry.

Some environmentalists say the move could backfire, prompting Republicans to repeal the provision so it can’t be used in the future.

The American Petroleum Institute, a national trade association that represents the country’s oil and natural gas industry, says the risks of seismic exploration to marine life have been overstated. API says seismic operators go to great lengths to prevent potential effects on marine life. Steps include monitoring animal movement and behavior patterns prior to exploration with areas of concern closed to seismic surveys. The surveying process begins with a “soft-start” where the intensity of the sound is gradually increased to full operational levels to allow animals that may be sensitive to the noise to leave the area.

“If visual observers or acoustic monitoring devices detect sensitive marine life in the vicinity at any time during the survey, then all operations stop immediately and are restarted only when the area is clear,” according to API.

API says advancements in seismic technology have helped find, drill and produce oil and natural gas with the least possible risks to the environment.

But any new East Coast drilling would bring greater risks to the environment, Knapp said.

“Every drilling procedure leaks,” Knapp said. “This is the most important decision that will ever be made about the Atlantic coast. Once seismic is allowed, drilling will be next. There’s no going back. Either preserve the economy we all love or we’re going to become the Gulf Coast with wells that leak and fish that die. That’s how important this decision is.”

Learn More

• Read the alliance’s letter to President Obama
• History of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act

EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA – People who drive electric cars will soon have more places to stop for a recharge around here.

Duke Energy recently awarded grants to Jacksonville, Oriental, Swansboro and CarolinaEast Health System in New Bern to cover the costs of installing electric vehicle charging stations. It’s part of a program to encourage adoption of electric vehicles by improving infrastructure needed to support their use. Jones County, Kinston, Wayne County and Goldsboro also received grants.

The deadline to apply for the program was in September. Duke Energy has yet to formally announce all the award winners, but some individual towns and cities have been notified.

Randy Wheeless, a spokesman for Duke Energy, said the company was pleased with the response to the grant program.

“We will end up with around 50 award winners. Right now, we’re just alerting cities and towns that they won and how much,” Wheeless said Thursday.

That’ll be enough for about 200 new public charging stations statewide. With a growing number of electric vehicles on the market for consumers to choose from, boosting the number of charging stations available to the public is key, Wheeless said.

“If we’re advocating more EV adoption, I think one of the barriers is how many charging stations are in the state,” he said.

The grant program stems from a $5.4 million legal settlement in 2015 with the Environmental Protection Agency and Justice Department of a lawsuit filed in 2000. The EPA and environmental groups alleged Duke Energy had violated federal Clean Air Act provisions by making modifications to five North Carolina power plants without also making required upgrades to air pollution controls. The Supreme Court found in favor of the EPA and Duke Energy agreed to settle rather than fight the lawsuit. The utility maintained it had complied with federal law, but agreed to pay a $975,000 fine and donate $4.4 million to environmental projects, including the installation of electric vehicle charging stations.

Duke Energy said in July its $1.5 million program will increase the number of public electric vehicle charging stations in North Carolina by 30 percent. The company’s EV Charging Infrastructure Support Project is to provide $1 million to help municipalities install public charging stations. Duke Energy will pay the total costs up to $5,000 per charge port, $20,000 per site or $50,000 per city under the program.

“Over the past decade, Duke Energy has supported the development of several hundred electric vehicle charging stations in North Carolina,” David Fountain, Duke Energy’s North Carolina president, said at the time. “Adoption of EVs depends on a robust infrastructure for consumers.”

In addition, Duke Energy is providing $500,000 to cities and towns for the construction of electric bus charging stations, funding the total costs up to $250,000 per entity.

The grant program provides leeway for the awarded cities and towns to choose locations to install the charging stations as they see fit, Wheeless said.

There are about 4,750 electric vehicles registered in North Carolina but only about 700 public charging ports around the state.

The Electric Power Research Institute estimates that there will be more than 700,000 electric vehicles in North Carolina by 2030 with 37,000 on the road in eastern North Carolina.

The New Bern-based East Carolina Council, the regional council of governments and planning organization serving Carteret, Craven, Duplin, Greene, Jones, Lenoir, Onslow, Pamlico and Wayne counties, has also been involved in promoting plug-in electric vehicle use and increasing the number of charging stations.

Judy Hills is the council’s executive director. Hills said the council began at the outset of the Duke Energy program to make sure communities knew about it.

“We really made a concerted effort to get the word out,” Hills said.

The council’s efforts to promote electric cars have also included forming a committee back in February to develop a plug-in electric vehicle readiness plan for the region surrounding the U.S. 70 corridor, which passes through many of the counties the council serves. This committee is now wrapping up its work, with a draft report set to be released soon.

The money for the planning effort came from an Economic Development Administration grant.

The promise of economic growth is often a good motivation for elected officials to get behind a project. Research has shown that installing a charging station at a business can increase customer traffic and shopping time. Businesses can also promote the stations to differentiate themselves from competitors. Municipalities with charging stations may also attract new businesses that value sustainable technology and innovation, according to the council.

Here on the coast, offering charging capabilities can also help lure environmentally conscious vacationers and visitors. But the response to these efforts has at times been only “lukewarm,” Hills said.

The council presented an electric vehicle drive event in Kinston on Sept. 17 to help promote the array of new electric cars on the market, but the event wasn’t well attended. Hills said there’s still an attitude in the region that electric vehicles are “for somebody else, not for me.” That will change with time, she said.

Part of the resistance is because this part of the state doesn’t have the air pollution other, more urban areas have. A key point for driving electric cars is that they don’t pollute, Hills said. Another aspect is the demographics of the eastern part of the state, where there may be a little more reluctance to embrace new technology.

“I think as technology adopters go, we sometimes seem to be a little behind the curve. Areas where people more readily adopt new technologies are way ahead of us,” Hills said.

But new products, including cars with longer-lasting batteries, and the addition of charging stations will encourage adoption and change minds.

“As those changes come about, more people will consider it when they buy a new car, or even a used car,” Hills said. “Also, changes in the environment and other things happening in the world may make that decision more attractive going forward. It may take us a little longer but I think we’ll get there.”

Hills cited a recent report that showed purchases of electric vehicles increase in areas after charging stations are installed there. That’s where the Duke Energy program can provide a big boost, she said.

“It’s hard to ask a government to make an investment in something that has a limited use. You have to think, what makes a government want to invest in this?” Hills said. “And so, this money that Duke has available for that will certainly go a long to helping move that along.”

The council is set to be recognized Tuesday for its efforts at the sixth annual Plug-in NC Summit in Raleigh.

Plug-in NC is a statewide program that promotes electric vehicles through education, outreach and consulting that has been working since 2011 to establish North Carolina as a leader in electrified transportation. The program provides resources for the public, including informational webinars and an interactive map to help drivers of electric vehicles locate charging stations available for public use.

Learn More

• Plug-in NC
• The East Carolina Council’s Plug-in Electric Vehicle Initiative

TOPSAIL ISLAND – Labor Day weekend is normally a three-day opportunity for many to enjoy a beach getaway one last time for the season. This year, while many are watching cautiously as what remains of Hurricane Hermine bears down on the coast, the holiday also marks the 20^th anniversary of Hurricane Fran, a deadly, costly storm that washed away homes and popular tourist attractions on this narrow barrier island and along our southern coast.

Hurricane Fran, the sixth named storm of the 1996 season, made landfall just south of Wilmington on the evening of Sept. 5. Fran came ashore as a moderate hurricane, a category 3 storm on the Saffir-Simpson Scale, with 115 mph sustained winds and a 12-foot storm surge. It was the strongest hurricane to make U.S. landfall in decades. The storm dumped 15 inches of rain in North Carolina, causing flooding and slowing cleanup and recovery efforts after it passed.

Fran killed 24 people in North Carolina and caused more than $7 billion in damage to public and private property. Although Hurricane Floyd three years later would kill more people and do more damage, Fran at the time was the most destructive storm to hit the state seen since Hurricane Hazel in 1954. Hazel remains the only category 4 hurricane to strike North Carolina.

“In Wilmington, Fran is still going to be one of those storms you talk about, unless you can remember Hazel,” said Jay Barnes, director of development for the North Carolina Aquarium Society and author of four books on hurricanes, including “North Carolina’s Hurricane History,” now in its fourth edition.

“One thing that I find, people are always interested in knowing how storms rank against one another,” Barnes said, adding that he explores the topic of North Carolina’s greatest hurricane in his most recent, Aug. 25, blog post at jaybarnesonhurricanes.com.

The various ways to rank storms include meteorological measurements, such as barometric pressure, wind speeds, rainfall and storm surges; property damage inflicted; and lives lost. Barnes puts Fran at No. 3 in his ranking of North Carolina hurricanes, behind Hurricane Hazel and the big No. 1, Floyd. Barnes, in his ranking, cites Floyd’s $6 billion in losses, 66-county swath of destruction and, most importantly, the 52 lives lost.

“On that measurement, Floyd ends up being our greatest natural disaster in our state’s history,” Barnes said.

Location also factors into the public’s recollection, Barnes said.

“In Carteret County, Fran was just a glancing blow,” he said. “Every storm is different, based on where you live.”

Coastal towns as north as Swansboro and Emerald Isle suffered damage and some flooding during Fran, but farther south along the coast, the storm was far more frightening. Fran’s effects as heavy rains, and to a lesser extent winds, moved inland also caught many by surprise.

According to the National Weather Service, three-quarters of homes in Wilmington sustained some damage from Fran with nearly a quarter of all homes sustaining major damage. Nearby beach towns of Carolina Beach, Kure Beach and Wrightsville Beach also saw flooding from the storm surge and severe damage to homes, fishing piers, public buildings and roads.

Ground Zero

In terms of devastation, Topsail Island and its three towns of North Topsail Beach, Surf City and Topsail Beach were ground zero. Fran’s high winds, storm surge and wave action damaged three-quarters of the structures on the island and destroyed 331 homes.

Also destroyed were beloved landmarks, including popular fishing piers. Edwin Lore is owner of Surf City Ocean Pier, Topsail Island’s first ocean pier, built in 1948. Hurricane Bertha did about $30,000 worth of damage to the structure earlier that summer, which was quickly repaired, but Fran destroyed the pier house, which was over the water, and nearly all of the pier itself.

“There was one little 40- to 50-foot section standing,” Lore said.

Lore and his family had evacuated to his hometown of Smithfield, where they were stuck for a few days because of storm debris there, but his pier manager at the time stayed behind.

Edwin Lore of the Surf City Ocean Pier recounts the 1996 destruction of his pier, and temporarily, his business, when Hurricane Fran made landfall. His story is presented as part of The North Carolina Channel’s “Hurricane Fran: A Retrospective.”

“He called me up and I knew what I was going to walk back into – or what I wasn’t going to walk back into. When I got over, of course knowing what I was going to see, it still kind of took me in shock. It was gone,” Lore said.

Lore was 11 years old in 1973 when his father had purchased the pier and it was a big part of his childhood before becoming his career. The business had weathered many storms over the decades, including a destructive nor’easter after Thanksgiving in 1974, but nothing like Fran.

“I knew when I left, based on the strength of storm, there probably wouldn’t be anything left, but when you see it, it goes through you,” Lore said. “I was intent on rebuilding, so I threw my energy into that instead of wasting my time moaning about what was there. It could be replaced.”

By Aug. 30, 1997, the new pier was completed, just in time for the fall fishing season that turned out to be the best the business had ever experienced. There was help from the state, especially in expediting permits, and federal assistance that allowed the rebuilding, but Lore said the community also came together in the storm’s aftermath.

“Everybody had a positive attitude. Everybody who had been living here for years was united to get things back the way they were,” Lore said. “Losing the pier was like losing a loved one. It was like that with the island. It took quite a beating. It was horrible storm and we caught the worst part of it. As it moved up, we got the bad side of it, where most of the damage was done. It couldn’t have hit us any worse.”

Pender County Sheriff Carson Smith Jr. was in 1996 the county’s emergency management director. Speaking Thursday just before going into a meeting to prepare for the arrival of Tropical Storm Hermine, Smith said Fran left lasting memories of scenes few in the community had ever witnessed.

“The brunt of Fran came at night,” Smith said. “Once the center passed and we could feel the wind shift it was about the same time the sun was coming up. It was evident then that we definitely took a major hit.”

One of the most memorable images Smith recalled was of beach homes washed not only off their foundations but swept completely off the barrier island.

“There was one house pretty much intact sitting between Topsail Island and the mainland,” Smith said.

He said an aerial tour of the storm’s aftermath was also striking.

“On much of the island, you could not see the asphalt. There was sand everywhere. When you looked at it from the air, it looked just like one big beach,” Smith said.

Inland, many trees not toppled during Hurricane Bertha were snapped, and roads were littered with felled trees. Flooding also became a problem as creeks and rivers crested in the days following the storm.

“We had some very high water during Fran,” Smith said, adding that the rising rivers were described as a 100-year flooding event.

After the storm, the county partnered with the U.S. Geological Service to install a flood monitor on the Northeast Cape Fear River. That device proved valuable three years later during Hurricane Floyd, which produced a 500-year flood, Smith said.

Bertha a Wake-up Call

Just weeks before Fran arrived, Hurricane Bertha had come through on July 12. Bertha was the first significant storm to hit the area since Hurricane Diana in 1984. Compared to Fran, Bertha was a lesser, Category 2 storm when it made landfall at Figure Eight Island, about halfway between Topsail Island and Wrightsville Beach, but Bertha caused $135 million in insured damage, mostly on the coast, and was blamed for a dozen deaths.

“Bertha, earlier in the summer, was a bit of a wake-up call,” Barnes said. “Bertha was the first hurricane-force winds that a lot of people here had experienced in their lifetimes.”

On Topsail Island, dozens of homes were damaged or destroyed during Bertha, including 40 homes lost in Surf City. About a quarter of all houses in North Topsail Beach lost roofs and three washed away during Bertha. The police station in North Topsail Beach was destroyed and later temporarily replaced with a double-wide trailer that washed away in the 12-foot storm surge that accompanied Hurricane Fran.

“On Topsail Island, Bertha did a significant amount of damage and then Fran came through and made it that much worse,” Barnes said. “The 12-foot surge, it had been a long time since we had that kind of water affecting a barrier island. In North Topsail Beach, there’s not a lot of high ground, so it was especially vulnerable.”

Fran’s storm tide over-washed nearly all of Topsail Island, and to a much greater extent than seen during Hurricane Bertha, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. The agency says much of the worst coastal damage from a hurricane happens in areas of extensive over-wash. Homes built before the state’s building codes were overhauled in the 1980s – those beach houses not on pilings or on inadequate pilings – fared the worst.

“Many homes that survived were where the over-wash was allowed to flow under the house because it was up on stilts,” Barnes said.

As the floodwater from Fran began to recede, it cut through North Topsail Beach’s New Inlet Road in at least a half-dozen spots, washing away large sections of the roadway and numerous homes along the route. Fran damaged more than 300 homes on the island, with more than 90 percent of buildings in North Topsail Beach damaged beyond repair.

“It was certainly a very hard-hit community,” Barnes said.

Lessons Learned

Stuart Turille is the current town manager of North Topsail Beach. Although he didn’t hold the job back when Hurricane Fran struck the community, he said the town’s preparedness is based on lessons learned during the back-to-back storms 20 years ago.

“The primary thing is our knowledge and experience,” Turille said. “We know – having been through a devastating hurricane – we now know where our vulnerable places are in town.”

Because members of the town staff have lived through past storms, their experience is valuable in restoring order after a storm has passed, Turille said.

“Should we receive a devastating event, we now understand the process and we know how to get back on our feet quickly,” he said.

Back in 1996, North Topsail Beach was still a fairly new town, having incorporated just six years earlier. Staff at the time lacked experience in dealing with bad storms, Turille said, and the one-two punch of Bertha and Fran wiped out major town infrastructure, including the town hall and police station. The facilities in place now were built to withstand stronger winds and rising water, but contingency plans are now in place, just in case.

“We’ve thought through our emergency planning, what we’d do to relocate should town hall be damaged,” Turille said. “We have a backup, we’ll relocate and still be operational.”

Turille said the damage from past storms has also underscored the need for pushing for coastal protection efforts, such as the town’s ongoing beach re-nourishment projects, which have pumped in sand to help broaden the beach and elevate the height of dunes that serve as the front line of protection from coastal storms.

Turille said rebuilding the beach and dunes will help prevent the kind of widespread property losses seen during Fran.

“Some of worst area of swash zones that overran the dunes were in that area,” Turille said. “Now, we’ve just completed a project to broaden the berm and heighten the dunes as coastal protection measures.”

The nearly $17 million project was completed last summer. It sparked controversy when tons of rocks were picked up by the dredge about a half mile offshore and pumped along with the sand onto the beach. The material didn’t meet guidelines for sand quality on re-nourished beaches and the amount of rock that showed up on the beach prompted worries that nesting sea turtles would struggle with the obstructions.

Turille said that with all the attention on the rocks, the public “lost sight of the enhanced protection” that re-nourishment offered, but town officials remained focused.

“That’s why our shoreline protection plan has honed in on how we can get that done, a broadened berm and higher dunes,” he said.

Barnes said beach re-nourishment has proven to help coastal communities withstand strong storms. The benefits have been successfully demonstrated in towns including Wrightsville Beach and Carolina Beach in New Hanover County.

“In that particular location, nourishment worked and saved property,” Barnes said.

Not everyone is sold on beach re-nourishment and artificial dunes as protection, certainly not Orrin Pilkey. The famed geologist is a professor emeritus of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University and founder and director emeritus of the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University. He’s also an old North Topsail Beach nemesis, once calling it the most dangerous developed beach on the East Coast.

“That’s lipstick on a pig. That’s just nonsense in any significant hurricane,” Pilkey said of the beach project. “It’ll be brushed away just like brushing a fly off the counter.”

Pilkey said dunes created by bulldozing sand into piles, a process he described as “a form of beach erosion,” may offer some protection from small storms, but not during a major hurricane such as Fran. It’s especially inadequate on Topsail Island, where the natural elevation is so low and where property owners affected by Fran were allowed to rebuild on the most precarious sites.

“Now North Topsail looks like nothing ever happened, but I and others consider that to be the most dangerous community of the East Coast barrier islands. It’s the least developable, and that’s not hyperbole, I really believe that,” Pilkey said. “Building high-rises on North Topsail was madness. The reason it’s madness, they now have no way to respond to sea-level rise. They can’t move the high-rises back. The loss of a beach cottage is not a disaster, you can move a cottage back or raise them – that helps a little while – but with high-rises, all you can do is abandon them or turn them into fishing reefs.”

The biggest outrage, Pilkey said, is that homes were allowed to be rebuilt on the half-dozen or so spots where floodwater cut channels through the island as it receded to the ocean. Now, those little, temporary inlets feature bridges where the road was washed away and single- and multi-family residences standing between the bridges and the ocean.

“That’s the greatest madness of all,” Pilkey said. “I wonder sometimes whether the people who own the houses were aware of it. I have a suspicion they were not.”

The channels eventually closed via natural coastal processes, but the areas remain vulnerable, as does the road, New River Inlet Road, Pilkey said.

“In certain storms, especially when it floods from the backside, the road will be cut off rather quickly, the escape route will be cut off quickly,” Pilkey said.

To Learn More

• Jay Barnes on Hurricanes
• National Weather Service: Hurricane Fran

CAPE HATTERAS – Old timers who grew up on the North Carolina coast may still recall seeing the night sky lit up by offshore battles during World War II. Now, researchers are using advanced technology to more fully explore the recently discovered wreckage from one such battle that happened just off the cape back in 1942.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and its research partners are visiting the site of two shipwrecks from a battle that took place on July 15, 1942. On that day, the German U-boat, U-576, torpedoed three ships, sinking the Nicaraguan-flagged freighter S.S. Bluefields. Within minutes, a barrage from the merchant ship convoy and its U.S. military escorts had sunk the German sub responsible for the attack. Navy air cover bombed the U-boat as the merchant ship Unicoi attacked with its deck gun.

NOAA discovered the wrecks off Cape Hatteras in 2014, 35 miles offshore and about 700 feet below the surface. The two hulls, undisturbed by humans for 74 years, came to rest just 240 yards apart. Both ships were placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Now NOAA is considering expanding the boundaries of a national marine sanctuary to increase protection of the Bluefields, U-576 and other historic shipwrecks.

“This discovery is the only known location in U.S. waters that contains archaeologically preserved remains of a convoy battle where both sides are so close together,” Joe Hoyt, Monitor National Marine Sanctuary archaeologist and chief scientist for the expedition, said in NOAA’s announcement on Monday. “By studying this site for the first time, we hope to learn more about the battle, as well as the natural habitats surrounding the shipwrecks.”

The research expedition, which runs through Sept. 6, is part of NOAA’s ongoing $800,000 effort to document nationally significant shipwrecks in the “Graveyard of the Atlantic” off North Carolina’s Outer Banks.

“Part of our mandate with the national marine sanctuaries we want to protect, is to both educate the public and highlight special places in the ocean, to preserve nationally historic cultural resources like shipwrecks,” said NOAA’s Vernon Smith in a telephone interview.

Project Baseline

The main focus of the expedition is to characterize, as completely as possible, the remains of a World War II naval battlefield and map the sea life habitat at the sites. The mission also seeks to develop an efficient, cost-effective approach for manned submersible operations and survey packages that will better serve the sanctuary and the broader archaeological community and to foster among the public increased appreciation of maritime heritage resources.

Smith said scientists involved will assess the condition of the shipwrecks and determine how they’re doing in terms of providing habitat for fish and other marine animals. It’s part of a research effort called Project Baseline.

Project Baseline, according to its website, is a nonprofit, global, aquatic conservation initiative. It includes a worldwide network of volunteers, collaborators and supporters to establish environmental baselines by documenting through video and photos underwater conditions in oceans, lakes, rivers, springs and flooded caves. The group’s images, descriptions and data are available to the public through an online database that creates a baseline for measuring environmental quality.

“When stitched together, those images create a time lapse revealing how that quality is changing. When we couple our divers with scientists and resource managers struggling to understand and protect the ecosystems where we dive, the worth of our effort becomes greater than the sum of its parts,” according to Project Baseline’s website.

Other partners include NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research; the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, or BOEM; NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science; 2GRobotics of Canada; SRI International, an international research organization; and the University of North Carolina’s Coastal Studies Institute in Wanchese.

The project is primarily funded through a collaborative agreement with BOEM and NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research, and in-kind support from Project Baseline.

NOAA and its partners will visit the remains of the two ships to document World War II’s “Battle of the Atlantic,” which pitted the U-boats of the German navy against combined Canadian, British and American forces defending Allied merchant ships. The expedition will also include visits to several other World War I, World War II and Civil War vessels off the North Carolina coast, including the USS Monitor.

The Monitor was the Union Navy’s first ironclad warship and a big factor in the Battle of Hampton Roads, Virginia, in March 1862. The Monitor sank in a storm about 16 miles off Cape Hatteras in December 1862 while on its way to Beaufort. The wreck was discovered in 1973 and two years later, in a move to preserve the wreck and its artifacts, a 0.5-nautical-mile radius was designated as the Monitor National Marine Sanctuary.

Local Concerns

NOAA’s proposed expansion of the Monitor sanctuary was announced in January. In June, four proposed expansion options were presented for public comment.

The expansion plan has caused concern among some Outer Banks residents, especially commercial fishermen and dive charter business owners who said it would lead to more restrictions on their livelihoods.

Smith said he understands the concerns: “Government comes in and keeps people away,” he said, but that’s not the case. “We’re not keeping people off the wrecks, we want people to enjoy these resources in a sustainable way.”

While rules currently prohibit anything other than hook and line fishing for both recreational and commercial fishermen in the current sanctuary, officials say that fishing activities would not be restricted in any way through sanctuary regulations for any new areas added.

“During the recent scoping process, NOAA asked the public for comments on areas that might be added and what types of regulations would be needed to protect the wrecks. NOAA heard strongly from fishermen that they fish near wrecks without impacting the ships,” Smith said.

Smith said NOAA seeks to provide services to the public, recreational divers and educators interested in the wrecks. Some restrictions apply, but the goal is to manage these places “holistically,” he said.

“Recreational diving, recreational boating, we don’t have a problem with. And in some sanctuaries commercial fishing takes place. It varies from site to site,” Smith said. “We recognize that these places are used by a variety of different user groups, from boaters to commercial and recreational fishers, divers and others. Our goal is to try and create a management scheme that protects the resource and, as much as possible, allows different user groups and people to continue to enjoy and use the resource.

In addition to diving, recreational fishing and commercial fishing, archaeological research, vessel transit and environmental monitoring all occur within the sanctuary. The extent to which these and other potential future activities, such as renewable or other energy facility siting and development, will be allowed within an expanded sanctuary boundary will be determined through the public process and an analysis of the issues, Smith said. “We believe potential conflicts among users can be minimized through education, coordination and adherence to laws, regulations and practices,” he said.

Smith said that in addition to honoring another generation of mariners that helped defend the nation during the world wars, expanding the sanctuary may bring benefits to the area.

“These resources also provide a certain amount of economic stimulus to local communities, depending on the shipwrecks and where they’re located,” he said.

Expanding the sanctuary would elevate the unique cultural heritage of coastal North Carolina to further levels of national recognition, preserve important historical sites for future generations, promote increased access and stewardship and generate local socio-economic benefits to local communities, he said.

The agency may take steps to help the public locate certain wrecks, such as providing dive buoys, Smith said.

“By trying to bring the stories of these wrecks to the attention of the public, we can educate and instill a stewardship ethic so people will, hopefully, take pride in these resources and they too will also try and protect them,” Smith said.

A War Grave

Although the crew of Bluefields evacuated without suffering any casualties, NOAA called the site a war grave for the crew of U-576. The German government has resisted any recovery efforts related to the U-boat.

“It is international custom to view the wreckage of land, sea and air vehicles assumed or presumed to hold the remains of fallen soldiers as war graves. As such, they are under special protection and should, if possible, remain at their site and location to allow the dead to rest in peace,” the German Foreign Office said at the time of the discovery in 2014.

U.S. policy is to respect the sovereign government ownership of shipwrecks and protect them from disturbance, but officials say that together, the two wrecks offer an unusual opportunity to learn more about forgotten history.

NOAA considers expansion as a way to protect and preserve these historic sites through education, archaeological research, stewardship and management. Any new regulations, if enacted, would be to avoid damage to resources and the removal of objects or artifacts.

“The significance of these sites cannot be overstated,” David Alberg, superintendent of Monitor National Marine Sanctuary, said in NOAA’s announcement. “This area off North Carolina is the best representation of a WWII battlefield off the East coast. Now, working with our partners, we have an opportunity to study it, characterize it, and, like other historic battlefields in this country, hopefully protect it.”

NOAA discovered the two vessels when archaeologists aboard NOAA research vessel SRVX Sand Tiger located them during an autonomous underwater vehicle survey, using high-resolution sonar.

The current expedition will use two manned submersibles provided by Project Baseline, along with its research vessel Baseline Explorer.

Underwater robots and advanced remote sensing technology, provided by 2G Robotics and SRI International, will generate bathymetric data and detailed acoustical models of the wrecks and surrounding seafloor. University of North Carolina’s Coastal Studies Institute will provide three-dimensional modeling of the wrecks.

Additional funding to support the mission was provided through a grant from NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research and BOEM.

To Learn More

• NOAA’s Ocean Explorer page
• Monitor Marine Sanctuary

The recent resignation of a founding member of the science panel that advises the state’s Coastal Resources Commission leaves an imbalance in expertise, according to some of the panel’s remaining members.

East Carolina University geologist Stan Riggs resigned July 24 in protest over legislative decisions on coastal policy during the past five years, restrictions placed on the member panel’s work and, most recently, the commission chairman’s stated desire to reclassify currently designated inlet hazard areas on the state’s coastal barrier islands.

“What I see happening is people are not paying attention to what the science panel has done and what’s really happening in our coastal system,” Riggs said in a recent interview. “If we want a viable economy going into the future and help people living out there on the coast, we have to deal with the long term as well as the short term. We’re building infrastructure out there for at least 100 years. Our resources are too important for ignoring the dynamics of that system.”

The panel may have up to 15 members. Five of the nine remaining members of the panel Riggs proposed in 1996 are engineers. Riggs’ departure leaves only three geologists on the panel, William Cleary of the University of North Carolina Wilmington; Stephen Benton, who retired from the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management; and Greg “Rudi” Rudolph of Carteret County’s Shore Protection Office.

“The panel has been continually reorganized around trying to make a match between coastal sedimentary geologists on one hand and coastal engineers on the other hand,” said Charles “Pete” Peterson, a biologist with the University of North Carolina’s Institute of Marine Sciences in Morehead City and also a member of the panel. “Those two groups have different ways as a whole of looking at things and analyzing things. It’s productive to have both voices, and the panel has the capacity to debate what the different disciplines are saying.”

Peterson named several geologists he’d like to see considered as Riggs’ replacement, including Reide Corbett of UNC’s Coastal Studies Institute, a UNC Wilmington professor and others. “Those people are the kind of strong coastal geologists that our panel is severely underweighted in,” Peterson said.

Corbett said it would be an interesting offer, especially in light of the controversy that has surrounded the panel in recent years, but he would consider it.

“As frustrating as it is, I still think we need that sort of science on that panel. It’s only going to get worse if no one is there to voice that opinion,” Corbett said of the geologists’ perspective.

Rudolph said he’d also like to see another geologist appointed to the panel but the sometimes controversial nature of the panel’s work could present challenges. “Some don’t like the CRC because it’s more political now,” he said.

Rudolph noted he didn’t believe members of the panel should be involved in choosing Riggs’ replacement.

“I’m not a big fan of the science panel selecting who the future science panel members are going to be because then it’s more like a club,” Rudolph said.

It Started with Sea-Level Rise

The panel’s work on sea-level rise projections made it a political target and thrust the state into the national spotlight in the arena of climate science. The state General Assembly’s response to the report confounded geologists on the panel.

Riggs said that General Assembly’s reaction to the panel’s original, 2010 sea-level rise report, which forecast up to a 39-inch rise by 2100, was the beginning of the end for him.

“The original sea level report, things were still very healthy and the science panel was working. Things were exciting. We had the support of the division and the CRC,” Riggs said. “The atmosphere changed when Republicans gained control in Raleigh. It was at that point where the legislature rejected our report,” Riggs said.

First there was a bill that didn’t pass that would have “outlawed sea-level rise,” as Riggs put it. The next year, a bill did pass that put constraints on what the state could do with respect to talking about and planning for sea-level rise.

“That was the beginning,” Riggs said. “That’s when it sort of began to deteriorate, in my opinion.”

Riggs said the 2010 sea-level rise report with its outlook to 2100 was used as a model by other coastal states that were behind North Carolina in considering the implications. Here at home, the developers on the coast also began to realize what the report could mean for them and appealed to their representatives in Raleigh to block any rulemaking based on the projections.

“What really got the natives going on that was that the CRC at the time directed its staff that all future construction had to consider that (scenarios looking forward to 2100),” said Rudolph, who studied for his master’s degree at ECU with Riggs as his adviser and who also worked as Riggs’ research assistant. “The policy was the thing that got people all riled up and screaming to the General Assembly.”

Undeterred, the panel continued its work, moving on to study and map inlets in great detail. Panel members put in an “incredible amount of time,” Riggs said.

“The whole problem associated with development on the inlets was coming to a head. We were working on (the inlet project) until the assignment came for the 2015 sea-level rise report. It was basically dictated to us how we had to do that,” Riggs said.

Rob Young, a geologist in charge of the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University, and Antonio Rodriguez, a geologist and geophysicist at the UNC Institute of Marine Sciences, resigned from the panel in 2014. Both cited at the time personal frustrations with the legislative mandates placed upon the panel, including those guiding its work on sea-level rise. Riggs said the dictatorial environment prompted their departures.

“It got too restrictive for them,” he said. “These young, bright scientists that helped write the original report decided for their own reasons why they didn’t want to waste their time anymore.”

The updated report was due March 31, 2015, but was finished well in advance. Once the panel completed its work on the report, it never met again. Riggs said he had grown increasingly frustrated with the process. The international science community had helped with the original report but the panel was not allowed to draw from that expertise for the 2015 update. Also, former members of the panel were not allowed to help.

“They didn’t allow us to do our own science review. They did allow two engineers to review it and they made valuable contributions to the report,” Riggs said, adding that those contributions were no substitute for an open review process, “which is critical for science.”

Riggs said there were also other reasons why he and other geologists resigned. The nature of the panel had changed over the years, Riggs said, from purely a scientific endeavor to one that now includes members that he said may have a vested interest in coastal policy decisions.

“Some (panel members) run major companies that make a lot of money pumping sand and hardening shorelines. I wanted to let people know that it’s not working very well. Everything is not copasetic in the kitchen,” Riggs said.

Panel member Tom Jarrett is an engineer formerly with the Army Corps of Engineers and now with Coastal Planning and Engineering of Wilmington. The firm specializes in beach re-nourishment and inlet-dredging projects.

Jarrett was appointed to the panel in 1997, while still with the Army Corps, and like Riggs is one of the original members.

“I retired from Corps in December 2000 and at that time the CRC didn’t see any reason for me not to continue to serve. They elected to keep me on,” Jarrett said. “Even though I now work for a private consulting outfit I’ve tried to keep my views neutral. As far as any conflict of interest, I’ve been very careful to stay out of that.”

Jarrett said he’s been intimately involved in development of inlet hazard areas, a study in which Riggs was less involved. Jarrett said he took a leadership role in pushing for legislation to allow terminal groins to be built on North Carolina beaches, but that’s where his role ended.

“With terminal groins, I admit to playing a role in getting that going, but once the ball got rolling I didn’t take any role in it,” Jarrett said.

Jarrett also provided comments for the panel’s subsequent report on terminal groins.

“I commented on that but I’ve tried to be as neutral and objective as I possibly could,” Jarrett said. “Nothing I said can be interpreted as having benefited the private sector.”

Jarrett said serving on the panel takes a lot of time and effort, but he plans to continue to serve as long as he’s wanted.

“I’m not getting paid for it,” he said.

Other Remaining Members

In addition to Cleary, Jarrett, Peterson and Rudolph, the remaining members of the panel are Margery Overton, the panel’s chairwoman, of the Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering at North Carolina State University; Spencer Rogers, who has geology and engineering degrees but works as an engineer with North Carolina Sea Grant in Wilmington; William Birkemeier, a retired engineer from the Army Corps of Engineers; and Elizabeth Sciaudone, also of the NCSU’s engineering department.

“Usually our challenge is to find enough engineers. Interestingly that’s not the mismatch at the moment,” Peterson said.

Peterson said the remaining members of the panel are “people who have contributed mightily in their fields and are respected in their fields.” Their philosophical differences lead to interesting debates, he said.

“But I don’t think anybody is going to be pushed around,” Peterson said.

Frank Gorham is chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission and has the responsibility of appointing Riggs’ replacement on the panel. A self-described “big science guy,” Gorham said he strives to get at “real data” on coastal issues.

“I have the greatest respect and appreciate for what Stan did for the state and I’m sorry to lose him,” Gorham said, adding that he was pressured after the sea-level rise report to fire the entire science panel and start from scratch.

“I opted not to do that. I kept Stan Riggs because I respected him,” Gorham said. “We have to plan for a range of cases. Ten geologists in a room will come up with 11 different answers. I am very used to scientists disagreeing and I think that’s healthy.”

Gorham said he wants to wait on making a new appointment until after a set of priorities is established for the panel.

“Once we agree on those, then we go find the expertise,” Gorham said.

Those priorities could include updating erosion predictions and cycles, particularly in designated inlet hazard areas, which Gorham would like to rename “inlet management areas.”

“Inlets have a greater erosion rates than non-inlet areas, I realize that,” Gorham said. “It’s frustrating when people’s homes get put in an inlet hazard area. If we called it something different than inlet hazard and we got people to recognize the severe erosion rates …”

Gorham interrupted himself, noting that Riggs thought the decision to change the designation meant downplaying the increased rates of erosion.

“It’s more an attempt to get people to pay attention to the study,” Gorham said. “We had people more worried about their property value going down and then they wouldn’t even listen to the data. I live close to an inlet. I know there’s more instability close to inlet. We need to get the science panel to show where an inlet has an impact.”

Gorham said subcategories within the inlet areas may be the best approach, with updated science on erosion rates there, which would likely vary in degrees of severity of erosion.

“We have to factor in man’s willingness to do beach re-nourishment and inlet dredging,” Gorham said. “Man’s desire to keep beaches re-nourished will offset some of the higher erosion rates that are due to an inlet.”

The Final Straw

Riggs said the commission’s recently suggested inlet zone reclassification was the final straw for him. Softening the definition will only encourage irresponsible development, he said.

“You’re building on a sand pile that wasn’t there a few decades ago. That’s crazy. We need to do a better job of managing our resources and protecting people because sea level is changing and it’s going to have a big effect on inlets,” Riggs said.

His protégé, Rudolph, however says taking a new look at inlet hazard zones is acceptable as a means of evaluating future risks, as long as the panel ignores the policy implications.

“If the CRC wants to do the setbacks differently in inlet hazard areas, compared to oceanfront, that’s totally their decision,” Rudolph said. “If the CRC’s concern is that you have inlet hazard areas and it connotes bad things and maybe that’s not what the connotation needs to be, then that’s really up to them. Most of the inlets are pretty much developed already. Changing the policy is going to be difficult because you already have a bunch of structures there, but we need to look at preventing more inlet-ward development. Setbacks moving seaward on the oceanfront may be OK, but on inlets it’s a whole different process. They wouldn’t have us looking at it if they weren’t thinking about doing something different with it.”

The Heart of the Group

While Riggs wasn’t the first geologist to step down in frustration, his departure is perhaps the greatest loss to the panel, Peterson said.

“Losing Stan is kind of like losing the heart of the group,” Peterson said. “His seminal role in getting this established – he was the first person they thought of to help formulate the group to speak to the many choices we have in response to challenges in our coastal zone. His loss will be felt in every meeting and every hour that the panel does its work.”

Riggs, 78, said he plans to spend his remaining years finishing up books he’s been writing that deal with the dynamics of coastal systems. As a lifelong educator, he sees it as a higher calling.

“I can do far better working toward educating the public than I can fighting the legislature. It takes an educated public to get a good legislature,” Riggs said. “The decision was, what are you going to do with the rest of your life? I’m not going to piss away any more time. I’m not an angry person who is out to get anybody, I’m just trying to see that we take better care of the coast.”

Learn More

• Sea Level Rise Study Update
• Update on Beach Erosion Report

NAVASSA – Officials involved in cleaning up the contamination left here decades ago by a wood-treatment operation say the process will take years, but now that an initial investigation of the Superfund site is complete, a new phase in the effort is about to begin.

Federal, state and other officials updated town residents Tuesday for the first time in about a year on the status of the ongoing work at the former Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. site. The 251-acre waterfront property in this Brunswick County town is where wood for railroad ties and telephone poles was pressure treated with creosote, a coal tar-based preservative, from 1936 until 1974. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the lead agency in the cleanup, placed the site on a national priority Superfund sites in 2010 because of contamination of groundwater, soils and sediments.

About 65 attended the meeting, including presenters, at the Navassa Community Center on Main Street.

Erik Spalvins, the EPA’s remedial project manager for the site, described the Superfund process as a “formalized, step-by-step, problem-solving approach” that can take as long as 15 years. During the current remedial investigation phase, the past 18 or so months, more than 500 soil samples have been taken at the site, Spalvins said.

“We hope that we can start to assemble some of these results and evaluate where the remaining question marks are and then in 2017 we can produce a document that will be a remedial investigation report,” Spalvins said. “What it’s going to cover is where the contamination is, here’s how high the levels are, here’s how that compares to what a safe level would be and here’s the risks.”

Attention will then turn to the possible options for cleaning up the site – a feasibility study that considers available technologies for cleaning up or containing the contamination.

“Then we make a recommendation as to what we propose to do, that’s the proposed plan, and the EPA makes a decision about which of these options we propose to do,” Spalvins said, adding that options could include drilling wells, building structures to contain the contamination underground or removing soil.

Public meetings are to be held throughout, at each stage of the process, to update residents and receive input.

“I’d say that we’re probably a couple of years from having that proposed plan stage,” Spalvins said. “The remedial design stage might take nine months or a year. Remedial action on a site like this could take two, three, four years for the soil and where we have to deal with groundwater it could take a lot longer.”

An attendee asked about having enough money to finish the cleanup.

Spalvins said the Multistate Environmental Response Trust, which was created in 2011 as result of a more than $5 billion court settlement against the Kerr-McGee Corp. and other related subsidiaries of Anadarko Petroleum Corp., was part of the largest settlement ever for environmental fraud.

“For this site right now there’s about 90-plus million dollars to pay for this cleanup,” Spalvins said. “If the cleanup is not finished, then the EPA will do it with taxpayer money with the state doing cost share. If we are able to do it for less than that, then leftover funds are going to be returned to other sites that the trust manages where they didn’t have enough money.”

The trust could be involved with the site for 20 years, he said.

“Creosote gets into the ground a lot easier than it gets out,” said Lauri Gorton, program manager with the Multistate Environmental Response Trust.

Gorton said the preferred plan is to treat and remove the contaminants, rather than to contain the material on site. Treatment and removal mean fewer limitations on future uses of the site, she said.

Some sites have been able to recycle creosote removed from ground for use at other wood-treatment operations, the officials said.

“No matter what approach we’ve done, the EPA is not going to just leave,” Spalvins said.

Gorton agreed, adding that if the site cannot be completely cleaned, then the trust will be around for the long term to continue monitoring conditions.

Initial Findings

Gorton said the investigation is showing what was expected to be found at the site. No high levels of contamination were found in surface soils where there were never active creosote operations or in areas that could put the public at risk.

The production area included a wastewater pond that was filled when the creosote operation was dismantled in 1980. Soil samples taken at the pond site show creosote contamination 80 feet below ground. Swampy areas in the marsh also show high levels of contamination.

Gorton said follow-up investigation work will begin at the site later this fall.

“What we’re going to see is additional sampling,” Gorton said. “We’ve got some spots want to follow up on.”

This includes the creosote processing areas that are thickly overgrown in the summer, Gorton said. The work will be easier when snakes and underbrush are less of a challenge to site workers.

“We want to make sure we do a comprehensive job,” Gorton said.

Officials said interviews with surviving former creosote workers could help pinpoint other potential areas of contamination that may not be well documented. Several former workers attended the meeting.

“It’s great to have access to a great resource like that,” Gorton said.

Some in attendance asked questions about how the pollution spreads in the groundwater and surface waters of nearby Sturgeon Creek and the Brunswick and Cape Fear rivers, the risks to human health and the kind of work that will take place at the site in the coming months.

Officials said there was no indication of groundwater contamination in the upland areas where there was no creosote production or in upland areas adjacent to the site, mainly because groundwater flows generally toward the creek. Detectable levels have been found in sediments in the rivers and marshes but not on the scale of the marsh immediately adjacent to the production area.

“The other piece of this is there were other wood treaters that have been around and these chemicals are pretty widespread in the environment when you start talking about being around docks and things like that,” Spalvins said. “We’ve detected them but we don’t see them at a level where we think that they’re causing problems.”

An attendee asked about the effects of contamination on the local marine life. Spalvins said fiddler crabs, clams, blue crab and finfish have been sampled, along with minnows found in ditches around the site.

There could be some “very local issues” with the marine life in the marsh but the contaminants don’t move up the food chain. That’s because, in mammals and fish, the chemicals are processed by liver and broken down.

Community Adviser

A community nonprofit group based here has stepped forward to fill the role of technical adviser to interpret EPA documents for townsfolk and assist in providing community input on EPA cleanup actions.

The Navassa Community Economic and Environmental Redevelopment Corp., or NCEERC, has submitted to the EPA a letter of intent to apply for a technical assistance grant from the EPA. The Superfund law allows for issuance of a single grant of up to $50,000 per site to a single nonprofit group, but other groups may partner with the local group. If no other group submits a letter of intent, the group may submit its application by Aug. 31. Any groups wishing to submit a separate application also have 30 days to submit a letter of intent or file a written request for a 30-day extension.

Tonya Spencer, EPA’s community involvement coordinator, explained that the grant allows the community to have a technical assistant to put EPA data into layman’s terms. That’s the adviser’s main role, to review scientific material and help community understand what it all means.

Another role is to gather community input that can help shape plans for future uses of the site.

“It’s almost like a consultant, except they’re working on your behalf,” Spencer said.

The multistate trust will also solicit input from the community about what it would like to see at the site, Gorton said.

“The main role of community is to pick up where the federal authority stops and provide a vision for the future of the community,” she said.

Last of three parts

NAVASSA – What will happen once the creosote contamination is cleaned up at the former wood-treatment site here? The town will have a say in answering that question.

The future uses of the site also depend on the results of an ongoing “massive investigation” of the contamination, explained Erik Spalvins, the Environmental Protection Agency’s remedial project manager for the Navassa site. Everyone’s goal, he said, is to begin some kind of redevelopment as quickly as reasonably possible.

“We don’t want to leave a cleaned-up site with a fence around it. We want to leave something more,” Spalvins said.

The wetlands at the site, about 92 acres, became property of state in the 1990s. Most of the property – Kerr-McGee owned about 251 acres total – now belongs to an entity known as the Multistate Environmental Response Trust. The trust was created in 2011 as part of a bankruptcy settlement involving more than 400 polluted Kerr-McGee sites in 24 states. Money given to the trust from the settlement can only be used to clean up those sites.

Spalvins said the upland areas, parts of the site never used for wood treatment, will eventually be removed from the Superfund designation. Uses of these areas may not be restricted at all. Other parts of the site, while they may never be appropriate for single-family homes – “That may not be an efficient use of funds,” Spalvins said – could see some kind of residential use.

“Based on what the community is interested in seeing, some type of residential use could be possible as long as we don’t have that direct exposure,” Spalvins said.

It is likely businesses could operate there, possibly public facilities.

“We’re really trying to focus on what the community’s vision is to guide that future land use and how we accommodate that future land use with the engineering and construction we have to do,” Spalvins said.

The site is an unusual property, he noted, in that it’s a time capsule where nothing has happened since the late 1970s. Otherwise, the property would have likely been developed.

EPA officials, when they meet again with the community later this year, hope to build a relationship that allows an exchange of ideas. Spalvin said he expects frequent meetings with local government officials or a community group, in addition to meetings with contractors, state officials and representatives from the trust, but there’s no definite timeframe for redevelopment.

“We’re trying to have a regular presence in the community as we do this cleanup to give them a voice in what happens in their backyard,” Spalvins said. “I hope in the next year the community can articulate a vision of what they’d like to see.”

The Investigation

Multistate Trust contractors have, during the past 18 months or so, taken about 500 samples at the Kerr-McGee site. Some of the unknowns at the site include how deep or widespread contamination is in the soil and groundwater and whether contaminants are migrating from drainage swales on the site into tidal marshes. It’s also been unclear whether people can be exposed to contamination and whether that exposure poses an unacceptable risk. Also, it hasn’t been established whether vapors from groundwater contamination might migrate through soils into future buildings at the site.

“We had a pretty massive investigation in the swamp where we put some mats out and we were able to drive out over the swamp and take samples so we could understand what was happening under the swamp and pin down exactly where contamination is, how bad it is and how far it went,” Spalvins said.

The results will determine which parts of the site need action and where it might do more harm than good if action is taken.

“We don’t want to take an action in the swamp if it’s going to harm the swamp and if the contamination isn’t causing any problems with the ecosystem,” Spalvins said.

Later, possibly this winter, contractors will start to look closer at areas they have not been able to access previously. By next spring, the team will begin to summarize where contamination exists and what can be done.

The work takes time, Spalvins said. “Every time we collect samples we find more questions,” he said.

The goal is to meet at least twice yearly. Officials with the state Department of Environmental Quality are also involved.

What Are the Risks?

Worker safety, the health of nearby residents and the danger of further damage to the environment are major considerations with a project like this, Spalvins said.

“The whole point of the cleanup is to protect human health and the environment,” he said.

In terms of the environment, decisions must be made as to whether to excavate or immobilize the contamination. There are tradeoffs in both.

“Do we destroy the swamp to save it?” Spalvins said. “At what level is contamination causing issues with wildlife or unacceptable exposure up the food chain, or people? Where do we draw the line?”

The marsh itself offers some advantages, mainly because of the large amount of organic materials that absorb contamination like a carbon filter.

“One of main features of the groundwater at this site is the tidal nature of this ecosystem. It complicates it but it also lets mother nature do a better job of dealing with the contamination on her own,” Spalvins said. “Twice daily, the change in tide means groundwater is not moving in the same direction or at the same speed all day. That’s done a lot to help reduce the overall impacts.”

Restoring the Ecology

Because the contamination damaged natural resources, including fish, wildlife, water and wetlands, the Navassa Trustee Council was formed as part of the 2014 court settlement that spawned the cleanup. The council includes representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NCDEQ to oversee restoration or offsetting of natural resources that were damaged.

In addition to the money and effort focused on cleaning up contamination at the site, about $23 million from the settlement is dedicated to restoring and correcting natural resources lost to contamination. NOAA is the lead trustee dealing with the natural resource damage assessment.

Habitat restoration will take place away from the Kerr-McGee site, said Howard Schnabolk of the NOAA Restoration Center in Charleston, South Carolina. NOAA is seeking help from the public in how to best spend that $23 million.

“We are charged with addressing the ecological injury,” Schnabolk said Tuesday. “The community has a lot of other issues, human health issues, damage to their property. We’ve made an effort to explain where our trustee group can help and where we can’t. The EPA effort has a lot more focus on social support – jobs, economic development, social issues.”

NOAA reached out to the public about a year ago for ideas on how to proceed.

“We put word out to the public explaining what we’re doing and that we’re looking for habitat-restoration projects to compensate for that ecological loss,” Schnabolk said.

The public responded with various ideas, he said. NOAA is now in the process of evaluating proposals.

“We intend to start spending some of the funds on projects soon, but before we spend, we need to put a restoration plan together and get it out for a 30-day review,” Schnabolk said, adding that the goal is to release the plan to the public early in 2017. “We’re still willing to entertain project ideas from the public. We haven’t officially allotted one dollar yet.”

The North Carolina Coastal Federation has applied for about $1.8 million in grants to do restoration of marsh and estuarine habitats in the lower Cape Fear River, an affected area about 15 miles downriver from the Kerr-McGee site. The federation’s proposal includes building fish and oyster reefs at Carolina Beach State Park.

Some in Navassa have expressed frustration about how the money may be spent. Schnabolk acknowledged the process may be difficult for the community to understand.

“We struggled a little bit to explain,” he said.

Environmental justice advocate Veronica Carter said many in town were upset when the trust settlement representatives held a meeting last fall to discuss restoration.

“They were like, ‘Wait a minute, what about us? Our people have been dying off for years,’” Carter said. “You’re more concerned about the critters than the people.”

Carter said it’s imperative to clean up the entire river basin, not just the Kerr-McGee site. “They drilled 78 feet down (in Sturgeon Creek) and found creosote,” she said.

Schnabolk said the mayor has helped bridge the communication gap with townsfolk.

Power Struggle

Navassa has been without a town administrator for several years. The town council had assigned certain administrative duties to Mayor Eulis Willis, but in January, the board voted 3-2 to strip the mayor of those duties. Willis said the decision related to “town business in general” and had nothing to do with his involvement with the Kerr-McGee cleanup. But that could change.

“The major impact that could happen is if, administratively, they decide ‘Well, mayor, we don’t want you to have nothing to do with none of this.’ And they could put some checks in place,” Willis said.

Councilman Athelston Bethel began a four-year term on the town board in 2015. Bethel said he’d like to see the council more involved in decisions related to the Kerr-McGee site.

“We’re asked to vote without having all the information,” Bethel said. “I’m his biggest opposition. I like the mayor, he’s good for the town, but we always felt the mayor ran the town and not the council.”

Bethel said he and other board members were briefed on the cleanup and restoration.

“We walked through the property and discussed what we would like to see done with the property and that’s as far as it went,” Bethel said.

Still, Bethel said he feels comfortable with what he knows, but he wants to be in on the discussions and not being invited to meetings about the site bothers him. This includes a locally appointed restoration group.

Louis “Bobby” Brown is a member of that group, which he said met Friday. Brown told CRO he couldn’t discuss what happened at the meeting because he’s bound by a confidentiality agreement.

Bethel said it’s possible the mayor doesn’t want the town council’s input.

“Perhaps it would destroy what he’s trying to do,” Bethel said. “He goes to Atlanta to EPA meetings. He comes back and doesn’t say anything to the council. He talks to the committee. His thing is that the committee is responsible.”

Willis defended his role in the process. “I’m the one who understands what’s going on,” he said.

Schnabolk agreed, adding that he stays in close contact with the mayor.

“We’ve worked through the mayor to understand what the community’s needs are,” Schnabolk said. “The mayor’s done a good job at working with local landowners to identify projects and put us in contact with them. He’s like a broker. He’s the go-to person for me.”

Willis has long been the most familiar face of Navassa, appearing as town spokesman on numerous issues during his tenure. He’s also led several fights when it appeared the town had been slighted. His advocacy on behalf of the town, where his family goes back at least nine generations, includes fighting for highway and bridge funding, economic-development attention and revitalization grants. The highway into town bears Willis’ name. Willis said he’s a direct descendant of the first black man to purchase land in Navassa back in 1875.

Bethel said other voices in town deserve to be heard. Increased media coverage of town business could help open the discussion, he said.

“I’d like to see more press at meetings. It’s vitally important at this juncture when we’re fighting for what is right for this town,” Bethel said. “Navassa is sort of a close-knit town and people don’t like the fact that the mayor has all the say with the media. They feel like they don’t get a true picture.”

Bethel praised the mayor and his fellow council members for working for change, but he said much is needed in town, especially a library and a cultural center. The town, along with the North Carolina Land Trust, received earlier this year a $25,000 grant from the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation to create plans for a heritage center focused on the community’s Gullah-Geechee culture and to protect land in the vicinity with Gullah-Geechee significance. Much more is needed, Bethel said.

“We don’t have anything in Navassa,” Bethel said. “We don’t have a service station. There’s not a coffee shop for the guys to hang out in the morning.”

Looking Ahead

Mike Hargett, Brunswick County’s director of economic development and planning, says town officials appear to be on the right track.

“It’s a forward-thinking community and they embrace progressive ideas,” Hargett said. “We’ve seen brownfields developed into usable sites. I think they’re to be commended for those efforts.”

Hargett said the Kerr-McGee site would be attractive for commercial or residential because of its waterfront.

“The water frontage on the river gives quick access to the port and Navassa will soon have very convenient access to I-140 with an interchange that will provide access to the interstate. Water and sewer are available and rail. Those are pretty key components to serving an industrial site,” Hargett said.

The only way to make the Kerr-McGee site marketable is to clean up the contamination, Hargett said. “Lenders are not willing to finance a project where there are environmental issues,” he said. A clean site, however, could work for a mixture of industrial and residential uses.

“Mixed use is a great idea,” Hargett said. “The waterfront location is ideal for residential and with advanced manufacturing that we have these days, they certainly could co-exist with an intelligent site design. There are some sites like that in the county. Navassa has approved a site that includes a mixture of commercial and residential called River Bend. It’s undeveloped as yet but I thought it was a very intelligent design for that site.”

Willis has pursued economic development projects on his own. He led efforts to lure a boat manufacturer to town. He also fought to attract an auto and appliance recycling company that wanted to build a landfill in Brunswick County. The boat manufacturer, closed in 2008. The recycling company, Hugo Neu, never broke ground. The project met widespread resistance because of its potential environmental effects. Critics said the company eyed Navassa because of its low-income, predominantly black population, but the company said the site was recommended by state and county officials. Willis is still upset the project didn’t happen.

To Learn More

• Multistate Environmental Response Trust
• NOAA’s Damage Assessment, Remediation and Restoration Program
• Brunswick County Economic Development

Read Part I: “A century of contamination”

Read Part II: “From guano to creosote”

Second of three parts

NAVASSA – Creosote was one of numerous toxic materials handled at the various industries that have operated here over the decades. Industry brought needed jobs, but in many cases contamination remained after the factories closed.

Veronica Carter serves on the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s board of directors and as the federation’s representative on the Southeastern North Carolina Environmental Justice Coalition. She said the number of contamination sites in and around Navassa is “mind boggling” considering the size of the community, which covers 14 square miles and includes about 1,500 residents.

“If you’re talking environmental justice, these guys are like the poster child because the demographics of the county are probably like 85 percent white and the rest minorities. Navassa is the flipside of that,” Carter said.

Navassa is quiet and rural, seemingly much farther removed from the urban bustle of nearby Wilmington, but a new highway under construction could soon bring big changes. There is a steady flow of big trucks in and out of town because of the highway construction and local industry that remains. A major rail yard here provides a vital connection for the state port in Wilmington and the state’s interior, but the town sees little economic benefit from it.

Neither does the town benefit much from the wealth and recent growth of the surrounding area. There are no golf courses here, although there are about 30 elsewhere in Brunswick County. There is no neighborhood of waterfront “McMansions,” as may be found along the Intracoastal Waterway and at the Brunswick Island beaches just a few miles south. What might have been prime real estate with scenic river views has remained undeveloped for more than 40 years because of the creosote contamination at the 251-acre Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. site. Contamination has already been addressed and some commercial redevelopment has occurred at other sites around Navassa, but the Great Recession hit hard here and efforts to lure new investment since then have yielded little benefits.

Railroads and Fertilizer

Because of its prime location with rail and river access and proximity to downtown Wilmington, five miles east, the village was home to various chemical, meat-packing and petroleum operations. As many as four now-defunct fertilizer companies employed more than 4,000 workers at one time.

“Here I am growing up in the ’60s and we’ve got all these fertilizer plants, and even though we’re small and everything, I still grew up in an industrial economy,” said Mayor Eulis Willis. “It’s so much different from the agricultural, agrarian background that most of Brunswick County has had.”

The town was incorporated in 1977 and includes CSX Transportation’s Davis Yard, the regional base for the railroad’s switching operations. Three miles long with a railcar capacity of 2,250, Davis Yard has 55 separate tracks, loading and unloading facilities and warehouses. It connects the Port of Wilmington by rail to points to the west and southwest.

The U.S. Postal Service named the village much earlier, in 1885, after the Navassa Guano Co., a fertilizer factory that opened here in 1869. The factory was built on a site known as Meares’ Bluff, near where the railroad bridge across the Brunswick River had been built two years earlier.

Navassa Guano Fertilizer Co. was formed after large guano deposits were discovered in 1856 on Navassa Island, a small, uninhabited island about 15 miles off the coast of Jamaica. A group of Wilmington investors arranged to have ships that delivered North Carolina turpentine products to the West Indies return with guano from Navassa Island. The fertilizer manufactured here, including phosphate-based product beginning in 1884, was then transported by rail to the state’s interior.

More fertilizer companies followed. Armour Fertilizer Works built a plant here in 1919. Royster Fertilizer came in 1927 and finally Smith-Douglas Fertilizer in 1946.  Newspapers across the region, including the Raeford News-Journal and the Lumberton Robesonian, reported the Smith-Douglas plant opening at the time.

“The Smith-Douglass plant at Navassa will add materially to an industry that has long been famous at that location,” according to the reports.

The Cleanup Begins

Navassa Guano Co. sold its property to Virginia Chemical Co. in 1927 and the operation was eventually taken over by Estech General Chemical Co. Mobil Oil Corp. eventually took over the plant assets. Another merger in 1999 created ExxonMobil, which negotiated with EPA officials in 2005 to clean up the site where the agency had found elevated levels of arsenic and lead in soil, groundwater and marsh sediment. ExxonMobil spent $10 million on the project in 2006 and continues to monitor groundwater there.

The EPA began in 2013 cleaning up a former waste oil-recycling plant that operated here from 1993 until 2013. High concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, and heavy metals were found at the P&W Waste Oil Services Inc. site. Company owner Benjamin Franklin Pass of Leland was sentenced in 2014 to 42 months in prison and ordered to pay $21.4 million in restitution for clean-up costs associated with the “widespread” environmental contamination that resulted from mishandling of used oil contaminated with PCBs, according to the U.S. Justice Department.

“Right now, we’ve got three Superfunds and two of them have been cleaned up,” Willis said. “P&W Oil has been cleaned up, the Navassa plant was cleaned up and now we’re working on Kerr-McGee. Now, we haven’t even talked about the little brownfield sites that are involved.”

There’s also the former site of another creosote operation, Carolina Creosoting Corp. on Navassa Road. Other sites of concern include the Royster Fertilizer site off Royster Road and the Smith-Douglas site on Cedar Hill Road.

Also, about 600 workers from Brunswick and surrounding counties lost their jobs in 2013 when the DAK Americas, formerly Dupont, plant near Navassa closed. The plant made polymer resin, polyester fiber and raw materials for resins and fibers. Willis said the shuttered plant could pose additional environmental threats to the community.

Not in Navassa but also nearby are the coal-ash ponds at the Duke Energy Sutton Steam Plant just across the river.

A Company Town

Back in the 1920s and ’30s, much of the land in Navassa was subdivided into small lots for homes, similar to those seen in mill towns.

“That’s all it was, just a little industrial, company town. That was the kind of environment I grew up in,” Willis said.

Louis “Bobby” Brown, 85, of Navassa, worked at the creosote operation for a few years in the early 1950s. He said the work was hot and nasty but job opportunities in Navassa at that time were limited. There were basically only two employers in Navassa and the creosote job paid better, about 75 cents an hour, Brown recalled.

“There wasn’t nothing else out here. You could go to the creosote plant or the sawmill and the sawmill didn’t pay as well,” Brown said.

Johnnie Willis, 88, another surviving worker at the creosote operation, said the wages were lower, about 25-35 cents an hour. Brown didn’t disagree. “Seventy-five or 25 or 35 cents an hour, it wasn’t near a dollar, I know that,” Brown said.

Other workers, including those who unloaded crossties from boxcars, were paid piecemeal, about 5 cents per tie, which often worked out well for hard workers.

“They used to make more money than I did,” Brown said.

The two sides of the creosote production line were delineated by color. Logs peeled of their bark and yet to be treated with the tarry preservative were stored on what was considered the “white side” of the production, while the treatment process and the subsequent handling of treated logs were on the “black side.”

“I worked on the white side,” Brown said.

The differences in black and white also applied to the wages paid. Supervisors at the creosote plant, nearly always white men, were paid more, Brown said. Racial inequality was part of life here.

“A black man couldn’t even buy a Coke,” Brown said. “The only store in town would only sell Pepsi or Nehi to blacks, Cokes were only for whites. I used to say all the time if I had the power of the Lord, I’d make all white people be black for 24 hours and make all black people be white for 24 hours, just so they could see how it felt.”

Few Resources

Mayor Willis said the efforts to get contaminated sites around town cleaned up have been successful only through perseverance.

Willis appealed for years to get the EPA to clean up the Estech site and also contamination found at the Cape Fear Meat Packing Co. site, near where the I-140 bypass is under construction north of town.

“For us living with the environmental issues that we’ve got, there’s not a hell of a lot of resources to address them. And when I start reaching out and asking for help, there ain’t a whole lot of help coming,” Willis said.

Part of the problem is the state’s tier system of scoring for economic assistance, which is based on per capita income, and the relative affluence in communities nearby.

The N.C. Department of Commerce annually ranks the state’s 100 counties based on economic well-being and assigns each a tier designation. Tiers are calculated according to counties’ average unemployment rate, median household income, percentage growth in population and adjusted property tax base per capita.

The 40 most distressed counties are designated as Tier 1, the next 40 as Tier 2 and the 20 least distressed as Tier 3. This system is used by various state programs to encourage economic activity in the less prosperous areas of the state, but Willis is among those who say the method is flawed.

“The two (most economically sound counties) in the whole area are Brunswick and New Hanover, but we rank with Bladen and Columbus (counties) at the bottom, if you look at the per capita income in Navassa,” Willis said. “Every time I go to try and get some help or some assistance, I hear, ‘No, you’re from a rich area.’”

The median income for a family in Navassa in 2010 was $35,179. For Brunswick County, the median income for a family was $42,037. For New Hanover County, the median income for a family was $50,861.

According to the 2010 census, the town’s racial makeup was about 27 percent white and nearly 64 percent African-American. More than 27 percent of Navassa’s population live below the poverty line, with a Navassa’s population was about 1,500 at the time of the 2010 census. That’s compared to 479 in 2000. The huge growth was mainly because residential areas surrounding the town, communities called Old Mill, Phoenix and Cedar Hill, were annexed during the decade.

“Immediately after that, we were tagged in North Carolina as one of the fastest-growing communities, but it wasn’t really the case because of annexation,” Willis said.

It also took a fight to get the state Department of Transportation to add interchanges linking Navassa to the I-140 bypass under construction. Interchanges weren’t included in the original plan, but Willis, a member of the transportation-planning group for the area, protested the decision, citing a case where the DOT put a road through a black community without consideration for the community. It was an environmental justice precedent for highway construction, Willis said.

“The federal government says that if you spend any of our money, from now on, you will make sure that the minority community, if its adversely impacted, that they’ll have a way to get out,” Willis said. “I started emailing everyone that would listen and the next thing you know we got two interchanges in Navassa.”

The ongoing highway project has displaced some of the town’s few white residents.

“We had a nice little enclave of people, 35 or 40 whites, right along where the interchange is going,” Willis said. “Well, DOT came in and bought them all out.”

A few of the displaced families stayed in town but most moved away, Willis said.

‘A good position for growth’

The bypass, and its interchanges are expected to ease access. Willis and other town officials say the new highway will bring needed economic opportunity. Officials began planning years ago for the changes.

“The town is in a good position for growth due, in large part, to the availability of relatively inexpensive land that is undeveloped,” according to Navassa’s 20-year future land-use plan adopted in 2012.

The town’s “gateway plan” includes two, already approved planned-unit developments in the vicinity of the interchanges that are permitted to add a combined 5,500 residential units over the next 20 years, as long as there is adequate water and sewer capacity.

The plan also calls for preserving Navassa’s Gullah-Geechee heritage. This heritage is reflected in the current population of Navassa who are descendants of slaves who worked the rice plantations of the Cape Fear River area.

Trustees of the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation earlier this year awarded the town and the North Carolina Coastal Land Trust a $25,000 grant to develop plans to conserve Gullah-Geechee heritage. The money is to go to produce concept plans for a state Gullah-Geechee cultural heritage center and to protect lands related to Gullah-Geechee history near the town.

While some residents of Navassa have a direct link to the culture, Willis said the concept is a relatively new understanding among townsfolk. It’s important, he said, to help the town establish its own identity.

This identity is also part of the reason for the annual Navassa Homecoming Parade, which was held Saturday. The celebration has been a tradition since 1982.

Despite these efforts, the mayor says his town’s identity is threatened. There’s been talk in recent years of a consolidation of the town governments of Navassa, Leland and Bellville. This would destroy Navassa’s identity, Willis said.

Another issue, Willis said, is that 60 percent of Navassa residents have a Leland mailing address because of the way the U.S. Postal Service routes mail.

“There’s the identity thing there,” Willis said.

To Learn More

• Navassa Island
• Navassa Guano Co.
• Environmental justice in America
• Gullah-Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor

Thursday: The clean-up plan

Part I: “A century of contamination.”