Though it snakes 50 miles through Onslow County from start to finish, the New River is, in a practical sense, two distinct parts.

The upper river begins northwest of Richlands, a small but increasingly developing town that’s roughly 10 miles from the Duplin County line. From there, the river cuts a narrow path through largely rural agricultural land southeast to Jacksonville, where it widens, its fresh water transitioning to salt water.

The lower river then forms into a tidal estuarine 2 miles wide before ultimately opening into Onslow Bay in the Atlantic Ocean.

Plans have been in the works some two years now to ensure the river’s distinguishing parts get the attention they need. This year, Coastal Carolina Riverwatch, with the support of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, is finalizing the Lower New River Watershed Restoration Plan,  one that focuses on areas where saltwater creeks drain into shellfish-harvesting waters and tributaries including bays and creeks.

One river, two plans.

Plans are being designed through a wide-reaching collaborative effort to work in unison to restore and protect the river’s water quality.

“We felt that, even though this a river that begins and ends in Onslow County, that it would be a great opportunity for us to separate it into two different plans so that we are spending as much time as we can in those two sections and really delve into the issues and the concerns and things that are affecting water quality and things that could potentially improve water quality through the watershed restoration plan,” Coastal Carolina Riverwatch Executive Director Lisa Rider told Coastal Review in an interview earlier this month.

Next year, the upper New River plan is expected to be complete. That plan addresses inland freshwater systems that flow through neighborhoods, farms, and paddle trails, she added.

At their cores, the plans espouse the connections shared by water, land and people. Essential to both missions is bridging people, whether it be those who live along it, recreate on it, or fish in it for sustenance, with organizations and agencies “needed to respond at the scale the river demands” to improve and protect it, Rider explained.

“It’s definitely a collaborative effort and I think that’s what makes this process a little bit unique for the watershed water management planning,” she said. “We’ve been really spending a lot of time connecting with community members, leadership in the community, folks that really have a unique grasp of what’s going on in the area.”

Riverwatch has worked through the New River Roundtable, a collaborative group of scientists, regulators, academics, government representatives and stakeholders, Rider explained. The organization has also worked closely with the county and with state partners.

The organization took a boots-on-the-ground approach, setting up at local festivals and other public events and speaking at various homeowners’ associations and community meetings.

The watershed restoration plans are a first for Coastal Carolina Riverwatch, an organization that has for years been monitoring the New River to try and determine sources of bacteria detected in the river.

The plans are rooted in the idea that, by creating one set of watershed restoration plans for the river, “we may get some really great projects out of that” to fill in gaps in areas of the river where water quality improvements and protections are needed, Rider said.

“That sort of initiated us into starting to work with the North Carolina Land and Water Fund to start funding the lower part of the New River plan, and we talked to them quite a bit about the reasoning for separating those plans out, knowing that eventually we would be working in unison,” she said.

The North Carolina Division of Water Resources has been key in helping the organization make the lower river plan sustainable through continued use and updates.

The plans in the agency’s watershed improvement projects, or WIPS, tool, which maps water quality improvement projects reported by residents, organizations and local governments.

“Even after the plan is complete it’s not really complete because we’re going to be continually using the watershed improvement tool to gauge what the public sees, what’s being requested in terms of projects by stakeholders and community members, and then looking to help connect funders with the projects that are being prioritized,” Rider said.

Severe pollution closed the New River to the public in the 1980s.

Things were so dire in the river that when 25 million gallons of waste flowed from a breached hog lagoon into its waters, no fish kills were recorded.

Three years after that spill, Jacksonville closed its downtown wastewater treatment plant to cut off the predominant source of pollution that had been sickening the lower river, where the riverbed between Wilson Bay and Stones Bay was covered by soft organics like ammonia and phosphates that, when in excessive amounts, choke out aquatic life.

City officials urged those at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune to stop its wastewater facility from discharging into the river.

The river was reopened in 2001.

Since then, both the city and Onslow County have been taking further steps to improve and protect the New River.

Jacksonville took on a multiyear project installing artificial reefs on either side of the river between Wilson Bay and Stones Bay to grow millions of oysters. The final phase of the $1.6 million Oyster Highway Project, which has helped usher marine life back into the river, wrapped a couple of years ago.

In 2024, the city’s elected leaders signed off on a grant awarded to Jacksonville’s stormwater department to develop a New River Nutrient Management Plan.

That plan focuses on nutrient loading from nonpoint sources — stormwater that flows from streets, subdivisions, commercial and industrial areas — into the city’s drainage system.

Last December, the Onslow County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution that supports using low-impact development strategies in all new or significantly renovated county-funded facilities “when they are fiscally responsible and practical,” according to a county notice.

The resolution also encourages the county school system and Coastal Carolina Community College in Jacksonville to adopt similar strategies, such as bioretention areas, swales, pocket wetlands, impervious surface removal, cisterns, green roofs, and permeable pavement, for new and renovated projects.

“As Onslow County continues to grow it will be increasingly important to meet the needs of future development through sustainable means,” according to a county release.

Onslow County residents who would like to help Coastal Carolina Riverwatch identify flood-prone areas, streams in need of restoration or stabilization, areas where stormwater runoff causes erosion or water quality problems, and flood mitigation projects may contact the organization by email at waterkeeper@coastalcarolina.org.

Community-based organizations, including homeowner associations, civic and church groups, environmental and conservation clubs, paddling and fishing organizations, business associations and school groups may request a presentation by Coastal Carolina Riverwatch – or offer a project idea, or talk about an area where there are problems with flooding, at one of the group’s regular meetings.

“The collaboration, I think, really reflects how the river itself works,” Rider said. “Water doesn’t recognize those jurisdictional lines so the solutions themselves are more effective when the planning reflects that reality. This approach, we fell like, helps ensure that the investments are targeted, the support is local, and that it’s designed to deliver real benefits for both water quality and the quality of life across the watershed.”                                                                                                               

COROLLA — There’s a pond at the Donal C. O’Brien, Jr. Sanctuary and Audubon Center, the Pine Island Club, just to the west of the clubhouse, with a troubled past.

Sometime in the 1940s, when the Pine Island Club was a hunting club, the membership dug out an existing pond, put in what was perhaps a 3 inches in diameter pipe to carry water from a canal off Currituck Sound and then bulkheaded the shore.

“They bulkheaded it so that they could have ducks in there all the time, so they could breed them,” said Audubon Center Senior Coordinator of Habitats and Facilities Sara Marschhauser.

The pond though, after more than 75 years, was no longer an inviting habitat for ducks, geese, or any of the species of birds, turtles or mammals that are part of the sanctuary habitat, longtime Sanctuary Director Robbie Fearn recently told the Coastal Review.

“The number of birds that I saw in it each winter went down as that pond was no longer serving the needs of wildlife,” he said.

Over the years, the water level had been falling, and “the water level was 2 feet below the bulkhead, so there was no soft side for turtles and smaller ducks. We saw little goslings (that) got stuck in there last year,” Marschhauser said. “We had to put something in there to get them out.”

That has since changed. As part of a $309,000 grant from the North Carolina Land and Water Fund, the pond, Marschhauser said, has been “restored back to its previous footprint.”

With the pond restored, wildlife came back almost immediately.

“Pretty quickly we had two wood ducks come out from the back side of the marsh and just hang out on the edge for a couple weeks,” Marschhauser said.

She mentioned that she had seen shorebirds, in this case a tri-colored heron, spotted sandpiper and great egret, standing side by side feeding.

“That means then there must have been a lot of food there. They don’t cooperate unless there’s food,” Marschhauser said.

Restoring the pond required considerably more than merely removing the bulkhead, smoothing the sides and digging out the bottom where silt had filled it.

The original pipes were much too small to provide enough water to maintain the pond’s depth, and, over the years, Fearn noted, “as sediment filled into the bottom of that pipe it got more and more restricted.”

The new pipe is significantly wider and will be much easier to maintain so that silt doesn’t restrict water flow. That extra volume of water can already be seen as it allows fish more access the pond.

“We’ve already seen increase in fish reproducing in this pond,” Marschhauser said.

What was clear from the outset of the project, however, was that simply bringing the pond back to its original shape and size and laying in a larger pipe would not be enough to maintain sufficient water levels.

The road from the clubhouse to the Currituck Sound dock passes through an open vista of marsh, trees and grasses. Songbirds are in constant motion. The dock itself is a haven for shorebirds and an occasional nutria.

About 25 or 30 yards from the dock, the canal that feeds the pond passes under the road. At one, the crossing was little more than a causeway over a ditch. “There were two little pipes … and that was it. You weren’t really getting much flow at all,” Marschhauser said.

To correct that, a low bridge now crosses the canal that is more open, allowing water to flow freely, “so that there’s not even a pipe that it has to go through,” she said.

An added bonus, Marschhauser continued, is that in high-water events, which results from any sustained wind from the west, “hopefully our bridge won’t flood.”

With a sustained flow of water, Marschhauser said she was confident the habitat will return to its original diversity.

“The hydrology is what’s going to bring in all the critters now,” she said.

Fearn agreed, noting how much more diverse the wildlife using the restored pond will be.

“By changing it back to a to a natural-edge pond where not just like diving ducks could use it, but (also) wading birds and bobcats and the otter, it becomes a buffet for everybody, rather than a small buffet for a limited number of species,” he said.

The North Carolina Land and Water Fund grant the Donal C. O’Brien, Jr. Audubon Center has received is the second substantial grant awarded to the center in the past two years. Last year a $3.05 million National Fish and Wildlife Foundation grant “to fund innovative marsh restoration pilot projects” was begun with a number of those pilot projects ongoing.

At least one of the projects, Fearn said, “a thin layer sediment, putting silt and sand on top of the (marsh) islands, is cutting-edge for the state of North Carolina. So the process of working through it with regulators … is taking a little longer to get that permit.”

Other shoreline-stabilization projects have been completed and are being evaluated.

Fearn attributed Pine Island’s success in scoring major grants to simply listening.

“We’re listening to the landscape, and we’re listening to what the community needs, and then we understand the grants that we’re applying for and make sure they fit well,” he said.

EAST LAKE — Red wolf populations in northeastern North Carolina are still far from recovered, but there are optimistic signs that the highly endangered species now has a solid chance.

More wolves are breeding, more pups are surviving, coyote hybridization has been cut, and there are fewer mortalities from vehicle strikes and gunshots.

While still modest, those successes reflect increased community engagement and renewed commitment from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and its numerous partners.

“It’s kind of a small crew, but we’re really dedicated to what we’re doing here,” wildlife biologist Joe Madison, North Carolina program manager for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Red Wolf Recovery Program, said during a virtual meeting held Sept. 23 to provide updates on the program. “We want to make this work. We want to work with landowners to make this work. We don’t want to impose it.”

Madison said that only about half of the red wolves roam within Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge land. The population, as of August, according to Fish and Wildlife data, totals about 30 red wolves, including 18 collared adults as well as uncollared juvenile wolves and a few other adults. This population roams the designated recovery area, 1.7 million acres of public and private land in Hyde, Dare, Tyrrell, Washington and Beaufort counties. Red wolves have been seen in all five counties

It is the only known wild population in the world.

Red wolves had once ranged over wide swaths of the U.S. mainland, including much of the Gulf Coast and Southeast regions, but after years of overhunting and habitat loss, the animals were declared extinct in the wild and added to the Endangered Species List in 1967. Twenty years later, four pairs of captive wolves, offspring of wild stragglers captured earlier in Louisiana, were transferred to Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge, headquartered in Dare County. Innovative management tactics led to steady population growth, reaching a height of about 120 red wolves by 2007.

In 2020, there were only about seven collared wolves.

But poor communication with landowners led to angry confrontations over wolves coming onto private lands, while coyote hunting regulations led to mistaken identities.  Political support and funding for the recovery program dropped precipitously, and more wolves were being shot, whether intentionally or by mistake. By 2015, proposals were introduced to drastically reduce or potentially eliminate the program. After a series of lawsuits by environmental groups, the recovery program was eventually restored.

As Red Wolf Recovery Program Coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Emily Weller has acknowledged, the agency had to change the way it operated.

“Reintroducing a large carnivore into the wild had never been done before, and the focus of this program in the beginning was almost entirely biological,” Weller said, according to minutes of a management update meeting in September 2024. “But the social aspects, the community engagement, and human dimension — those were the cracks in our program’s foundation.”

Now the concept of “collaborative conservation” is viewed as critical to the survival of the red wolf, she said recently. 

“We cannot recover this species on our own,” Weller said during this week’s virtual update. “Our work depends on a pretty complex network of organizations, agencies, communities and individuals.”

That network includes veterinarian care at North Carolina State University and local veterinarians, staff with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and assistance from numerous nonprofit and nongovernment groups.

“The science tells us what’s possible,” Weller said. “But it’s the relationships, the trust, the collaboration, that really determine what’s achievable.”

The Fish and Wildlife Service also now works with “Prey for the Pack,” a habitat-improvement program that engages with private landowners in eastern North Carolina wolf recovery areas in mutually beneficial habitat programming.

The Red Wolf Recovery Program also works closely with 52 zoo and wildlife centers across the country as part of the Saving Animals From Extinction, or SAFE, program, an initiative of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, which currently cares for 280 captive red wolves. Part of the program’s goal is to increase the SAFE population to 400.

“They are a critical piece of this program in that they support the establishment of wild populations in maintaining genetic diversity,” Weller said.

Much care goes into choosing captive wolves to transfer to the recovery program in hopes of future pairing, as well as deciding which pups to place into dens with similarly aged pups for wild mothers to adopt, Weller noted.

“We rely on universities and academia for research and data to guide and base our decisions, and we’re using it constantly to adapt our management,” she said. “And then we need close coordination and communication with local landowners and community members to understand and incorporate their concerns and hopes for their community, as they have the most direct bearing on conservation and recovery, since they are the ones that live with the red wolves.”

Weller said that, other than a period of time when spending was frozen or restricted, the current funding for the Red Wolf Recovery Program had not been reduced.

Ultimately, she said, success will be when red wolves can be delisted — when they don’t need human help to survive — which is expected to take about 50 years, if all goes as planned.

Criteria that meets that goal include measurable thresholds: three viable populations, distributed to maximize redundancy and protect from catastrophic loss; one population of at least 180 and two with a minimum of 280 wolves, each with high gene diversity. Populations must be stable or growing for a decade with minimal human help and have a 95% probability of persisting for 100 years.

And finally, there must be long-term commitment that the sustainable populations can be maintained into the foreseeable future without Endangered Species Act protections.

“Red wolf recovery is about far more than just saving the species,” Weller added. “It’s about restoring ecosystems or landscapes to their natural balanced state and creating healthier environments that benefit plants and wildlife, including game species, and people.”

Every December, the red wolf program issues a release strategy for the coming year, that sets out a plan of how many captive wolves to release into the wild population that will best enable genetic diversity and sustainable growth. Changing conditions will be considered in any necessary revisions.

“It is also important to recognize that the ability to execute many of the releases is highly dependent on numerous on-the-ground factors,” according to the 2024-25 plan. “These factors include, but are not limited to, the ability to successfully capture specific wild Red Wolves, the correct timing of birth, and size of wild ad captive litters, to allow for pup fostering, and the survival of individual wild Red Wolves included in the scenarios.

“Given the myriad of factors that influence the different scenarios, the Service’s actions described in this strategy require real-time flexibility and the ability to adapt to changing factors on the ground and situations; thus, they require management discretion in the field to maximize the chances of success.”

Madison said that the team depends on having that flexibility to make judgment calls and adjust management tactics. During the update meeting, he elaborated on numerous and highly complex strategies that go into pup fostering, proper wolf-human interactions and handling — as little as possible — and wolf feeding – frozen, wild, small mammals like rabbits, raccoons, nutria and fresh frozen roadkill, like deer — and matchmaking (wolves are picky and fickle, too).

But Madison seemed quite pleased with the improvements in pup population survival, an obviously critical component of species recovery.

The pup survival rate to one year is typically about 50%, he said, but after two complete litters didn’t make it in recent years,  the recovery team determined that the likely cause was canine distemper.

“So this year when these pups were in an acclimation pen, and they were five weeks old, we went in the pen, recaptured them, and we gave them their first round of vaccines,” Madison explained. “Also, we implanted them with abdominal transmitters so we would be able to track them after they were released.”

So far, so good, he said. A family group that was released into the wild in May seems to be thriving.

“We may go into the season with a great plan, but then, you know, stuff happens out there,” Madison said. “And we have to adjust and make do with the best we possibly can.”

This story has been updated.

WILMINGTON – Beams of sunlight broke through dark gray storm clouds suspended in the sky above this historic city on a recent August morning.

The local forecast was calling for rain, the kind of weather that drives tourists from area beaches to explore other experiences the area has to offer. The kind of weather that makes for a busy day at the Battleship North Carolina, the iconic floating World War II memorial moored on the Cape Fear River across from downtown Wilmington.

“This parking lot will be full in another hour,” said Terry DeMeo, the battleship’s director of development.

A year ago, DeMeo might not have made that prediction with as much certainty.

Back then, floodwaters overspilling from the Cape Fear River might have swallowed dozens of parking spaces in the western portion of the parking lot and forced visitors to make a decision: wade through water to get to the museum’s visitor center or head for higher ground.

That’s not much of a worry these days.

A wetland has been built in place of the chronically flooded section of parking lot to help absorb high-tide driven water. A tidal creek now meanders through this area of the property to direct water from the wetland back to the Cape Fear River.

A 500-foot-long and 50-foot-wide bioretention area extends through a paved, raised parking lot that has, since its completion Memorial Day weekend, gone untouched by floodwaters.

A bioswale runs the length of the parking lot next to Battleship Road. Living shorelines blend in with the rest of the natural, wild landscape around the ship’s mooring.

These features are all part of the battleship’s “Living with Water” project, one that accommodates the water rather than try and fight it back.

Construction on the project, some seven years in the making, is mostly complete.

Land next to the battleship has become a well-known and well-documented case in point on the impacts of sea level rise.

Since the memorial opened to the public in 1961, flood events on the property have climbed on a near-steady incline. Over the past six decades, a more than 7,000% increase in tidal flooding frequency has been documented at the site.

Flood events spurred by the rising sea created a sense of urgency for the museum’s leaders. The memorial does not receive regular government funding.

Persistent flooding of the property threatened one of the primary sources of the battleship’s funding – admission fees and gift shop sales.

“We actually lost parking, but that’s how committed we are to this project,” DeMeo said as she looked across the parking lot.

The lot sits at an elevation 6 feet above the old gravel one it replaced earlier this year.

The parking lot slopes to a bioretention area that looks as much like a pleasing water feature as it does a functional holding area for stormwater that allows water to percolate down into the soil.

A total of 450 spaces were at the memorial before the project was built. Today, there are 150 fewer parking spaces on the property.

Of those parking spaces, 100 were unusable due to flooding of the western portion of the old parking lot, DeMeo said. Plans are in the works to finish an overflow lot that may add roughly another 55 spaces.

“So, discounting the unusable old spaces, we expect to come out about even,” DeMeo said later in an email.

The loss of spaces has been a small price to pay for the multimillion-dollar project, one funded through federal and state grants, including the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the North Carolina Land and Water Fund, as well as the USS North Carolina Battleship Commission, Atlantic Coastal Fish Habitat Partnership, and numerous individual donors.

Within days of the wetland and tidal creek’s completion, birds moved in on the area, DeMeo said.

“That’s been pretty amazing to see the avian community step in right away, which means fish were in there,” she said. “That’s also when we saw the diminution of walking through knee-high flooding.”

The land, she explained, has been able to recreate itself.

The site now hosts researchers from NOAA as well as the University of North Carolina Wilmington, who are monitoring everything from the physical and vegetative parameters of the area to water quality.

The museum’s leaders are now in the early stages of exploring the creation of a living lab partnership with the university and NOAA.

A living lab is a natural fit, “and it’s a way to keep an eye on the project itself,” DeMeo said.

“This is a long-term project,” she said. “We don’t know where it’s ending. We consider ourselves a model for how this can be done and how it can’t be done. We really see ourselves as an opportunity to use as a case study. We had the opportunity and we had the need. That’s why we feel so strongly about serving as a model.”

There was a time when the distinctive “kiki-do” call of eastern black rails were a common sound rising up from North Carolina marshes.

Masters of secrecy, these little birds are rarely, if ever, seen.

They prefer to skirt through the marsh using tunnels dug by rabbits and other small mammals rather than take to the sky. Their nests are typically well concealed close to the ground in the highest part of brackish, saltwater and inland freshwater marshes.

But the habitat that eastern black rails so skillfully use to maintain their privacy is under growing threat from rising ocean waters, more powerful storms, and development and, if their numbers continue to decline, projections are they’ll disappear altogether within 35 years.

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission aims to help these birds, putting forth a management plan to improve the black rails’ habitat by permanently protecting coastal marshes and assisting private landowners with potential habitat creation.

That’s going to take hundreds of acres of additional inland, shallow marsh and high-elevation coastal marsh.

“We think there’s probably less than 40 breeding pairs in North Carolina right now,” said Kacy Cook, a coastal waterbird biologist with the Wildlife Resources Commission.

The commission is accepting public comment on the Black Rail Management Plan through July 11.

The eastern black rail was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 2020. The commission lists it as a species of greatest conservation need.

Long gone are the days when eastern black rails were documented in freshwater marshes in the North Carolina mountains and Piedmont. No one has heard their “kiki-do” in the interior part of the state since 2005, Cook said.

Once abundant black rail habitat along the North Carolina has been crowded out by houses, roads and farmed land.

The last remaining pockets of coastal areas where the birds are heard in some places in the Outer Banks (exact locations are kept under wraps to prevent human disturbance) and Cedar Island, an unincorporated area of Carteret County. Even there, surveys reveal a dramatic population decline.

Surveys are conducted throughout the black rails’ breeding cycle by using something called a targeted call-response where biologists play a recording of the “kiki-do” sound and wait for a response from black rails in the survey area.

“You used to be able to hear 70 black rail calling from the causeway,” at Cedar Island, Cook said.

Now, fewer than 10 respond at any given time, she said.

And while that’s not good for the eastern black rail, it’s also indicative of a wider coastal problem.

“Black rails are our signal that our coastal marshes and freshwater wetlands are in trouble, and that makes a difference for a lot of species, and our own wellbeing,” Cook said.

Eastern black rails rely on very shallow water levels in marshes. They have legs that are typically just over one inch long. Their fledglings, roughly the size of cotton balls, are out of the nest within 24 hours of hatching, but they’re not able to fly until about 40 days later.

This is why coastal storm flooding, exacerbated by sea level rise, is a particular threat, because flood waters can wash away the nests, eggs and chicks. One big storm could wipe out the remaining population in North Carolina.

“Those are happening at a rate that is too high for their population to grow,” Cook said.

Lack of fire, which is crucial to maintaining that type of habitat, and agricultural practices that include cutting field borders where black rails like to settle among wet, tall, grassy habitat, are further degrading the birds’ habitat.

“I’m only finding black rails where we have high herbaceous plant diversity. They only use habitats that are very dense herbaceous cover, grasses and flowers with few shrubs and no trees,” Cook said.

The commission’s management plan for black rails includes the creation and restoration of 600 acres of freshwater marsh and 600 acres of additional high-elevation coastal march by 2056.

“What we do for black rails will benefit all of the marsh birds that we have now, including the egrets and the herons and the wood storks. So, working on restoring black rail habitat is going to benefit all of our coastal birds in some way and our seafood. Seventy-five percent of our seafood comes from coastal marshes,” Cook said.

Eastern and coastal North Carolina are home to some truly enormous trees. Towering bald cypresses with buttressed trunks, ancient live oaks with branches spreading out almost endlessly. The kinds of trees that leave people stunned. And though the person beholding the tree might not know it, the magnificent thing in front of them could be, or one day become, a champion.

Designated giants

The “Champion Tree” designation is a simple concept with a big purpose. The idea is to find the largest individual specimen of any given tree species, which is then named the champion of that species. The purpose goes far beyond measurements and rankings, however.

As first envisioned by the American Forestry Association in 1940, the Champion Tree Program, previously called the National Register of Big Trees, was intended to identify and conserve the nation’s largest remaining trees, which were at risk during an era of economic expansion and aggressive timber harvesting. It was also hoped that the program would increase the public’s appreciation for trees and encourage community science in forestry.

Today, anyone can nominate a tree for the National Register of Champion Trees, the annual publication of the Champion Tree Program. Nominated trees are reviewed and measured by an expert under the supervision of the University of Tennessee’s School of Natural Resources, which assumed official responsibility for the Champion Tree Program in 2024, and the champions are thereby sorted out for each species.

As of last year, when the most recent national register was published, North Carolina boasted 10 national champion trees, two of which are in the coastal plains: a pond pine in Bladen County, and a silky camellia in Gates County.

In order to find champions within their borders, state forestry services eventually established their own champion tree lists, such as North Carolina’s, which took shape under the auspices of the North Carolina Forest Service in the 1970s.

This means that North Carolina has a state champion tree for each species native to the state, and any state champion tree that is not bested in size by one of the same species in another state can be named the national champion.

Looking for the big ones

For 25-year-old Luke Ferreira, a big-tree hunter originally from New Bern, the sense of appreciation and the scientific mindset that spurred the original Champion Tree Program are always close at hand when he goes looking for giants.

“In some of the pretty remote places we go, I wonder, has anybody ever even seen this tree before?” Ferreira said in a telephone interview. “That’s what makes it worth it to me. Sometimes you come across something that takes your breath away.”

Ferreira, who now lives in Clayton, frequently ventures back to eastern North Carolina to look for and measure large trees.

“I’d say we definitely have more champions or potential champions east of I-95 than west of it,” he said.

When Ferreira finds a large tree, he calculates its size according to the method prescribed by the national Champion Tree Program. Each inch of a tree trunk’s circumference, as measured 4.5 feet above the ground, counts as one point, as does each foot of the tree’s height. The average spread in feet of the tree’s crown is divided by four, and this score is added to the point score for trunk circumference and height, yielding the overall score by which tree sizes can be compared.

Using these methods, Ferreira determined that a water hickory he and a friend discovered in a Craven County swamp was championship material. They nominated it to the state champion list, which prompted the N.C. Forest Service, following its protocols, to send out a county ranger to verify the tree’s dimensions. The ruling? With a 210-inch circumference, a height of 124 feet, and a 71-foot crown spread, it was the new state champion water hickory.

It should be noted, however, that those measurements yield 352 points according to the official Champion Tree Program method. The current national champion water hickory is listed at only 330 points, so Ferreira says he will be nominating the tree to the national list soon.

It might sound straightforward, but in reality, measuring tree sizes is a tricky business. The National Register of Champion Trees publishes a Measuring Guidelines Handbook that is 86 pages and includes two appendices and countless diagrams, so it may deter some beginners.

Luckily for Ferreira, trees aren’t just his hobby, they’re also his profession. Ferreira is a safety coordinator with Bartlett Tree Experts, so he has plenty of experience identifying, measuring and even climbing trees.

“I use a reel tape to measure the crown spread and the circumference, and then we use clinometers for height,” Ferreira said, referring to a device that calculates the height of distant objects with the help of a little trigonometry. “But if the tree isn’t too remote, I will sometimes tape drop it, where I climb up and drop the tape all the way down.”

Dying down, growing back

North Carolina’s big-tree database was taken offline in recent months before being made accessible again in early May. Andrew Pleninger, urban and community forestry program head at the N.C. Forest Service, oversees the state’s champion tree list. Pleninger said that the access issues stemmed from coinciding technical difficulties and the regular, laborious review such a program requires.

On the technical side, Pleninger said the web application hosting the database with the champion tree list was malfunctioning, prompting him to take it offline. Meanwhile, he and his staff have been working to reinspect all the existing state champions, to make sure everything on the list is accurate and up to date — a task delayed by staff shortages.

“It’s a good, popular program, and I’d like to continue to support it,” Pleninger said by telephone. “Tuning it up is one of our tasks right now.”

Maintaining champion tree registers with any kind of regularity is surely a large undertaking. Hundreds of trees, some of them in isolated mountain hollers or remote and unnavigable swamps, have to be checked to make sure none have fallen to storm, disease or axe.  

As Ferreira put it, “Once something becomes big enough to be a champion, it’s already close to the end of its life anyway.”

Even the loss of a limb can cost a tree its champion status. In a cemetery in Clinton, there stands a flowering dogwood that as recently as 2021 was the undisputed national champion.

“I was amazed at how big it was,” Pleninger said of the graveyard sentinel, which was once 33 feet tall and boasted a 40-foot crown spread. “I saw pictures of it before I went, and I thought, this is not a dogwood.”

However, the old tree has since lost one of its two main limbs, reducing its size significantly. It is no longer the national champion, and is likely not even the largest flowering dogwood in North Carolina anymore. However, a recent visit to the cemetery off of N.C. Highway 24 in Sampson County proved that the tree is still alive and still impressive. Time and decay may have robbed it of its title as champion, but it’s not yet too old to bloom in spring.

Caring for champions

The graceful leviathan at the heart of Wilmington’s Airlie Gardens isn’t just North Carolina’s state champion live oak, it’s probably one of the state’s best-known trees. It has served as a backdrop for hundreds of weddings and many thousands of photos, and it is frequently the object of concerned check-ins from the public.  

“The number one question we get after every storm is, ‘how’s the Airlie Oak?’” said Janine Powell, Airlie’s director of donor relations. “After Hurricane Florence, the first thing we did was put a picture of her up, and you could see Spanish moss and branches all over the lawn, but she’s still there.”

In an interview conducted in the shade of the sprawling oak, which is thought to have sprouted sometime around the 1540s, Powell spoke affectionately of the tree, as if it were a grande dame. That sense of care is reflected in the way Airlie Gardens looks after their champion.

When a large branch sagged to the ground in 2019, arborists from Bartlett Tree Experts were hired to thoroughly evaluate the Airlie Oak’s health and recommend measures to protect it for future generations. A customized brace to stabilize the sagging limb, support cables for the other limbs, a grounded copper wire to protect the tree from lightning strikes, removal of Spanish moss to let in more light, aeration and fertilization of the soil. The list of treatments the tree has received reads like a testament to the love of its caretakers.

“It’s amazing how much it revitalized her,” Powell said. “She just looks better. If I look at photographs from 2014 to now, oh my gosh.”

When asked what it means for Airlie Gardens to contain a state champion tree, Powell didn’t hesitate. “For the Gardens, it means the world to us,” she said. “Just knowing that it’s been around for so long.”

To raise funds for the care of their champion and the rest of their grounds, Airlie Gardens has partnered with Penderlea Farms to sell saplings grown from the acorns of the Airlie Oak.

These “historic live oaks,” according to Powell, are intended to help educate the public on the natural shape that live oaks require to be resilient (and beautiful) in their natural coastal environment.

Through the recognition of a specific remarkable tree, they are encouraging people to think about all trees a bit more deeply. Appreciation, protection, education — they’re all there, the original hallmarks of the Champion Tree Program.

SWAN QUARTER — Turns out that those million big, invasive fish that were supposed to be swimming in Lake Mattamuskeet didn’t show up, as contractors conducting a mass removal project that began last year reevaluate the estimated population of common carp in the state’s largest natural freshwater lake.

“What we found is we’re not finding the carp numbers in the lake that we thought were there,” Kendall Smith, refuge manager at Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge, told the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan Core Stakeholder Team at a recent meeting.

“So far we have not detected any aggregations of fish. We are finding concentration, places where you find more fish than others, but nothing that would be considered an aggregation,” he said.

Smith explained that the refuge will continue to work with the contractor during the year to review other techniques, assess the issues with the carp’s habits and reproduction, and determine the next approach.

“We’re learning a lot about their movements, confirming whether or not they do activate in the wintertime or early spring,” Smith continued.

But reduction of carp, aggressive bottom feeders that are blamed for much of the lake’s turbidity, is just one of the multiple challenges being tackled. The team, made up of folks with local, state and federal expertise, including representatives from governments, nonprofits and landowners, is proving to be as resilient and adaptive as the lake itself.

“Like anything worthwhile, it’s the hard stuff you’ve got to pay attention to,” local farmer and former refuge biologist Kelly Davis told Coastal Review, “because the easy stuff works itself out, right?”

A member of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Davis, along with her late husband Blythe, for decades farmed 2,000 acres of farmland in Hyde County, of which about 150 acres drain into Lake Mattamuskeet.

In her observation, the lake’s biggest issue in restoring the submerged aquatic vegetation, or SAV, is the haziness of the water, to which the carp contribute by churning up the lake bottom.

“Whatever’s killing the grass,’ she said, “it’s sedimentation. It’s cloudy waters.”

 Often referred to as a jewel of Hyde County, Lake Mattamuskeet, the centerpiece of the refuge, is 6 miles wide, 18 miles long and averages 2 feet deep.

The 40,000-acre lake, expansive and often shimmering, is famously photogenic. Serene cypress swamps along its border could be described convincingly as habitat for elves and gnomes.

But its beauty belies its environmental vulnerability. It is situated on low land, surrounded by pocosin forests and rich farmlands, intersected by gated canals that drain water, sediment and nutrients into the lake.

In addition to nearby rivers, the vast Pamlico Sound, to the lake ecosystem’s benefit and detriment, contributes some of its marine life and waters, whether pushed in by wind-driven tides or flooding. 

Since the 1990s, the submerged aquatic vegetation in the lake had gradually then suddenly disappeared, depriving the hundreds of thousands of waterfowl along the Atlantic Flyway that had stopped over for food and shelter.

Once Hyde County’s community hub, the lake, the refuge and the long-closed Mattamuskeet Lodge, which the county plans to restore and reopen, is still supporting hunting, fishing and farming activities. And ducks, swans and geese still alight at Mattamuskeet, but now mostly at the seasonal duck impoundments created around the lake.

Since 2017, the stakeholder team has been focused on solutions to the lake’s water quality problems, including loss of SAV and persistent algal blooms, as well as flooding and drainage of the surrounding land.

Guidance for the work has been provided by a watershed restoration plan facilitated by the North Carolina Coastal Federation, in partnership with Hyde County, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. The Coastal Federation is the publisher of Coastal Review, an independent online newspaper that covers coastal issues in North Carolina.

Despite uncertainty with staffing and funding concerns related to recent cuts in the federal government, work at the lake and surrounding land is ongoing and planned for upcoming months, according to a discussion during the Jan. 30 team meeting in the Hyde County Government Complex.

Five projects, funded by a $16.86 million Regional Conservation Partnership Program grant awarded to the North Carolina Coastal Federation, are designed to enhance water quality within the Lake Mattamuskeet watershed.

Project planned are improvements in the Fairfield Drainage District including installing a pump station to reduce drainage into the lake and enhance crops, restoring 1,000 acres of wetlands on converted agricultural land, constructing a 4,506-linear foot living shoreline to protect a Natural Resources Conservation Service dike in Swan Quarter and other critical infrastructure, facilitating agricultural best management practices to mitigate discharge of agricultural runoff into the lake, and outreach to aquaculture producers in an effort to boost participation in oyster restoration.

The Coastal Federation is currently working to finalize a partnership agreement with the Conservation Service, according to the federation’s coastal advocate Alyson Flynn, the meeting’s moderator. She also said that the federation has contracted with consultant Jonathan Hinkle to assist in the design and modeling of the large-scale restoration projects.

Part of the work, which has a four-year timeline, with a potential 1-year extension, involves diverting, pumping and draining water on the land in a way that would avoid adding sediment or nutrients to the lake, a hydrology challenge to engineer and a problem when there may be divergent goals. Drainage improvements also include cleaning out major drainage canals.

 “We all agree that the lake is in poor health, and we want to help fix it, but what that looks like seem to change,” Flynn said in an interview, referring to the proposed Fairfield project. “And so, yes, by diverting that fresh water up into the north, we’re hoping that the lake water will naturally filter out through that designed wetland before it gets to the Intracoastal Waterway in the north, with the assistance of pumps.”

Davis, who attended the stakeholders meeting informally as an area landowner, said that water is affected by changes in sea level and by wind tide, and there’s no choice but to work with the conditions, whatever their whims.  

“There will be times where some of that water movement is hampered until the wind shifts and blows the sound back out, but that’s part of water management in Hyde County, or really on the peninsula,” Davis said. “Whether the water body is the Pungo River, the Intracoastal Waterway, the Pamlico Sound, or Lake Mattamuskeet, the whole idea is to try to get the sediment trapped somewhere before it hits that water. And as the water slowly move through wetlands, the slower you can move the water, the more time it has for the sediment to fall out, and the more what you’re sending to the water bodies is mostly just water.”

What is important, she added, is that all the projects’ stakeholders are engaged and involved — and patient.

“They’re big projects, but they’re also projects that should have decades of value. The projects don’t have to be perfect,” she said, adding that every challenge that is addressed at the time makes a difference. “Because the needs are now, and they will be in the near term and the long term, and the wind still blows the sound out.”

OAK ISLAND — To an unsuspecting eye, it may appear trees have fared well here despite hurricanes and crop rows of houses built on this barrier island over the past couple of decades.

Pines and curvy-limbed live oaks seemingly pepper the landscape on the 12-mile-long island in Brunswick County.

But an inventory of mature live oaks and longleaf pines on town property completed a little more than a year ago revealed that not all is what it seems. The tree canopy that provides respite from scorching summer days and slows wind speeds whipped up during powerful coastal storms has depleted since the mid-2000s.

The town had 59% tree canopy cover, or nearly 7,100 of its 12,000 acres, according to a 2022 assessment, one that has helped shepherd a townwide effort to protect its existing trees and plant hundreds more.

Oak Island’s Tree Preservation Project has prompted the implementation of local rules that require property owners and builders get approval before cutting down any tree, protects hundreds of what are known as heritage live oaks and longleaf pines (those near or at 100 years old), removes Bradford pears on public land and replaces them with new live oaks, and adds hundreds more live oaks to the island.

“We’re going to grow this program,” said Brice Taylor, the town’s stormwater administrator.

He’s eager for that to happen. There is something special, arguably majestic, about old live oak trees with their broad crowns and gnarly branches stoically bowing to the earth.

On a recent, mild February morning, Taylor propped on the tailgate of a pickup truck parked to one side of a street where a Southport-based landscaping crew readied to plant more than two dozen live oaks.

The trees arrive in 25-gallon plastic pots, each stand about 12 feet tall, and are a mere five years old. In time, they’ll grow to what town officials envision as an arch-like canopy, or as one town employee put it, a “tunnel of love” over Oak Island Drive, the main thoroughfare on the island.

This is the latest round of what will be 200 plantings this year along street rights-of-way and town-owned land.

Last year, 100 young live oaks were plugged into the landscape. They are of different varieties with names like George Washington, Hoggard and Wrightsville Beach.

The trees have sprouted from acorns and carefully grown at Penderlea Farms in Burgaw, a town roughly an hour north of the island.

Because the trees are locally sourced, they’ll be more resilient to the southeastern North Carolina climate.

As the trees grow, they’ll form an intricate system of roots that act as super absorbent sponges, soaking up rainfall in a manner that helps reduce flooding.

To ensure the young live oaks consistently get enough to drink, the town has watering bags installed around each tree.

Each bag holds 20 gallons of water, which is time released into the soil at the tree’s base. The bags get refilled every five days in the summer and every four days throughout cooler months.

“It’s a very efficient way of watering,” said Bryan Whitworth, owner of GreenMan Landscape Design & Maintenance, which is planting the trees.

That’s important because watering the trees is expensive.

The town is preparing to launch an adopt-a-tree program in the next couple of weeks where participants will take over responsibility from the town and fill the watering bags.

It’s a program that is expected to be well received in a community that has by and large supported protecting and expanding the town’s tree canopy.

Taylor said a little more than 92% of lots on the island are constructed out, a testament to the growth that has occurred here.

If a property owner wants to remove a tree from his or her land, that person is required to submit a free-of-charge permit application to the town for approval.

The town encourages property owners to remove Bradford pears from their land. These weak-limbed trees are an invasive species, one that’s being targeted by a collaborative of state agencies through a program called N.C. Bradford Pear Bounty.

This program offers a one-to-one tree exchange (one replacement tree for one Bradford pear) to qualifying property owners.

More than 20 Bradford pears have been removed from Oak Island town-owned land.

Since the Oak Island Town Council adopted Town Ordinance Chapter 32: Vegetation in mid-March last year, the town has issued $8,000 in ordinance-related violations.

If a property owner wants to plant a tree, he is allowed to choose from a list of 13 species preapproved by the town.

Oak Island is a Tree City USA, an honor the National Arbor Day Foundation bestowed it 25 years ago.

This year’s Arbor Day celebration will kick off with a tree ceremony 4-5 p.m. April 25 in Bill Smith Park. The following day, the town will announce the name selected from its name-the-tree contest for the park’s main attraction, a live oak estimated to be between 200-260 years old.

“We’re working really hard to ensure (Oak Island’s) not just a name, it’s an observation,” said town communications manager Mike Emory.

Sandy Cross, senior planner for Duck, recently brought Coastal Review with her as she walked along the edge of Currituck Sound, where a project to make the Dare County town more resilient was completed in May.

Cross excitedly pointed out signs of continuing progress at the site.

“See this little grass right here? This is a black needle rush or Juncus roemerianus,” she said, growing more excited as the stroll continued another 10 to 15 yards farther along the shoreline.

“Wait a minute. See this grass that looks kind of like a Charlie Brown Christmas tree?” she asked. “That’s called Spartina cynosuroides, which is a coastal wetland species. We did not plant that.”

The project funded with local, state and federal money also elevated a portion of N.C. Highway 12 to reduce flooding, and it restored native marsh to protect the shoreline and improve natural habitat.

In October, the American Planning Association recognized the project, honoring the town with its Marvin Collins Planning Award in Sustainability and Resilience.

The award-winning projects and programs were selected for their “high quality, originality, and innovation, as well as a degree of transferability,” according to the association. “They are also impactful, in that they address a known community need and position the community for a stronger, more equitable future.”

Most vulnerable infrastructure

N.C. 12 is the only road that connects Duck to the rest of Dare County to the south and Corolla village in Currituck County to the north. At the north end of Duck’s business district, the highway was prone to flooding. When the wind was strong enough for long enough, revetment rocks that were placed alongside the road were lifted from their bed and strewn across the highway.

“For anyone that’s been in Duck any length of time, they know that a good southwest wind will inundate the roadway,” Cross said.

Town officials knew well that the quarter-mile stretch of the road was at risk. A 2019 Western Carolina University vulnerability assessment, “indicated that this section of roadway was the most vulnerable infrastructure we had in the in the town,” Cross said.

The project cost a little more than $4.3 million, which was mostly paid for with grants, although the town did contribute $398,500 of its own. Construction began in October 2023 and took six months to complete.

Sills were installed to protect a new living shoreline. Marsh grasses were planted after the invasive phragmites reeds that had taken over the nearshore were removed. The small riprap rocks were replaced by Class III Armor Stone, revetment stones that weight more than a ton each and should withstand even the strongest winds and waves.

The roadbed was raised 2.5 feet and a new sidewalk was built, all with resilience features.

“They put in strips,” Cross said of the design, “intended as a small stormwater mechanism. They’re probably about 2 feet deep, and at the base there’s some filter cloth, and then there’s a rock bed, and then there’s bio-retention soil.” 

There is also a wild grass planted between the road and the sidewalk— liriope.

In the past the town had used little bluestem between the highway and sidewalk, but Cross really wanted to find a grass that would work better as a barrier.

“They (little bluestem) get really tall, and they get really floppy when they get wet,” she said.

Liriope is a flowering grass that Cross said, “is probably the only plant that can survive the soot and the very small space in which it has to survive.”

Duck has created a series of vision documents beginning in 2009 with its “2022 Vision” that describes the town as “a pedestrian first community that is safe and easy to navigate by walking and cycling.”

That same document stressed environmental stewardship with an emphasis on living shorelines for protection on the sound side of the village.

Phase 4 of the sidewalk project was to be at the north end of the business district, and plans called for a living shoreline to create additional defense from soundside flooding.

Standing at the south end of the project area, Cross explained how the project went from an ambitious but relatively limited shoreline plan to an award-winning project, a process kickstarted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

“We were going put in a sidewalk, and we were going to put in a living shoreline. That was all scheduled to begin in 2019,” she said. “Then FEMA came out with their Building Resilient Infrastructures and Communities grant program and there was a huge pot of money for resilience projects.”

With possibility of funding for raising the road in conjunction with the living shoreline and sidewalk project, the town paused to “apply for this BRIC grant to raise the road and then really make it a resilience project,” Cross recalled.

The state, Cross said, said the project was a good candidate for funding but advised the town to hold off on the sidewalk and living shoreline components.

“You need to encompass it all in order to really fare well in the scoring of the grant,” she said. “So we started the grant process with BRIC in 2020. Fast-forward to 2024, when we actually saw the money for the grant.”

The roughly $1.9 million appeared to be enough to raise the roadbed and replace the riprap.

“Then COVID happened,” Cross said. “Everything you thought was going to cost one thing ended up costing double that. We were able to apply to the Department of Emergency Management with the state for some additional funding. We ended up getting an additional $1.5 million and change to offset some of the increase in cost of the project.”

There were other grants as well, including the $398,500 from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for the living shoreline, $148,000 from the Outer Banks Visitors Bureau for the sidewalk, and an additional $20,000 grant from the Community Conservation Assistance Program administered through the soil and water districts by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ Division of Soil and Water Conservation.

Ricky Wiatt, senior landscape architect with environmental and government consulting firm VHB, which has long worked with the town, wrote on the company’s blog that the project, “was not merely a one-and-done solution but rather a dynamic and layered approach designed to adapt and thrive in the face of ongoing challenges. By embracing the principles of resiliency and incorporating diverse strategies, the Town of Duck is not only safeguarding its infrastructure but also fostering a more sustainable and vibrant community for generations to come.”

For Cross, however, although construction has been completed, there is still work to be done.

“We do expect this to be a case study. That’s one of the things I am continually telling people, and one of the reasons why I want to get some monitoring program together,” she said. “This is all fine and dandy, but if we don’t have a way to track it when it’s done, then what have we done it for?”

HATTERAS ISLAND — With ongoing removal of petroleum-contaminated soil from Buxton Beach, along with a considerable amount of remnant building debris trucked away since September, a community meeting hosted Monday evening by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers representatives revealed notably less frustration and even a hint of a friendly partnership vibe.

“I expect them to do the very best they can,” said Jeff Dawson, a member of the Buxton Civic Association, speaking after the meeting at the Fessenden Center in Buxton in reference to the Corps’ current response.

That’s a big difference from the alarm bells the newly formed group of village residents had been ringing about the petroleum pollution and old building debris first exposed on the eroding beach by a series of storms about a year and a half earlier.

“It’s like ‘Yay!’” Dawson added. “But why did they take so long?”

Brief updates of the cleanup project were provided, but the main impetus for the meeting was to present an overview about creating a Restoration Advisory Board, or RAB in government-speak.

In a slide presentation, Alexandra Jangrell-Tackett, program manager with Dawson, the Corps’ public outreach contractor, explained that a RAB would provide an option for the community to share information about work at what is officially known as Buxton Naval Facility, a Formerly Used Defense Sites, or FUDS, as a way to keep residents updated on the actions taking place at the Buxton Naval Facility.

The 50-acre site is entirely located within the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

While a RAB allows for “concerns, needs or values” of a community to be conveyed, similar to a public meeting, it is more formal, with two co-chairs who conduct regular meetings that have agendas and minutes. It serves as a liaison between the Corps and the affected community.

“It’s important to note that a RAB is not a decision-making body,” Jangrell-Tackett said. “However, it’s that avenue for communication exchange.”

RABs are established with “sustained and sufficient” interest from communities where active environmental restoration projects are being done at Department of Defense sites, Jangrell-Tackett said during her presentation.

But a community also has the option of just holding public meetings concerning the cleanup work, she said.

While a RAB allows for “concerns, needs or values” of a community to be conveyed similar to a public meeting, Jangrell-Tackett explained, it is more formal, with two co-chairs — one from the community, one from the defense department — who conduct regular meetings that are structured with agendas, a mission statement, operational procedures and minutes.

Each RAB could have up to 30 members, each with two-year terms in the role of liaisons.

A survey on the community’s interest in a RAB was provided by the Corps, which will evaluate it after the deadline in 30 days.

Brian Harris, a member of the Buxton Civic Association, said after the presentation that he was very pleased with the Corps’ latest cleanup efforts and willingness to communicate with the community.

“Everything’s great — we love it,” he said. “Obviously, we want the RAB.”

Harris added that either a member or the overall association would be willing to serve as the RAB community member, but they’ll know more after the results of the survey are completed and further discussion is held with the Corps.

Since the Corps’ FUDS office took responsibility in 1991 for environmental restoration at the former Naval base near today’s Buxton Beach, it had removed 50 storage tanks and 4,000 tons of petroleum-contaminated soil. It has also conducted groundwater remediation and continued monitoring.

After a series of summer storms in 2023 exposed huge chunks of concrete that was once bits of buried Navy buildings, surfers and other locals started noticing strong diesel odors at the beach and a sheen in the ocean.

FUDS investigators responded, but over the months they had had difficulty determining the source of the intermittent petroleum stench.

Then, in September, more storms left an even stronger petroleum odor on the beach, resulting in the current, more visibly aggressive FUDS response.

“It was really that event that was a catalyst to get us out to that site,” said Col. Ronald Sturgeon, the Corps’ Savannah District commander, while speaking with reporters after the meeting.

Sturgeon noted that severe erosion had complicated detection of the petroleum.

“There was 15 more feet of beach there … That Building 19, the major source of the infrastructure, was 2 to 300 meters away from the ocean,” he said. “Now it’s in the ocean.”

After being back and forth doing testing at the site for more than a year, the Corps finally saw the evidence before their eyes in September, and responded.

Related: Work gets underway to pinpoint Buxton pollution source

“The release of the petroleum out of the site was a shock,” he said. “My team really pulled together and got a contractor to the site in record time. It was under two weeks … for this type of thing, it’s actually really fast.

“And once we started digging up some of the soil, removed some of the infrastructure and started to take those readings, yeah, there was a lot of (petroleum) contamination there that we weren’t tracking.”

Sturgeon said that the contractor had removed a large amount of infrastructure in order to test and access the petroleum contaminated-soil underneath, but the Corps does not have the authority to remove any additional remnant infrastructure unless it is hampering the petroleum contamination removal.

The contractors also removed about 18,000 gallons of water from the site, which was put in a machine to sort out whatever contaminants it may contain, he said.

Excavations began Oct. 2, according to the Corps, and were expected to be completed in 60 days. To date, 505 cubic yards and 11,000 gallons of petroleum-impacted soil and water, as well as approximately 82,400 pounds of concrete, 1,133 feet of pipes and 1,030 feet of metal cables and wires have been removed, the Corps said.

A contract for comprehensive sampling is expected to be awarded by Nov. 15, Sturgeon said. The sampling will delineate the nature and extent of any petroleum contamination remaining at the FUDS property.

The cleanup will be considered completed after it falls within the state Department of Environmental Quality standards. The Corps is also working closely with the National Park Service.

“We have focused in on immediate action that was required in specific zones,” Sturgeon said. “We will continue to sample within the FUDS boundary.”

But, Sturgeon said, the source of the petroleum is still unknown.

“If I knew that, I tell you what, we’d solve the problem already,” he said, adding the mystery is why the Corps is doing further work. “We have plans to sample the entire site.”

The recent reclassification of the red-cockaded woodpecker from endangered to threatened came some 25 years earlier than initially anticipated.

Wildlife officials attribute the downlisting, announced Oct. 24, to widespread, collective efforts between government agencies and multiple organizations that have worked to restore and manage habitat on which the small birds depend.

But some conservation groups argue that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision prematurely removes protections for the species because its habitat remains fragmented, which keeps the birds isolated to certain areas, making them particularly vulnerable in a changing climate.

The red-cockaded woodpecker was listed as endangered in 1970 following decades of habitat loss – largely longleaf pine forests – to logging, fire suppression, urban development and agricultural sprawl. Those practices stripped the nation’s Southeastern landscape of longleaf pine forests from Virginia to Florida to Texas.

John Doresky, Fish and Wildlife Service red-cockaded woodpecker recovery coordinator, said the downlisting “speaks volumes” to the work that continues to be done on the ground to recuperate the birds’ habitat.

“What it says to me is that the scientific advisory committee that was put together that developed the recovery plan, their vision of how we needed to move forward was spot on,” he said.

Here in North Carolina, ongoing collaborations between state agencies, Department of Defense installations, and numerous conservation organizations are actively restoring longleaf pine forests.

Last year alone, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission burned tens of thousands of acres for the sake of red-cockaded woodpecker habitat creation and restoration.

“The red-cockaded woodpecker is pretty nuanced in that it responds well to active management,” said Nick Shaver, the commission’s coastal eco-region supervisor. “If you create the habitat where it wants to be it will more than likely move there and that’s the reason for the success story. Lots of partnerships have been formed that benefit that critter and lots of land management has been done in the name of the red-cockaded woodpecker and they responded.”

Moving toward recovery

The downlisting means that protections are still in place for red-cockaded woodpeckers.

Under what is often called the “4(d) Rule,” which the Fish and Wildlife Service uses to issue regulations tailored to conserve a threatened species, land managers will continue to have to follow best management practices and rules established by state agencies, Doresky said.

But the rule somewhat loosens what have been historically restrictive land management practices, giving property managers some liberties they have not had these last 50 or so years – as long as the intention is to create old-growth forest habitat for the woodpeckers.

“Generally speaking, the protections remain the same as they were when (the woodpecker) was listed as endangered,” Doresky said.

Land managers will not have to go through some of the more laborious processes they did before to get approval to apply certain management tools such as prescribed fire and chemical applications.

For example, land managers who want to treat a landscape with chemicals have to ensure they’re not making an application of a chemical too caustic or apply it at the wrong time of the year.

Managers who choose to use prescribed burns or thinning to spur healthy pine forests with the goal of creating old growth, which is essential to red-cockaded woodpeckers, will not have to take as many cautions to protect and preserve each tree that has a woodpecker cavity.

Red-cockaded woodpeckers bore cavities into living pine trees, a process that takes the little birds, on average, about a year. These woodpeckers live in groups, or clusters, and help each other raise their young.

Red-cockaded woodpeckers prefer mature, longleaf pine forests that are generally more than 80 years old.

“Because the status is better we’re willing to accept some of those short-term potential risks,” Doresky explained. “We have enough tools now to stabilize and increase these activities in addition to these management strategies in the recovery plan. Once those are in place you’re really just waiting on time and you’re hoping that there isn’t some catastrophic event.”

Too soon?

Opponents of the downlisting say now is simply not the right time, particularly as the Southeast is experiencing more frequent, powerful coastal storms, sea level rise, and rising temperatures fueled by climate change.

According to an Oct. 24 Center for Biological Diversity release, Hurricane Helene destroyed 18 nest cavity trees in one area in Florida alone.

“The recovery of an endangered species is always something to celebrate but, in this case, it’s premature,” Ben Prater, Defenders of Wildlife Southeast program director, said in a statement. “It’s ironic that the decision to downlist has been made in the wake of one of the largest and most destructive storms to hit the Southeast in recorded history, fracturing crucial connections between red-cockaded woodpecker habitats. Decades of significant progress have been made to recover this species and manage habitats effectively — progress which could now be upended at a critical time.”

Defenders of Wildlife was among two dozen conservation groups that signed off on a 39-page letter in 2022 imploring the Fish and Wildlife Service to maintain the red-cockaded woodpeckers’ endangered status.

The letter, submitted on behalf of the groups by the Southern Environmental Law Center argued Fish and Wildlife had not justified downlisting the species

“While it’s encouraging that the service responded to many of our concerns by retaining more of the bird’s prior legal protections, the downlisting decision is still not based on the best interest of the species,” Southern Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney and Wildlife Program leader Ramona McGee said in a 2022 statement. “The service has not met its own scientific recovery plan criteria to justify loosening protections for this imperiled Southern icon.” 

The letter was signed by organizations in North Carolina, including Audubon North Carolina, North Carolina Sierra Club and North Carolina Wildlife Federation.

“These beautiful birds are making an incredible comeback thanks to the Endangered Species Act,” Will Harlan, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “Decades of active management by local, state and federal agencies have paid off, but a lot more still needs to be done to protect the long-leaf pine forests these woodpeckers and hundreds of other species call home.”

The future for recovery

The red-cockaded woodpeckers’ new status is more than two decades ahead of when the scientific advisory committee that created the recovery plan for the species anticipated.

While that may be a testament to the effectiveness of the strategies included in the recovery plan, it’s no indication of when the woodpeckers could be delisted.

The delisting criteria for the species includes that they are no longer dependent on artificial cavity inserts, which are used to stabilize and increase populations. Inserts expedite the creation a tree cavity.

Cavities are critical to the red-cockaded woodpeckers’ survival.

“That, to me, is sort of the variable that makes the prediction hereafter almost impossible because almost every single population has false cavities that are sustaining these populations at probably 50%, maybe larger,” Doresky said. “So, trying to anticipate how long it will take for properties to get trees old enough and to no longer be dependent on those cavities that we put in, yeah, that’s a tough one.”

In North Carolina, multiple agencies are partners are working to expand longleaf pine forests, also referred to as stands, in the state by actively replacing what have been commercial loblolly pine forests, which are forests grown and harvested for commercial purposes, with longleaf pines.

But the longleaf pine is one of the more slow-growing pine trees, Shaver said, and they take decades to mature.

“You’re looking 50, 60 years for stands that we’re establishing right now to be mature,” he said. “But because of the vast effort of longleaf restoration that really kicked off 30 years ago, 40 years ago, those initial stands are going to be mature in 20, 30 years. The outlook is really good because the expansion of longleaf restoration across the southeast, as those trees grow up through time, it’s going to give more and more and more land for those birds to expand.”

An ongoing lawsuit has put on hold both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s plan to treat the toxic blue-green algae in Lake Mattamuskeet and state funding for the project.

On behalf of Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club, the Southern Environmental Law Center challenged on May 20 the service’s decision “to allow the experimental use of an algaecide identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as toxic to birds in the 40,000-acre Lake Mattamuskeet” which has shown declining water quality since the early 1990s.

The 50,180-acre Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1934, providing habitat for hundreds of species of birds and is part of the Atlantic Flyway. The lake once filled with seagrass had none by 2017, and the declining submerged aquatic vegetation has led to poor water quality and clarity and contributed to large blooms of phytoplankton and cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.

The North Carolina Collaboratory, under the direction of the General Assembly, in July 2022 awarded a $5 million contract to the vendor, BlueGreen Technologies, which has an office in Pennsylvania, to test out its Lake Guard Oxy product on 400 acres of the lake. Based on results of several toxicity tests, the maximum single dosage rate to be used was to be 50 pounds per acre of Lake Guard Oxy, according to the service.

Southern Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney and Leader of the Wildlife Program Ramona McGee explained to Coastal Review that Mattamuskeet Refuge “is a revered bird sanctuary, so we’re very concerned about the impacts to birds from this toxic algaecide. This is a plan that resulted from the North Carolina General Assembly appropriating funds to the Collaboratory to conduct an experimental test of an algaecide. And for whatever reason, they selected Lake Mattamuskeet as their test site.”

The lawsuit is asking the court to block the plan until the Fish and Wildlife Service “conducts a full analysis that protects the mission and purpose of the wildlife refuge and takes a hard look at the toxic algaecide’s harms and the available alternatives,” the center said in its announcement.

The service, in a response to the lawsuit filed May 29, states that because of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s May 16 press release announcing that the “project would be ‘starting on June 1,’ Plaintiffs initiated this lawsuit and sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. However, as a result of the lawsuit, the Collaboratory has halted funding and put the Project on hold due to this pending lawsuit.”

McGee with the law center explained that not all details of how the company was selected for the study are known.

“What we do know is that BlueGreen Technologies registered lobbyists in the North Carolina General Assembly, and then subsequently the North Carolina General Assembly appropriated funds for this study. The vendor had to meet very specific criteria, and those criteria” match up with BlueGreen’s Lake Guard Oxy product and, “kind of unsurprisingly,” when the request for bids went out for this product, BlueGreen won with its Lake Guard Oxy product.

“After that, through whatever decision-making process, they selected Lake Mattamuskeet as the test site and again, Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge is a bird sanctuary, and this algaecide is toxic to birds,” McGee said.

A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service representative told Coastal Review that the service does not comment on active or pending litigation.

Emergency relief

The Fish and Wildlife Service released in March its final environmental assessment for the cyanobacteria treatment pilot study, and not long after, on May 16, the NCDEQ issued the press release stating that the department, under state water quality laws, had granted a certificate of coverage for the project to move forward as early as June 1.

“Because of that, the plaintiffs, the conservation groups here, went to the court seeking emergency relief,” McGee said, referring to the complaint filed May 20, motion filed May 24 that sought a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction, as well as the court-ordered, expedited hearing which took place May 31.

The Fish and Wildlife Service, the defendants in this case, indicated in their response brief in opposition to SELC’s motion dated May 29 that the Collaboratory had temporarily “halted funding and put the Project on hold due to this pending lawsuit,” but that funding could resume at any time.

The service added that, despite the Department of Environmental Quality’s announcement that the trial study could start on June 1, there were several steps that needed to be taken before the first treatment could be applied. Those steps could take around 10 weeks to complete.

SELC, in its May 30 reply to the defendant’s response brief, said its clients welcomed the new information and agreed to withdraw their request for a temporary restraining order, but not their request for a preliminary injunction.

“Because, as Defendants note, the UNC Collaboratory could resume funding the project at any time and set the project in motion, the Conservation Groups maintain their request for a preliminary injunction,” according to the reply.

McGee said that now, because of the new timeline, “we’re back to briefing.”

This means that the defendants will need to respond to the the law center’s May 30 reply by June 21, and then the groups would have to answer within 10 days, McGee explained.

This is still a request. “We’re still asking, at this point, the court to issue an order ensuring that defendants won’t move forward with the toxic algaecide experiment during the pendency of the lawsuit, but it’s at a slightly slower pace than it was before, given that defendants have basically assured us and the court that they’re not going to be applying the algaecide in the next couple of months,” McGee said.

The Collaboratory, in a prepared statement in response to Coastal Review’s query, said the vendor was selected in accordance with state law and that an academic team from the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill was working with the vendor to gather and assess baseline water quality data from Lake Mattamuskeet.

“The baseline data collection is ongoing, and the Collaboratory has made it clear to the vendor that subsequent phases of the project, including cost reimbursements for treatment activities, will depend on having all necessary State and federal authorizations in place. The continued collection of these data are important to better understand the impacts and effects of harmful algal blooms (HABs) in aquatic environments throughout our State,” according to the statement.

‘Evil plot of a comic book villain’

Plaintiffs Sierra Club North Carolina Chapter Acting State Director Erin Carey and Jane Davenport, senior attorney at Defenders of Wildlife, remain concerned about the algaecide study.

“An experimental algaecide that’s toxic to birds, targeted for use in a federal bird sanctuary, so a private company can collect proprietary information for its own profits –this whole thing feels like the evil plot of a comic book villain,” Carey said. “Common sense, public outcry, and even long-established mission priorities have failed to stop this misaligned and destructive project; our lawsuit is the logical next step. The stewardship inherent to the management of our preserves is paramount to the protection of thousands of species. We are proud to stand with our partners to protect the birds and other wildlife of Lake Mattamuskeet.”

Davenport reiterated that Defenders of Wildlife continues “to be very concerned about using Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge as a testing ground for an algaecide known to be toxic to birds. We are grateful that we have more time to fully lay out the legal issues with the Fish and Wildlife Service’s short-circuited environmental analysis that treated the experiment as a done deal.”

‘Little risk of negative impact to birds’

The EPA said in March 2023 that Lake Guard Oxy “is toxic to birds. Do not apply this product or allow it to drift to blooming crops or weeds while pollinating insects are actively visiting the area.”

The environmental assessment the Fish and Wildlife Service released in March 2024, notes that the statement, “toxic to birds,” on the label of Lake Guard Oxy, “must be considered in the context of the use of the product,” but concluded that the expected benefits offset the risk.

“The Service believes that use of Lake Guard Oxy in the manner and location in which it is proposed will have little risk of negative impact to birds. The potential long-term benefits of the proposed action for birds and refuge habitats outweighs the potential for negative impacts.”

A BlueGreen Water Technologies spokesperson told Coastal Review Monday that the company “has safely remediated water bodies around the globe using its Lake Guard Oxy technology to improve ecosystems for waterfowl and wildlife.”

While the EPA’s product label “advises for potential toxicity of the active ingredient under a variety of conditions on land and water, BlueGreen’s protocol is specific to harmful algal blooms and our dosage rates for Lake Mattamuskeet are below toxic thresholds as confirmed through proactive testing on waterfowl,” they said.

The product “was developed as a ‘leave no trace’ protocol for use in threatened ecosystems battling toxic, harmful algae blooms, like Lake Mattamuskeet. The peroxide-based product is fully biodegradable and breaks down into water and oxygen molecules. Compared to other peroxide-based treatments, Lake Guard Oxy has been found to provide higher efficacy at much lower doses due to the floating time-release formulation,” they continued.

Anyone who has taken a stroll along downtown Morehead City’s waterfront in the last six or seven months may have noticed the hundreds of concrete, flat-top pyramids being strategically placed in rows around the rapidly eroding Sugarloaf Island.

Those are wave attenuation devices, or WADs, and part of a bigger, hybrid project to restore 3,520 linear feet of the barrier island’s shoreline.

Teaming up with the city on the effort to save the island are Sea & Shoreline LLC., a Florida-based aquatic restoration specialist with offices in the Carolinas, the nonprofit North Carolina Coastal Federation, engineering consultant Quible & Associates of Kitty Hawk, East Carolina University and Sandbar Oyster Co., a Beaufort-based habitat-restoration business.

“About 25 years ago, the Coastal Federation worked with the town of Morehead City to purchase the island. At that time, it had been slated for development — there were some condo plans in the works,” Coastal Federation Living Shoreline Division Lead Dr. Lexia Weaver explained. “Thanks to that purchase the island was able to be protected and conserved and be the natural resource it is for both for the public and the environment, as well but since that time the island has eroded significantly, as much as a football field.”

Sea & Shoreline Chief Sales and Marketing Officer Heather Herold told Coastal Review that if this erosion, which is taking place at an accelerated rate because of rising sea levels and wave energy, isn’t addressed, “the island could disappear, leaving the town vulnerable to climate-related events.”

Weaver added that the state invested $6.6 million to “protect this crucial natural asset from ongoing and worsening erosion, especially as a result of storm systems that are frequent to our coastal region.”

The money is from a 2022 appropriation of $2 million and $4.6 million in 2023. The town held a ceremony when the work began in mid-November to thank Sen. Norm Sanderson, R-Pamlico, who also represents Carteret County, Rep. Celeste C. Cairns, R-Carteret and Craven counties, and former Rep. Pat McElraft of Emerald Isle for supporting the project.

“Restoration methods for this project include reducing wave energy with an offshore living breakwater, planting seagrass behind the living breakwater, and planting a living shoreline on Sugarloaf Island,” officials said. “The living break water will not impede normal vessel traffic because it will be installed in areas too shallow for vessels to navigate safely at high speeds. The breakwater will also be staggared so that fishers can fish around them or pass through sections of the wave attenuators.”

Herold said the project is expected to bring back habitat and lead to benefits such as shoreline restoration, water quality improvement, resiliency, fish habitat, upland habitat and flood control.

Weaver said the design was based on a 2022 study of the island, as well as other studies. There was also evidence of significant erosion through mapping imagery combined with local knowledge and testimonials.

Plans call for a total of 1,200 wave attenuators to be installed around the island. The attenuators are 7 feet tall with a 9-foot base on each of the three sides, weighing in at around 7,500 pounds each.

Tina Harris, Sea & Shoreline’s pre-construction manager, said that as of Monday, a total of 443 attenuators are in the water. Of those, 376 had been deployed at the west end of the island, completing the attenuator portion of the project on that end of the island. Work is now taking place on the east end of the island where another 67 attenuators, or units, have been deployed. Harris said they have about 650 left to deploy.

“Once we complete the east end of the island, we will deploy units along the entire south side moving from the east back towards the west,” Harris said, adding they anticipate completing the attenuator placement part of the project in late June to early July of this year. “The nature of the project is heavily dependent on weather conditions.”

The patented attenuators being installed are to “stop the wave energy and accrete sand behind them to naturally renourish and rebuild the shoreline without the need for beach renourishment,” Herold explained, adding the attenuators provide water quality benefits, including attracting oysters that filter water. Other installed projects are filtering 22 million gallons of water per day.

Herold said that, together, “these measures will protect and restore the island, improve water quality, create essential fish habitat, protect shorebird nesting areas, and enhance the shoreline for recreational boaters to enjoy.”

Herold added that the patented device is created by Living Shoreline Solutions Inc. and made out of a pH-neutral mixture of concrete and fiber-mesh. 

“We pour this mix into molds, allow for drying time, unmold them, let theme cure, then place them in the water in arrays that are pre-determined based upon scientific wave study modeling,” Herold said. As of Thursday, 682 total attenuators had been manufactured.

Harris added that the company manufactures the units at a Core Creek site and they are then moved the 10 miles by barge to Sugarloaf Island. Once the attenuators reach the island, the units are placed into the water using a large excavator, “where the units are leveled and aligned for maximum performance.”

In addition to the attenuators, Weaver said last week that two Oyster Catcher sills made by Sandbar Oyster Co. and totaling 550 feet have been put in place. These structures that resemble tables and made out of cement and plant-based cloth will continue to be manufactured and installed through the spring.

A total of 9,375 plugs of Spartina alterniflora, or smooth cordgrass, and 3,200 plugs of Uniola paniculata, or sea oats, were ordered as well and are scheduled to be planted this spring. Plans are to plant more in the spring of 2025, Weaver said.

They’re starting to see results of this work.

Weaver said that wave energy is already being reduced landward of the attenuators and sediment is already starting to accrete landward of the Oyster Catcher sills, promoting the natural expansion and growth of salt marsh grasses.

“The structures are also providing valuable habitat for fish, oysters and other marine life. Seagrass is expected to grow landward of the WADs in the quiescent waters,” Weaver added.

Morehead City Public Information Officer Anna Smith said Wednesday that the town “is grateful to be working with our partners on the Sugarloaf Island Restoration Project, and we are excited to already see positive progress,” adding that the “critical initiative would not be possible without $6.6 million in state legislative funding and the hard work” of the city’s partners and staff.

Post has been updated.

Gov. Roy Cooper has launched an ambitious initiative to conserve and restore wetlands that lost state protections last year when legislators passed a law that aligns with more narrowly defined federal wetland rules.

Cooper announced late Monday afternoon that he had signed Executive Order No. 305, which establishes a goal by 2040 to permanently conserve 1 million new acres of forests and wetlands, restore or reforest 1 million news acres of forests and wetlands, and plant 1 million trees in urban areas.

“North Carolina’s rich natural beauty is not only critical in our fight against flooding and climate change, but important to our economy,” Cooper stated in a release. “As our state continues to grow, we must be mindful to conserve and protect our natural resources and this historic Executive Order sets clear goals and puts a plan in place that will help us leave our state better than we found it for generations to come.”

Cooper last summer failed to stop the annual legislative exercise, the Farm Bill, which includes a provision that boxes in how the state can define and, ultimately, protect wetlands, from becoming law after North Carolina legislators overrode his veto of the bill.

Wording tucked into the North Carolina Farm Act of 2023 aligned how the state defines wetlands with that of the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled last May that waters of the United States, or WOTUS, applies only to wetlands that have “continuous surface connection.”

Looking back: Digging into the Farm Act

The Farm Bill strips longtime state-enacted safeguards and compensatory mitigation for more than 2 million acres of wetlands unique to North Carolina like Carolina bays and pocosins, which have no inlet or outlet.

According to the order, pocosins cover a substantial portion of North Carolina, “offer extensive benefits through carbon storage and sequestration; enhance water quality through storage and filtration; contribute to biodiversity and ecological resilience and mitigate flood and fire risk that cause substantial economic cost.”

Looking back: Wetlands left unprotected

Under the order, state agencies are directed to avoid or curtail new projects that would harm these types of wetlands, including mountain bogs.

“The governor’s action today recognizes how vital wetlands are to North Carolina’s people and wildlife, fisheries and flood protection,” Mary Maclean Asbill, director of the North Carolina offices of the Southern Environmental Law Center, stated in a release. “North Carolina’s legislature set the wrong example by failing to protect our wetlands, increasing the risk of flooding to our communities and endangering North Carolinians and fisheries.”

The order also requires state agencies to study the social, economic and environmental value of protecting these and other types of wetlands and seek federal funding to protect and restore wetlands to minimize flooding, improve water quality and capture carbon.

Leaders of environmental organizations and state agency heads praised the order.

“Now more than ever, North Carolina needs to conserve our working lands—including wetlands and forests that reduce flooding, clean our drinking water, and sustain fish and wildlife,” Grady O’Brien, policy associate with North Carolina Conservation Network, said in a release. “We’re grateful for the robust commitment this executive order makes toward protecting natural resources and providing good stewardship of our state’s valuable lands.”

Katherine Skinner, executive director of The Nature Conservancy North Carolina Chapter, said efforts to protect and restore natural areas is “vital” for the state’s future.

“They ensure clean air, clean water, and recreational opportunities in a rapidly growing region,” she said in a release. “And, they are also crucial to our continued economic growth, most of which is centered on our natural resources.”

The state is experiencing more intense hurricanes, flooding, extreme temperatures, droughts, sea level rise and saltwater intrusion – all effects of climate change that have caused more than $250 billion in damages over the last few years, according to the executive order.

North Carolina has responded by investing millions in climate mitigation efforts, including the creation of the statewide Flood Resiliency Blueprint.

The goals and directives set in the order are derived in large part from the 2020 North Carolina Natural and Working Lands Action Plan, which was created with input from a group of nearly 100 expert stakeholders under the direction of the state Department of Environmental Quality, or DEQ. The plan lays out specific actions the state may take to reduce the impacts of climate change.

Looking back: Interactive maps show benefits of natural, working lands

Katie Warnell, a senior policy associate at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment & Sustainability, is part of the working group on natural and working lands.

“It is inspiring to see recommendations from the state’s Natural and Working Lands Action Plan being elevated as priorities in this executive order,” she stated in a release. “The order’s ambitious goals for land conservation and restoration will preserve and enhance the many benefits North Carolina’s natural and working lands provide to everyone who lives in or visits the state. The executive order also addresses many data gaps and limitations previously highlighted in the action plan, which hinder planning for the sustainable management of North Carolina’s lands and waters.”

The executive order also includes the following stipulations:

• A native plant policy for all future state-owned projects.
• Promotion and support from state agencies for new and ongoing conservation and restoration, and climate resiliency efforts within tribal communities.
• Research climate impacts on the state’s biodiversity.

“This Executive Order positions North Carolina to take a science-based approach to achieving mutually beneficial goals relating to environmental quality, economic development, resiliency, and ecosystem enhancement by identifying and protecting our forests and natural and working lands,” DEQ Secretary Elizabeth S. Biser stated in a release.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Nature Based Resiliency Coordinator Sara Ward said the goal set in the order is a “game-changing target.”

“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is particularly excited about the emphasis on the state’s internationally significant peatlands, known as pocosins, in today’s action,” she said in a release.

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Executive Director Cameron Ingram called the order ambitious and important.

“Given all the tremendous pressures facing North Carolina’s lands and waters, we are excited to be a part of this ambitious and important initiative,” he said in a release. “We look forward to continuing to work with our State agency and non-profit partners to support the conservation of land to benefit wildlife and their habitats while providing opportunities for North Carolinians to enjoy hunting, fishing, boating, and wildlife associated recreation.”

SWAN QUARTER — With a lot of nets, some electric stunning, and help from a few “Judas” fish with transmitters, contractors this month are about to launch a roundup to remove a million pounds of invasive common carp from the impaired waters of Lake Mattamuskeet.

The $1 million project, funded by a Bipartisan Infrastructure Law grant, is a critical phase of the ongoing and multifaceted conservation effort to restore the state’s largest freshwater lake. But with an estimated 1 million carp in the lake, weighing an average 4 pounds each, the removal will leave about 75% of the carp to continue its destructive dominance of the ecosystem, at least until another project can be approved and funded.

“This is going to be a continual issue that we have to address through maintenance efforts once this large-scale removal takes place,” Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge Manager Kendall Smith recently told Coastal Review. “But our goal here is to crash the population of carp. They’re already stressed living in the environment that they do.”

The draft environmental assessment for the carp removal project released in March 2021 had called for removal of 99% of the carp. Although that is not possible yet, Smith said, the refuge fully intends to follow through with carp control.

Situated in the center of rural mainland Hyde County, Lake Mattamuskeet, totaling 63 square miles, is 18 miles long and 7 miles wide. At 40,276 acres, it spans the majority of the 50,180-acre refuge and is remarkably shallow — just 2 to 3 feet deep. Since the 1990s, the condition of the lake has declined precipitously, and the overabundance of carp, which create turbidity in the water, is one of the major contributors to the problem.

“So as bottom feeders, they’re constantly moving along the bottom, sort of filtering through that muck,” Smith said about the carp. “It keeps it suspended in the water column.”

Today, the lake, once a major overwintering destination for thousands of waterfowl, is devoid of submerged aquatic vegetation, lacks water clarity and is plagued with algal blooms from high nutrient levels. Once plentiful largemouth bass, crappie, catfish, sunfish and striped bass have been crowded out by carp or depleted by poor water conditions and lack of food. Many of the waterfowl now visit nearby bird impoundments to feed rather than stopping at the lake.

Minnesota-based contractor WSB came to the refuge in early December to develop a plan and to catch some of the fish to implant transmitters, Smith said.

“The idea there is carp congregate in the wintertime,” he explained. “And by inserting some transmitters and releasing those fish back into the lake, we can track them later to locate those congregations.” Thus, the fish with transmitters serve as a kind of “Judas” by betraying the location of the other carp.

Smith said that most of the carp will be caught in large-haul seine nets that capture fish from top to bottom in the water column. Other species trapped in the net will be released, and the carp will be loaded onto boats and trucks.

Carp removal had been identified in the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan as an important part of an interconnected process to restore water quality at the lake. The 2018 plan, a partnership between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Hyde County, the North Carolina Coastal Federation and local stakeholders, also recommended science-based approaches to reduction of nutrients in the lake and submerged vegetation restoration.

A similar removal effort in the 1940s and 1950s successfully restored water clarity by removing significant numbers of carp with large-haul seines, baited traps and pound nets, according to a Nov. 13 U.S. Fish and Wildlife press release. More recent efforts employed in other water bodies have used what is known as the modified unified method, which herds fish into large seines. “Once netted, carp are extracted from the lake,” the release said. “WSB will utilize a combination of these removal methods.”

About three years ago, the refuge installed barriers on the tide gates in the four canals connecting the sound to the lake, Smith said. The barriers, vertical slats spaced 2 inches apart, keep adult carp from coming into the lake to breed, but allow other fish and crabs to get through.

Although Lake Mattamuskeet possesses a serene, even mystical beauty, it has not been a pristine environment for a century or more.

“Unlike most naturally formed shallow lakes, Lake Mattamuskeet has been anthropogenically manipulated multiple times throughout its history, resulting in a highly altered morphology and hydrology,” April Dawn Lamb wrote in her 2020 thesis for her graduate degree at North Carolina State University, Informing Common Carp Removal and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Restoration in Lake Mattamuskeet. “Specifically, repeated attempts to drain the lake for agricultural use reduced its original surface area significantly, the dredging of four outfall canals connected the lake to the estuarine Pamlico Sound, and the construction of Highway 94 in 1940 split the lake into two distinct basins.

“Cumulatively, these events have increased nutrient availability to the main lake, contributed to historical shifts in the primary producer community, and facilitated the development of alternative stable states which persisted until the 1990’s,” she wrote.

Lamb’s research, which provided the carp population estimates for the refuge, found that despite their large numbers, the fish are not thriving. “Broadly, we find that carp in Lake Mattamuskeet are young, fast-growing, and short-lived,” she said.

Most fish were less than 4 pounds and survive about four years; healthy populations of common carp weigh up to 8 pounds and live as long as 20 years. The lake’s high temperatures and pH levels in the summer likely contribute to their relatively puny size and high mortality rate, she added. 

Along with a team of subcontractors, WSB, after obtaining the proper permits, is to track the fish, set up various nets, catch the fish, sort the fish, find different markets for the fish, pack and transport the fish, help dispose of unusable fish, among numerous other tasks, all within 18 months.

“We have to surgically implant high-frequency radio tags in the carp, then construct a series of receivers across Mattamuskeet, so we can track those radio-type fish in real time using satellites,” Tony Havranek, WSB’s project manager, said.

So far, the team has inserted 39 fish radio tags, with one kept out to determine the range of detection, deployed seine nets and removed about 900 carp. Havranek had also led operations for the fish logistics company, Erie, Michigan-based FisH20, a subcontractor tasked with transporting the fish to the markets.

Other subcontractors include Four Peaks Environmental Science & Data Solutions, based in Wenatchee, Washington, which will assist with radio telemetry and tracking and Wabasha, Minnesota-based Adams Boat Service, which has worked on several similar state and federal projects in the Midwest.

The tags are about the size of an AA battery in diameter and length, Havranek said. 

“We physically push that tag into the carp, and then we thread a wire antenna through the side of the fish and suture the fish up,” he said. The sutures dissolve, and the flexible wire antenna doesn’t inhibit the fish. The battery power source has a tiny circuit board on top. The contractors have handheld receivers to the stationary receivers.

 “And then based on the amplitude of the signal or the strength of it, the receiver can can tell approximately where that radio-tagged fish is at in the lake, and then the receiver itself uses a cell modem to send that information back to us,” he said.

Even though “cell service is brutal” at Mattamuskeet, Havranek said, the amount of data is small enough to transmit.

“So I can see it in St. Paul and my partners at Four Peaks in Washington State can see it together in real time,” he said.

A limited seasonal market is available for live carp in New York and Detroit, he said, adding that contractors will also investigate more potential markets along the East Coast. But the bony, somewhat undersized fish is not a popular menu item. They will also be looking for markets for fresh or dead carp, such as for animal feed, fish meal or fertilizer.

“But to be able to even sell carp on that market, especially when you start thinking about the freight costs involved, yeah, it’s really tough,” Havranek said. “We’ve got both live trucks and refrigerated trucks that we can utilize to move fish. But again, the more local places that I can bring those — I thought about crab bait or other types of bait that could be made out of the carp — it’d be really beneficial for a project like this because it can reduce the overall cost based on shipping.”

Fish carcasses could potentially also be used by farmers here, he said. Whatever can’t be marketed would be composted at suitable sites, potentially including uplands on the refuge. 

Even though the contract is just for removal of the fish, Havranek said he couldn’t “in good conscience” not help the refuge understand the current carp population by providing updated information, such as the current average weight and length. For instance, he said that from recent sampling it appears that the carp are larger and heavier than what old data had shown. 

There is an ecological tipping point — a management threshold — of about 89 pounds per acre of carp, Havranek said. And based on the old data, that would be about 140 pounds of carp per acre in Lake Mattamuskeet.

Smith, the refuge manager, agreed that the contractor’s work will be invaluable in making more effective management decisions, especially with their updated data and their years of experience.

“I think that with this trapping effort we’ll learn a lot more about the population levels and that’s something that this contractor typically does on other lakes and projects,” Smith said, adding that he expects that WSB will make multiple visits during the 18-month contract period. “It’ll be a very adaptive process as they see how successful they are with the initial efforts … and certainly learning what works best and what locations are most productive as they go.”

In recommendations made in her thesis, Lamb suggested that a “suite” of management tactics should be employed at various life stages of the carp, including the canal gate barriers that the refuge has already installed. Other measures to limit repopulation Lamb recommended would be to address potential nursery areas in impoundments and irrigation canals surrounding the lake, add predator fish like bluegill that eat the hundreds of thousands of eggs the carp produce every breeding season, which the refuge has already started doing, and potentially create and manage permanent barriers in canals to trap carp for easier removal.

“To decrease the biomass of adult fish in the lake,” she added, “we recommend conducting yearly carp removals.”

The biological rub is that carp — like another famously resilient species, the coyote — may compensate for reduced population numbers by stepping up their reproduction.

But Havranek said that if their removal project is successful and the refuge implements the other management tactics, the population cycle may be able to be stretched out over a number of years.

“All things being equal, I think it’d be really wise to at least be out on that water body just doing some simple surveys maybe once every three years, something like that,” he said. “That way you can be somewhat proactive in the management piece.”

Whether or not carp actually reproduce more after removal is not necessarily evident to Havranek. But it is clear, he said, that “they can take a beating” by managing to survive stressors in Mattamuskeet that many fish could not — low oxygen, high temperatures, high algae content.

“And they’re still going to be able to find food in some way, shape or form (although) some of them out there look pretty scrawny,” Havranek said. “So I’m sure that they’re somewhat being impacted, but they’ll always just keep coming back.”

Construction of a long-planned project to save Sugarloaf Island, the rapidly eroding, uninhabited barrier island across from the Morehead City waterfront, is officially underway. 

Morehead City Mayor Jerry Jones welcomed the handful of reporters, elected officials and partner representatives gathered Wednesday at Big Rock Landing on Shepard Street, facing the island that’s just south of the federal Harbor Channel, to celebrate the start of the project.

The gathering was also held to thank Sen. Norm Sanderson, R-Pamlico, who also represents Carteret County, and Rep. Celeste C. Cairns, R-Carteret and Craven counties, both present at the media event, and former Rep. Pat McElraft of Emerald Isle for supporting the effort. 

The shoreline protection project has been appropriated a total of $6.6 million – $2 million in 2022 and $4.6 million in 2023 — to restore the island by using a hybrid approach of offshore wave attenuation breakwaters, expanding seagrass meadows, and building living shorelines.

Sanderson said Morehead City is a destination for many people in the state, across the Southeast and farther. He lauded local leadership for making the project happen, “because this is vital. It’s vital again for the citizens, for our tourists. It’s vital for the next generation. It’s vital for all of the people who want to come to Morehead City and enjoy what we get to enjoy every single day.”

Cairns added that when she was approached about the project, she was excited and thought “we can do this.” 

Jones said that when someone asked him a few minutes prior why they were there, “I said we’re here to celebrate. We have a celebration of protecting our future while preserving our past.”

For the last two years, Florida-based aquatic restoration company Sea & Shoreline, the nonprofit North Carolina Coastal Federation, engineering firm Quible & Associates, aquaculture firm Sandbar Oyster Co., and East Carolina University have been studying, designing, planning, and permitting the project, officials announced.

“Currently, the seaward shoreline of the Island is eroding, leaving uprooted trees and vegetation behind. In addition, wave exposure and swift currents are sweeping nutrient-rich sediment into the water column. The eroded sediments now released into the water are degrading water quality and visitor experiences to the Island,” officials continued. “Protecting the Island with an offshore wavebreak will mitigate shoreline and coastal habitat erosion, enhance coastal resilience, create seagrass habitat and increased fishing opportunities, improve water quality, enhance ecotourism by increasing the beach line, sequester carbon, and enhance shorebird nesting.”

Jones recalled Wednesday that the city had purchased Sugarloaf Island 20 years ago to prevent its development. 

“We had heard that a developer was coming. They wanted to build high-rises and boat marinas on the island, and we felt like the better use would be a public park,” Jones said. 

The city used grants, donations and tax dollars to purchase and conserve the island. 

“Today we’re here to preserve Sugarloaf Island for future generations,” he said, and to make sure that the Morehead City waterfront is protected. 

Brian Rubino, vice president of the engineering firm Quible & Associates in Currituck County, said that although Sugarloaf Island is a small barrier island — it’s only about 36 acres right now — it protects downtown Morehead City’s infrastructure, roads, homes and businesses. 

The island also is host to a number of different marine and coastal environments, such as sand flats, sandspits, low dunes, maritime forest and peat marsh, all of which is getting eroded at dramatic rates. 

“The erosion rates of the island vary, depending on where you are, but it’s anywhere from 5 to 15 feet per year and it’s not uncommon to lose up to 10 feet overnight in a big storm,” Rubino said. He added that sea level rise and large storms coupled with very strong currents creates a lot of erosion, leading to sediment washing away and going into the federal boat channel between downtown waterfront and the island.

The project, Rubino continued, is to protect what’s left and hopefully grow the island to create and expand shallow water habitats for fish and wildlife. 

Brian Henry, director of the Sea & Shoreline’s North Carolina and South Carolina offices, said state elected officials “saw the vision” to restore the small barrier island. 

Henry told attendees to expect Carteret County-based Sandbar Oyster Co. to be deploying soon its oyster tables on the east end of the island. Made of biodegradable hardscape formed in the shape of a table, these are designed to provide a surface for oysters to attach and grow and create an intertidal oyster reef and salt marsh habitat.

Henry continued that Sea & Shoreline has a construction area nearby where 400 of the 1,200 wave attenuation devices for the project have been built. The devices will be deployed from the west side of the island all the way around and leave room for boats to get through.

The concrete triangular structures are 7-foot-tall. The base measures 9 feet on each side. There are six triangular windows on each side, and a small opening on the top, officials said.

“These are the first wave attenuators that have been deployed in this area,” he said, adding they’re very excited to bring these here. 

The devices, which are supposed to withstand hurricane-force winds, are to be placed offshore to diffuse wave energy, help re-form the shoreline via sand accretion, support seagrass growth to enhance water quality, and create essential fish habitat, officials said. 

Henry added that the company plans to begin deploying the devices in January and complete work in June. 

Jones closed the press conference saying that the community was built on legacies.

“We would not be standing here today if it wasn’t for the people that came before us. The leadership that came before us. The generations that recognize the beauty that we have here to Morehead City,” he said. “We are protecting our legacies, we’re protecting the future of Morehead City for future generations because we don’t inherit the Earth, we borrow the Earth from our children. And we have a responsibility to protect that for our children for the future and our future generations.”

After the press conference, Sanderson told Coastal Review that the project could serve as a model for other communities looking to preserve their at-risk public lands.

“If they don’t, then they’re missing a great opportunity to preserve what God has given us here and be stewards. We’re supposed to be stewards,” he said, adding that it’s a challenge throughout the year. “We’re always fighting Mother Nature.”

Cairns added that one of the good things about this project is that everyone is on the same page, whether it’s the businesses, community, environmental groups and the city. 

“Everybody seems to benefit and I think when people are able to work together, then the project becomes much easier to come to fruition,” she said. “Success begets success. So if this project turns out as well as we expect and hope, then other towns will look at it as a model.” 

Coastal Federation Living Shoreline Program Director Dr. Lexia Weaver told Coastal Review that the nonprofit organization is eager to begin construction and that it will not only stabilize the shoreline of Sugarloaf Island and protect downtown Morehead City, but also restore valuable salt marsh and oyster habitats that have been lost through time. 

The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review. 

Update Oct. 3: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service officials announced Monday that they are extending the public comment period from Oct. 15 to Oct. 30 for the draft environmental assessment for cyanobacteria treatment in Lake Mattamuskeet. Comments may be emailed to mattamuskeet@fws.gov.

Original story:

SWAN QUARTER — Officials at Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge are considering permitting a relatively new pesticide in a trial project to study its effect on blue-green algae that has plagued the state’s largest freshwater lake.

A draft environmental assessment of the proposed treatment on Lake Mattamuskeet was released earlier this month. Public comments are due by Oct. 15 and may be emailed to mattamuskeet@fws.gov or mailed to Mattamuskeet NWR, 85 Mattamuskeet Rd, Swan Quarter, NC 27885.

Based on the product’s warning label, there are concerns that it could be a risk to the migrating waterfowl and other birds that visit and breed at the refuge, which in large part was created to be a sanctuary for those birds. Added to that worry, the algae, also known as cyanobacteria, is a symptom of numerous unhealthy factors plaguing the lake’s ecosystem, including excess nutrients and loss of submerged aquatic vegetation, which officials call SAV, that requires more complex remedies than merely ridding it of an algal bloom.

“This is not seen by us as the solution for restoration of the lake, or restoration of SAV in and of itself,” Mattamuskeet Refuge Manager Kendall Smith told Coastal Review. “It’s a trial treatment. We’re learning a lot, but it’s an opportunity to evaluate a technique that may be helpful to the overall strategy of restoring SAV in the lake.”

Smith also said that while the algaecide may be dangerous to birds in its pellet form, it is safe once dissolved. And there would be no shoreline or land areas, he said, where the birds would be exposed to the pellets.

Still, the undissolved pellets can remain on the water’s surface before that happens, said Ramona McGee, staff attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center in Chapel Hill.

“It’s hard to see that this can be considered compatible use if this is toxic to birds,” she told Coastal Review.

Before the refuge would be able to implement the trial cyanobacteria treatment, it would have to secure permits from the North Carolina Department of Water Resources and agency approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s pesticide use proposal system. The earliest the work would begin is this winter, Smith said.

According to the Fish and Wildlife Service proposal, a sodium percarbonate-based algaecide, Lake Guard Oxy, would be used over approximately 600 acres, isolated in several areas around the lake’s perimeter. The agency agreed to pursue the pilot study after the refuge was approached in 2022 by the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences and Pittsburgh-based contractor BlueGreen Water Technologies, which was seeking to evaluate the cyanobacteria treatment in a North Carolina water body. Project funding includes $5 million appropriated by the North Carolina General Assembly in 2021. 

“This treatment is intended to reduce the cyanobacteria populations to allow for the re- establishment of beneficial algae and phytoplankton communities and to increase water clarity in Lake Mattamuskeet,” an agency document said.

Online information about Lake Guard Oxy on the Environmental Protection Agency website dated March states under the “environmental hazards” heading: “This pesticide is toxic to birds. Do not apply this product or allow it to drift to blooming crops or weeds while pollinating insects are actively visiting the area.”

Information on BlueGreen’s website, however, states that the product’s formulations are Environmental Protection Agency- and National Science Foundation-certified, “and are made from ingredients that have been safety-approved causing no harm to human, animal, or plant life.”

McGee, with the law center, also said that under the National Environmental Policy Act, federal agencies are required to do an informed analysis before issuing an environmental assessment.

By definition, a pilot project is inherently experimental, she said. But the refuge had already issued a special use permit in January to BlueGreen, which has installed solar-powered probes to monitor parts of the lake, in addition to independent monitoring by UNC.

Monitoring environmental impacts would also continue during and after treatment.

“Those are the sort of questions the Fish and Wildlife Service should’ve considered,” she said. “This is being done backwards, in terms of analyzing the effects.”

McGee said the law center had been coordinating with environmental groups and planned to submit comments. 

The North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review, also plans to submit comments about its concerns, said Alyson Flynn, the nonprofit’s coastal advocate in its Wanchese office.

“The use of experimental chemicals is not going to solve the water quality and flooding problems at Lake Mattamuskeet,” Flynn said.

Once the bustling centerpiece of Hyde County’s rural mainland communities, Lake Mattamuskeet experienced rapid degradation in its water quality and overall environmental health over recent decades. Despite that, the 40,000-acre lake, 6 miles wide, 18 miles long and an average of 2 feet deep, maintains its otherworldly beauty, surrounded by swamp forests, marshes and upland forests.

The refuge, which totals about 50,000 acres, includes a boardwalk near the lake that winds through wetlands filled with old cypress knees and craggy old trees where visitors might half-expect to see gnomes. Most famously, the refuge attracts thousands of wintering tundra swan and other migratory waterbirds, as well as numerous species of resident duck. It is also home to numerous mammals, including black bear, bobcat and endangered red wolves.

“Unfortunately, due to excessive nutrients, reduced flow to Pamlico Sound, and an overabundance of invasive common carp, the lake conditions began to decline in the early 1990s in both water quality and clarity,” according to the document. “During this period of decline, water quality monitoring documented increases in nutrients, harmful algae blooms, and turbidity in the lake.”

Carp have contributed to the lake’s problems by not only eating the submerged grasses, but also by creating more suspended sediments that block sunlight from reaching the vegetation.

Smith said that the refuge is working on finalizing a contract to have most of the carp removed in the near future.

With the depletion of the underwater vegetation, waterfowl lost a vital source of nutrients. Although the birds still come to the refuge in large numbers, they go to the duck impoundments on and around the refuge for food and use the lake for a rest stop.

Drainage into the lake from surrounding farmland and bird impoundments has been associated with the increased level of nutrients, which contributed to eutrophication that led to dominance of phytoplankton.

In 2016, the lake was listed by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Water Resources as impaired waters, based on high alkalinity and levels of chlorophyll-a, both indicators for cyanobacterial harmful algal blooms that produce cyanotoxins. The refuge has posted warning signs at the lake since 2019 to inform the public about the danger of the blooms, which can cause skin rashes and itchy or sore eyes, ears or noses.

Described as photosynthetic, single-celled aquatic organisms by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cyanobacteria are prone to quickly multiply in warm, quiet waters that have high amounts of nutrients.

The slimy green coating recognized as algal blooms in water bodies is not present at Lake Mattamuskeet, Smith said. Rather, it appears as a cloudiness in the water. 

Confronted with the wipeout of lake grasses and compromised ecosystem in 2017, refuge officials seeking a holistic approach to addressing issues on a watershed scale reached out to stakeholders to plan a collective effort to improve water quality. Led by the Coastal Federation, the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan, released in 2018, established best management practices and cooperative strategies to improve drainage and restore submerged grasses.

Smith said that the treatment could be one of the tools used to restore water quality, but it won’t solve all the lake’s problems.

“We do think that reestablishing SAV somewhere in the lake is a step in the right direction,” he said.

JACKSONVILLE – Jacksonville Stormwater Manager Pat Donovan-Brandenburg vividly recalls the naysayers.

“I had scientists look me right in the face and tell me I’d lost my mind,” she said.

More than 20 years have passed since the city shuttered its downtown wastewater treatment plant in a move to cut off the predominant source of what had sickened the New River to the point that the state had closed its waters to the public nearly two decades earlier. At the urging of city officials, Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune also stopped its wastewater facility from discharging into the river.

By then, every inch of hard habitat along the riverbed between Wilson Bay and Stones Bay was covered by soft organics like ammonia and phosphates, which in excessive amounts choke out aquatic life.

To put into perspective just how dire things were in the river, consider this: No fish kills were recorded after 25 million gallons of waste flowed from a breached hog lagoon into the river in 1995.

The river needed not only to be cleaned, but the habitat within it restored.

Donovan-Brandenburg thought that, perhaps, oysters might do the trick.

Trying to clean and revive a river some argued had too much freshwater coming down from the upper and mid part of the estuary to sustain oysters was a gamble.

“But that’s science,” Donovan-Brandenburg said. “Science is taking a chance.”

The state in 2001 reopened New River, where more than 10 million oysters have been planted over the course of 10 years in Wilson Bay alone.

Another 15 million have been added to a series of strategically-placed, human-made oyster reefs through a plan dubbed the Oyster Highway Project, one that has aided in ushering marine life back into the river, Donovan-Brandenburg said.

In the seven years since the project began, fishermen have been reporting catches of red drum, flounder, spot and croaker that hadn’t been coming out of the river for decades, she said.

“I kind of thought they would come,” Donovan-Brandenburg said. “I just didn’t realize it would be that fast. You hope and you pray that that’s what happens, but there’s no guarantee it will happen.”

It’s not just fishermen who have returned to the river’s waters. Last May, dozens of people competed in the fifth annual New River Splash Triathlon.

The $1.6 million Oyster Highway Project has been funded through multiple sources, including private donations and grants from the North Carolina Land and Water Fund, Duke Energy Water Resources Fund and N.C. Attorney General’s Environmental Enhancement Grant program.

This year marks the project’s third and final phase, which entails the expansion of most of the 12 artificial reefs from a half-acre to an acre. City officials, representatives of nongovernment organizations and volunteers in 2019 began constructing the reefs on either side of the river between Wilson Bay and Stones Bay.

Three reefs will not be expanded to one full acre because of their proximity to areas where military officials suspect unexploded ordnance – bombs, shells, grenades and bullets – may be in shallow waters near the river banks.

On a sweltering August mid-morning, Donovan-Brandenburg waded through waters just off the shore of Marine Corps Air Station New River, where massive aircraft hangers and multi-storied barracks rose up from the horizon overlooking the glass smooth-like river.

She pointed out rows of reef teeming with oysters growing on two different types of foundations.

One set of foundations is called Oyster Catcher, a co-invention of University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Institute of Marine Sciences Professor Niels Lindquist and commercial fisherman David Cessna, who died in 2021.

“I was a little unsure about what would happen all the way up in Jacksonville and Wilson Bay where Pat had been putting oysters for quite a while,” Lindquist said. “It’s amazing how well the oysters have done all the way up Wilson Bay and back despite having some big freshwater pulses come through. I think the success of those site over the last two, three years certainly validate Pat’s contention that it is appropriate habitat.”

The other reef builder used in the river is an Oyster Castle, interlocking blocks made of shell, limestone and concrete.

The idea behind using the different substrate was to see which type would work best in the river.

“What we have found is that both are equally beneficial,” Donovan-Brandenburg said.

Oyster Catchers are designed to attract and offer oyster larvae drifting with the currents a hard substrate on which to grow.

Oyster Castles allow juvenile oysters to grow and the blocks also help combat shoreline erosion. Lindquist said the bigger, more important component of the project is now going to be stocking the reefs, particularly the Oyster Castle reefs, which not only have a lot of structure, but help the Oyster Catcher reefs stay in place.

The long road to restoring the river did not come without its challenges, Donovan-Brandenburg said.

“It was not easy, I can tell you that,” she said.

City staff and volunteers will install the remaining reef expansions sometime between October and December. Oysters will be added in the late spring of next year.

Donovan-Brandenbug said she’d like to continue adding oysters to the river to help ensure the river’s waters stay healthy, an effort, she said, that also entails protecting perimeter wetlands and residents educating themselves and taking responsibility by doing little things like picking up pet waste.

“As long as I’m here I don’t know that we’ll ever be done,” she said.

That’s good news for the river, one already being affected by sea level rise.

Professor Joel Fodrie with the UNC Institute of Marine Sciences has been monitoring the Oyster Highway project since 2019.

He said the project, overall, has been a success and notes that the reefs now support hundreds and hundreds of mussels, which filter out harmful algae and bacteria.

There are things to celebrate and some realization that a few things could be done better, Fodrie said.

“Some (reefs) are doing better than others and that’s because we worked across this environmental gradient that is the estuary. Not only have we benefited the system and the footprint of these areas, but as we share the data and as papers come out, the next people get to do this better because this was an experiment.”

And, there will always be work to be done in the river.

“It’s not the final story,” Fodrie said. “Restoration is not do it one time and then you get to walk away. We’re not really restoring these systems, we’re trying to maintain these systems. I don’t think we’re ever going to arrive at a finish line. I think we have to maintain these systems just like you maintain your car or your lawn or your house or any other thing you care about so I hate there to be the illusion that we somehow finished. I think the New River Highway is neat and it deserves a little spotlight and then Pat, yeah, not crazy, but certainly the core, the emotional, ethical core of making this happen. It’s kind of remarkable what she has leveraged to do this.”

COLUMBIA — In a land where fire and water dominate and bountiful natural landscapes have a history of unnatural manipulation, a recently released water management plan for Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge is seeking to restore and protect a unique environment in North Carolina’s vast coastal plain that is at the frontlines of a rapidly changing climate.

“This place is really, really a special place,” Wendy Stanton, the refuge’s manager, told Coastal Review. “We’re all facing these climate change, sea level rise issues on this peninsula. It’s a very vulnerable area.”

The refuge’s water management plan and environmental assessment released Aug. 8 is intended as a dynamic working document to serve as a guide for the next 15 years. In Pocosin Lakes, which is crisscrossed with drainage ditches on flat land barely above sea level, where water comes only from the sky — sometimes in deluges, sometimes barely at all — and where desiccated peatlands had become fuel for fires, water management is a conservation balancing act upon which the entire ecosystem depends.

Ongoing success with rewetting pocosin shows hope that restoration is a critical component of management that produces results, with recent wildfires controlled before they were able to spread like previous fires that had burned deep into the peat. As had become evident, pumping water from the canals won’t decrease flooding, but it could increase fire hazard.

“By draining the peat we’re increasing the risk for catastrophic ground fire,” Stanton said. “You know, we’ve had so many fires over the years since the ’80s, before it was even refuge land. We’ve learned a lot of lessons from those fires. So we just we just can’t do that.”

Healthy peat soils in restored areas hold moisture longer than peat soils in an open drainage system, and saturating the soil inhibits intense ground fires in peat, according to the plan. At the same time, the surface vegetation is allowed to burn, which is good for peat ecosystems.

As scientists urgently seek ways to mitigate climate change, the refuge’s peat soil also has gained much attention for its ability to hold tons of carbon, the main pollutant causing global warming. But when dried-out pocosin burns, it releases that stored carbon into the atmosphere.

Established in 1990, Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge was named for the spongy peatlands known as pocosin — an Algonquian word meaning “swamp on a hill” — that make up much of the region’s soil. Although dominated by the shrubby vegetation of pocosin habitat, the refuge also contains hardwood forests, Atlantic white cedar, farmlands, lakes, ponds, bird impoundments and cypress gum swamp, according to its website.

The refuge is situated within the Albemarle-Pamlico Peninsula, the second largest estuarine system in the continental U.S. Spanning Washington, Hyde and Tyrrell counties, the 110,106-acre refuge hosts huge numbers, about 100,000 a year, of migrating and resident waterfowl, most notably tundra swans that arrive by the thousands every November.

Wintering snow geese also visit every year, as well as numerous duck species. Managed waterfowl habitat encompasses about 8,300 acres within the refuge, including Pungo Lake and part of New Lake.

“And wintertime is a real special time to come to the Pungo unit because we have these absolutely spectacular fly-outs of waterfowl from Pungo Lake,” Stanton said.

Numerous other neotropical migratory and land birds also stop over or breed at the refuge. And the endangered eastern red wolf and red-cockaded woodpecker, both listed as protected under the Endangered Species Act, use the refuge as habitat. The diverse wildlife populations also include white-tailed deer, black bear, reptiles, amphibians and fish.

Land is only 20 feet to a few feet above sea level, and the flood-prone region has lost population since the early 20th century. Hunting, fishing, forestry and farming are major sources of employment, with ecotourism a new source of income, but the counties remain some of the poorest in the state.

With such a complex ecosystem, Pocosin Lakes’ water plan is by necessity flexible and adaptable, Stanton said.

Funding has been provided through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which awarded $27.25 million, about $5 million of which is going toward nature-based solutions to support the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission game lands. Another portion will be used to maintain the more than 37,000 acres of restored coastal wetlands, which make up 86% of the highly altered peatlands.

The remainder of the money, she said, will be used for Pocosin Lakes to complete the infrastructure for a second restoration area between Evans Road and Harvester Road, southeast of Lake Phelps, which is currently only partially restored.

Some areas of the refuge will raise water levels using a system of gates, pumps and culverts in canals, Stanton explained. But in other areas, water levels will be decreased, or nature will be allowed to take its course with sea level rise.

Four U.S. Geological Survey continuous groundwater monitoring wells help provide a glimpse of what is going on below the surface, which is helpful during the fire season, she said. In addition, the refuge is testing improved water level monitoring equipment — a task now done by hand.

“We have people go out there and they just use a yardstick to measure the water levels at the different structures,” Stanton said.

The new water management plan incorporates information from a 1994 hydraulic and hydrologic study that developed strategies to restore the pocosin by raising water levels, a water inventory assessment in 2016 that evaluated long-term water management needs and threats, and management documents for the endangered red wolf and red-cockaded woodpecker, as well as protection guidelines for the bald eagle.

“Fortunately, the artificial drainage level in the extensive drainage/ditch systems can be managed with relatively simple infrastructure, allowing the Service to eliminate excessive artificial drainage of water via the ditches from the refuge’s peat soils,” according to the plan. “This allows rainfall to be captured and held in the peat soils, returning their natural sponge-like qualities. Therefore, while evapotranspiration can cause the water table to drop, peat soils in restored areas will retain moisture longer than peat soils in an open drainage system.”

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the land was cleared and the existing drainage system was installed by First Colony Farms, according to documents. In small demonstration areas, the upper part of the peat layer was skimmed off to make land preparation easier, although ultimately very little land was actually farmed. Between regulatory restrictions and high costs, peat mining was also not possible.

Eventually the land was sold and then later donated to the federal government.

Today, there’s active farming in the Pungo unit, Stanton said, with about 1,200 acres of cooperative farm lands. The refuge contracts with some local farmers to leave about 20% of standing corn and winter wheat as cover crop.

“That not only helps conserve the farm soil, but it provides winter browse or green browse for the wintering tundra swans,” Stanton said. “The corn provides a ‘hot’ food. It’s actually high in carbohydrates for the wintering waterfowl.”

The refuge has held several meetings with the surrounding community, Stanton said. The sessions focused on smaller areas around the refuge, on what the refuge “is trying to accomplish, and also hear their concerns and how we can work together.”

There was a period in recent years when area farmers angrily blamed Pocosin Lakes’ peat restoration for flooding their land, although refuge officials said that the flooding problem was nearly all due to repeated extreme rainfall, some associated with tropical storms.

During the process of developing the water management plan, the refuge stepped up communication and its outreach to the community, Stanton said.

“I think relationships have improved tremendously,” she said.

Stanton said that a lot of the agricultural lands are family run farms, some for generations, and they’ve been having increasing challenges with drainage because of sea level rise. But if there’s a problem around the refuge that they want to address, Stanton said, she is “happy to go out and meet with them, or we can talk about it and let’s see what we can do.”

Stanton said that the refuge can sometimes help mitigate impacts of heavy rain on crops by manipulating their drainage structures to slow down water flow or hold the extra water until harvesting in done in an area.

In general, water-control structures — flat board risers — hold back or release water that flows in canals to rewet the pocosin, she said. But they also can hold back water produced by storms — up to a point.

“During hurricanes, sometimes we’ll get 20 inches, and nor’easters also can dump a lot of rain,” Stanton said. “We’re getting a lot more rain bombs.”

But the refuge cannot empty the canals in anticipation of a storm, a question she often hears. The idea is that the refuge would then be able to act as retention pond — except it wouldn’t, she said, because there’s only a certain amount of capacity in the canals. The risk is that rather than protecting the farmlands, draining them would either increase the risk of wildfires by exposing the pocosin to drying — they’re very difficult to rewet —  or the water will land right on top of the pocosin and sheet flow out.

Vegetation in pocosin is “fire-dependent,” according to refuge documents. With its high organic content, peat burns readily, but the severity of ground fire is related to the water table level. Before people began altering the landscape, pocosin fires were typically contained above ground, refuge officials said. But altered land or peat affected by severe drought, will lose its protective moisture, and peat fires could burn extremely deeply and for a long time.

After starting in 1923, a logging slash fire known as “the Great Conflagration” burned until extinguished in 1926, torching about 150 square miles and smothering nearby communities in yellow peat smoke for entire summers, according to the refuge document.

The first of two catastrophic fires in Pocosin Lakes was ignited on Allen Road by an escaped debris fire during a drought in spring 1985 in the Pungo unit, which was then state land. It burned through 100,000 acres and as deeply as 3 feet, destroying 26 homes before stopping at the banks of the Alligator River. During the eight weeks it burned, an estimated 1 million to 3.8 million metric tons of carbon were emitted into the air.

The second one, the Evans Road wildfire, was started by lightning on nearby private land on June 1, 2008. After burning 40,740 acres at average depths ranging from 6 to 24 inches, the fire was finally extinguished in January 2009. In areas on private land with the driest conditions, the fire smoldered 5 feet deep into the peat. Less was lost in the refuge because of an ongoing hydrology project that was completed in 2010. By the time the Evans Road fire was completely out, an estimated 10 tons of carbon had been emitted.

Two smaller wildfires in the refuge and the nearby area have occurred within the past year, Stanton said. One was in July 2022, followed by another in March.

The March fire, which began on private land by a debris fire spread by wind, became a ground fire. By then, the refuge knew the fire had to be quickly saturated before getting a chance to go deeper.

“You’ve got to flood it,” she said. “We learned that from Allen Road and Evans Road fires.”

In the short term, Stanton said, the refuge is focusing on completion of the infrastructure in the pocosin restoration area. Also, the refuge will continue work with stakeholders and adjacent landowners to help address drainage issues and other concerns they may want to discuss “to understand more about what we’re doing and the values of pocosin wetlands.”

But the changing climate presents challenges for the future. Pocosin Lakes is part of the Atlantic coastal plain that is subject to some of the highest sea level rise on the coast. Plus, the land accretes vertically unlike most wetlands and is not influenced by tides or sediment travel.

The ability of the pocosin coastal wetlands to adjust to rising seas may be limited, according to the plan.

“If the rate of sea level rise exceeds the vertical accumulation rate of peat in these wetlands,” the document said, “extensive areas could be submerged within a relatively short time.”

A state transportation project to remove an old culvert over a Chowan County creek and replace it with one that will allow river herring to reach important spawning ground is being funded by a first-of-its-kind federal grant.

A decades’ old culvert over Pembroke Creek in Edenton will be replaced with a larger, prefabricated aluminum box culvert. The new culvert will allow in more light, which fish prefer, and space for alewife and blueback herring that swim upstream each spring from the Atlantic Ocean to spawn before returning to the sea.

The most recent Atlantic coastwide stock assessment of river herring indicates that the fish remain depleted and at near historic lows.

Culvert replacement at the creek on Hickory Fork Road will open access to at least 1.5 more miles of habitat to river herring.

This was the only road/fish passage improvement project awarded out of six North Carolina Department of Transportation officials submitted for a shot at a Federal Highway Administration Aquatic Organism Passage grant.

The fact that North Carolina was awarded $472,000 from the same grant being sought out by states like Alaska and those in the Northwest and Northeast that are home to big salmon areas and large native tribes is a pretty remarkable feat, state officials say.

“The fact that we got one was great,” DOT Senior Project Manager Colin Mellor said.

The grant is part of the $1.2 trillion 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the nation’s largest federal investment in public transportation. More than $2 billion is earmarked for improving fish passages throughout the country.

In all, 10 states and 14 tribal governments in the west from Washington, Oregon and California to Idaho and east to Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Virginia, were awarded more than $195 million for 169 projects.

“For North Carolina to have a project that was awarded, that was a big deal and certainly it does speak to the value of our resources here in North Carolina,” said Travis Wilson, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission eastern DOT habitat conservation coordinator.

The chunk of funding awarded to North Carolina will cover the cost of one of a number of transportation projects targeting improvements for fish passage in rivers and creeks in the coastal plain.

“On the whole, whenever we adjust our water crossings, whenever we replace culverts or bridges or anything, we try to do the right thing, first of all hydraulically, so that the water moves, and then after that if we can make animal passage better we’ve tried to do that,” Mellor said. “Whenever we replace a culvert we’re always thinking about animal passage. This isn’t new to DOT. What’s new is that there’s funding specifically available for it.”

Transportation officials work hand-in-hand with state wildlife and fisheries officials in identifying projects that improve both a roadway, be it to replace an aging culvert or bridge, and waterways for anadromous fish and animal passage, including frogs and salamanders.

Pembroke Creek is in a watershed that flows into the Albemarle Sound, a large coastal estuary of forests, salt marshes, mudflats, dunes and beaches and submerged aquatic vegetation. 

Commercial and recreational fishers are drawn to the sound for its abundance of fish, including striped bass, crappie, flounder, red drum, largemouth bass and weakfish.

The sound’s anadromous fish spawning areas span 10 counties in the northeast coastal region of the state.

And with larger obstructions like dams in big rivers typically getting more attention when it comes to the topic of improving anadromous fish passage, there are thousands of culvert barriers in smaller systems that need to be highlighted, Wilson said.

Holly White, a fisheries biologist with the state Division of Marine Fisheries, explained that culverts clogged with debris and culverts that are deteriorating effectively become little dams for river herring.

The population of river herring coastwide has been declining since the 1990s.

“While we can’t really quantify it, we know these culverts do have an impact because the fish can’t get to where they would primarily be spawning,” White said.

The division in 2008 began consistently conducting a river herring spawning area survey to identify spawning areas in tributaries of the Albemarle Sound.

The survey is conducted during migration and spawning season in the spring. The data collected from these surveys is used to determine areas affected by and in need of culvert replacement to aid in fish passage.

According to information White provided, most of the sampling stations are at road crossings such as culverts and bridges over tributaries. 

White said in an email following a telephone interview that the site selection “highlights the data need for areas outside of the Albemarle Sound to document culvert impediments to anadromous organisms such as river herring.”

“I hope that this funding sparks the interest to research culverts in the Tar-Pamlico River, Neuse River, and Cape Fear River systems where passage by anadromous organisms is limited,” she wrote.

State agencies are already working in preparation for the next round of federal grant funding.

BOILING SPRING LAKES – The rain did not interrupt them as they squatted down, jabbing through thick brush and muddy soil with their trowels.

The sporadic, short-lived rain showers Monday morning in Boiling Spring Lakes were a welcome respite from the swelling morning temperatures that would reach 91 degrees by afternoon.

Rain nor clouds, heat nor shine will stop impending utility construction along the shallow ditch bed in which a group of volunteers fervently worked to dig up as many Venus flytraps as they could for replanting far from the roadside on which they’d sprouted by the hundreds.

Development and lack of burning, a management tool crucial to flytrap habitat, have created population decline of the rare, arguably bizarre yet totally fascinating, carnivorous plants that occur naturally only within a 75-mile radius around Wilmington.

In this small Brunswick County city roughly 8 miles northwest of Southport, Venus flytraps have migrated to ditches alongside roads that were built years ago to accommodate new housing.

These spots offer the wet, open habitat flytraps require to grow and thrive, unlike the areas from which they migrated that are now overgrown by trees and shrubs that filter the sunlight the low-to-the-ground flytraps need.

Efforts to protect the flytraps’ roadside refuge have prompted the city to take over managing street-side mowing in areas that would otherwise be handled by the North Carolina Department of Transportation.

Now there’s interest to build houses on the vacant wooded lots where the plants once grew. Soon utility crews will begin digging up the areas to install water and sewer lines.

“We’re running out of time,” said Tyler Gramley, vice president of the North American Sarracenia Conservancy board of directors and volunteer. “Hopefully we’ll be able to get them all. The more you look the more there are. It’s great. It’s all great.”

Gramley crouched down to assist others who were gingerly digging underneath flytraps and pulling them up, the plants’ roots concealed in clumps of soggy, black soil.

Many of the volunteers were repeat flytrap retrievers who’d shown up more than a week earlier to remove and replant plants along a different roadside.

The group of about 12 volunteers – young and old(er) – were city residents, conservationists, business owners and out-of-towners lending their time, knees and backs to give the plants considered in North Carolina a “species of concern” a chance at survival.

“We have the largest population (of Venus flytraps) per capita with humans living among them,” said Stephanie Bodmer, owner of The Boiling Spring Lakes Motel. “We live with them. We work to preserve them.”

Bodmer is the volunteer coordinator of the flytrap relocation effort, one spurred by Julie Moore, a woman whose life’s work has centered on habitat protection.

Moore, a retired endangered species biologist who started Venus Flytrap Champions to assist property owners and managers in the Carolinas in caring for flytrap populations, was running late Monday morning. An accident on Interstate 40 left her sitting in highway gridlock as she traveled from her home in Raleigh to Boiling Spring Lakes.

By the time she arrived at the site where volunteers had been scooping up flytraps by the dozens and carefully tucking them into plastic bins for moving, the volunteers were getting ready to head to the site where the plants are being relocated.

Leery of poachers — it is a felony to poach Venus flytraps — Moore asked Coastal Review not disclose the locations of where the flytraps are being removed and relocated. The plants are being replanted within town-owned and -managed land.

Venus flytraps lack threatened and endangered species protections despite their dwindling habitat. In fact, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in late July issued a decision not to federally list Venus flytraps.

“There’s nothing else like them,” Moore said. “Taking them is protected, but the habitats are not. That’s the real problem.”

Venus flytraps live in open longleaf pine savannahs, habitat that has dwindled tremendously from an estimated 90 million acres spanning from Virginia to Florida and southwest to Texas to a little more than 3 million acres today.

Conservation groups have been working to preserve and restore longleaf pine forests. Ten years ago, The Nature Conservancy acquired more than 450 acres of longleaf pine forest in the Pinch Gut Ridge, an area crucial in maintaining the Green Swamp Preserve.

The preserve, which spans more than 17,000 acres just north of Supply on N.C. Highway 211, is famous for its carnivorous plants and orchids, the same species that grow in Boiling Spring Lakes, a city experiencing a population boom like much of Brunswick County east of U.S. 17.

When Boiling Spring Lakes resident Amber Townsend moved here 14 years ago she had no idea the plant that inspired the now-iconic Broadway-show-turned-movie, “Little Shop of Horrors,” flourished in the area.

It wasn’t until about four years ago when she visited a local farmers market that she found out the city is a “known hot spot,” according to Moore, for Venus flytraps.

Townsend enthusiastically talked about her intrigue of Venus flytraps as she sat on the ground carefully digging up every plant she spotted. She donned a straw hat decorated with a fake rendition of the carnivorous plant. The hat matched the Venus flytrap earrings she wore.

“I’ve really, really loved these plants and when I found out there’s a way to preserve them I wanted to help,” she said.

She was one of the return volunteers who, little more than a week earlier, relocated about 370 of the plants.

Volunteer Jared Lukavski made the drive from his home in Charlotte for a second time to volunteer.

“I fell in love with these plants a couple of years ago when I saw one at Walmart,” he said. “At the time I didn’t know they were native. It just almost defines nature to have a plant that wants to eat a bug.”

Boiling Spring Lakes resident Kathy Sykes has lived here for more than 30 years. She vividly recalled seeing a Venus flytrap for the first time during a horseback ride on her property.

“I couldn’t believe it,” she said. “This is one unique little area that we live in.”

Moore agreed.

“Boiling Spring Lakes is an oddity in that you can see Venus flytraps just driving down the road,” she said. “They’re just endlessly fascinating. We’ll be continuing to do this. We’re hoping to make the area where we’ve moved the flytraps an educational place.”

The North Carolina Coastal Federation is moving forward with its plans to expand an existing Pamlico Sound oyster sanctuary network and create a partnership to encourage underrepresented university students to study marine sciences.

The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration notified the nonprofit Thursday that the $14.9 million grant had been finalized.

NOAA first announced the award recommendation in late April for the nearly $15 million project titled, “Completing the Pamlico Sound Oyster Sanctuary and Training the Next Generation of Restoration Professionals,” through the Biden administration’s Climate Ready Coasts initiative, funded through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act. 

This project is expected to complete the 500-acre goal of oyster sanctuaries in the Sen. Jean Preston Oyster Sanctuary Network, which is named in memory of the late state senator who represented Carteret County, and to facilitate an innovative program with N.C. State University and N.C. Central University to offer hands-on opportunities for underrepresented undergraduate and graduate students studying marine sciences.

Coastal Federation Oyster Program Director Erin Fleckenstein said that there are a handful of immediate next steps ahead for the oyster sanctuary work, including finalizing locations of  future sanctuary construction.

“The grant will allow us to build out several existing sanctuaries that are already permitted, but we also need to finalize locations and permit the additional sanctuary locations,” she said. Organization staff will be able to work with material suppliers to secure enough in the quantities and types needed to build out the sanctuary acres, and ensure that the stockpile locations are prepped and ready.

Lastly, Fleckenstien said that for this portion of the project, the Coastal Federation will open up bids for a construction contractor who will be responsible for constructing the sanctuaries that are planned.

For the partnership with the two universities, Fleckenstein said the researchers have advertised and made motions to hire a cohort of graduate students who will work toward their master’s or doctorate’s during the course of the grant.

“We’ve developed a list of potential research questions that the students will address during their research,” she added.

N.C. State Center for Marine Sciences and Technology, or CMAST, Director David Eggleston explained to Coastal Review that research on restoring oyster reefs and creating tools to help guide future restoration sites has been conducted for the past 15 years. The research group first teamed up with the Coastal Federation in 2010 in response to funding through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act.

“This initial effort focused on assessing the ecological performance of restored, subtidal oyster reefs in Pamlico Sound that are a part of the Jean Preston Oyster Sanctuary Network,” he said. This current project with the Coastal Federation, and other partners including N.C. Central, the state Division of Marine Fisheries and the North Carolina Aquariums system, will assess the ecological performance of restored subtidal oyster reefs.

“A novel and key component of the current project is to diversify and train the next generation of coastal habitat restoration practitioners. There is increasing recognition of the valuable ecosystem services provided by coastal habitats such as oyster reefs, seagrasses, salt marshes and mangroves. Given limited resources for habitat restoration, it is critical to locate restoration projects in areas that have the greatest chance of success,” Eggleston explained.

During this project, they will focus on training underrepresented graduate and undergraduate students in Geographic Information Systems, or GIS, computer-based machine learning, population dynamics, statistics and a broad suite of field and laboratory techniques including scientific diving, boat handling, and communication skills.

The N.C. State component is to assess the ecological performance of the restored oyster reefs relative to either unstructured estuarine bottom, or adjacent oyster reefs. Examples of ecological performance include tracking oyster settlement, growth and survival on restored oyster reefs, characterizing fish use of the reefs, the footprint of the reefs and any changes in their structural complexity over time, and refining GIS-based tools used to guide where to locate new restoration sites, he explained.

“Most of the budget for this project component is devoted to supporting graduate and undergraduate students from underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM,” he said.

N.C. State University is partnering with Dr. Carresse Gerald, assistant professor in Environmental, Earth and Geospatial Sciences at N.C. Central University, to recruit undergraduate and graduate students to participate in this project, serve as a formal co-mentor and graduate committee member for students, and facilitate approaches for student success, Eggleston said.

For undergraduates, this includes successful scholarship or fellowship applications, employment post-graduation in STEM, or acceptance to graduate programs. For graduate students, this is earning a degree in a timely manner, which is two to three years for a master’s or four to five years for a doctorate, as well as enhancing skills in critical thinking, communication, interdisciplinarity and quantitative tools.

“These achievements should lead to increased workforce development of underrepresented groups as restoration practitioners, as well as building research capacity at an Historically Black College or University,” he said.

Gerald and Dr. Del Bohnenstiehl, professor in the Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences department at N.C. State, introduced the project during the Coastal Federation’s Oyster Summit, a two-day workshop held earlier this year in Raleigh.

Bohnenstiehl said there are three pillars to the program, with the first being a cohort of eight graduate students from underrepresented groups. The students will have an opportunity to begin or finish their master’s program or begin their doctorate program in marine science, data science or geospatial analytics.

“Our focus is going to be on recruiting from HBCUs such as North Carolina Central and other universities,” he said. HBCUs are historically Black colleges and universities.

The students will be working collaboratively and be involved in all aspects of the project. They will be able to carve out some piece of the project that they can focus on for their thesis, gain more expertise and work with advisers, Bohnenstiehl continued.

Gerald, during the summit, said that over the past few years, she has taken undergraduate students to the coast to work with the Coastal Federation.

“They really enjoy being out there, looking at the living shorelines, looking at the oysters and learning about the ecological impacts of those types of things on the environment,” Gerald said, adding that the program advisers intend to travel to the coast with more undergraduate students to encourage their exploration of this type of science and to develop an interest in restoration ecology.

Gerald said there will be opportunities for undergraduates in her science classes to visit the coast for field work, as well.

“I had an environmental education and outreach course that has come down to the coast before and so we’ll have some of those students as well participate in this effort to learn more about living shorelines, the ecology in the marine data science that is happening down in the Pamlico Sound,” she said.

Bohnenstiehl said that one of the opportunities that Central’s undergraduate students are encouraged to take advantage of in the short term is the summer fellowship at CMAST, “an existing program that has been very successful. It’s up to about 40% minority participation already.”

There is funding through this project to support four students from underrepresented groups every summer for the next three years, Bohnenstiehl said.

“We think there’s going to be a huge opportunity to bring these students in, and all the research shows if you start off hands-on, kind of long summer experiences are really critical for getting students engaged in and engaging them in the STEM fields,” he said. STEM means science, technology, engineering and math.

The students will train and take courses but at the heart of the project is an ecological study, trying to understand the benefits of building the sanctuary reefs, their function and their ecosystem services, Bohnenstiehl explained.

“And that’s what the students will be working on, trying to quantify and understand together with partners from DMF and elsewhere,” he continued. Components of the project include field sampling, oyster demographics, mercury within the oyster samples, and “We’ll be looking at maps of the seafloor, trying to quantify and find ways to describe the habitat that’s created by these reefs.”

Bohnenstiehl said they anticipate bringing the graduate students into this project in all aspects as well as the undergraduate students at these different levels.

“Over the next three years, we should have 70 or 80 different students participate in these programs and contribute to the science that goes into all of this and hopefully they’ll be prepared then to be this next generation of practitioners when it comes to understanding oyster reefs and restoration in general,” he said.

Gerald explained to Coastal Review that she was brought in by the Federation’s Coastal Education Coordinator, Rachel Bisesi, “who asked if I would be interested in working on the grant. After a meeting with other partners from NC State we were forging ahead.”

Gerald said they plan to select well-rounded students – four from N.C. State and four from N.C. Central – by evaluating their academic progress, personal statement along with other metrics.

Some of the work students will delve into includes analyzing habitat restoration response variables in the oyster populations and evaluating contaminants such as mercury in the oyster species, she explained.

Gerald said the goal for N.C. Central’s portion of the project is to increase students, more specifically underrepresented and underserved individuals, to engage in ecological studies and more specifically restoration ecology by engaging them in the large-scale oyster restoration project in the Pamlico Sound.

The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review.

Veined with thousands of miles of streams and rivers, dotted by several national wildlife refuges, pocosin wetlands and state parks, the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine region is one of the nation’s ecological crown jewels.

The estuary was designated in 1987 as “an estuary of national significance” and is listed as one of “America’s Great Waters.”

But this precious ecological resource is in a region that is vulnerable to a host of man-made and climate change-related challenges: habitat conversion and wildfires, shoreline erosion and saltwater intrusion.

A recent allocation of federal funding will boost ongoing efforts to restore and build up resiliency throughout the nearly 28,000-mile watershed using a myriad of nature-based solutions.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service earlier this month announced $27.25 million is being appropriated to the agency’s National Wildlife Refuge System for Albemarle-Pamlico Sound restoration initiatives.

The funding will make a meaningful impact and be used for projects that will tie into nature-based activities and initiatives on wildlife refuges and state game lands within the region, explained Rebekah Martin, Coastal N.C. Refuges Complex project leader.

“We’ve really been working on these long-term types of resilience projects long before we thought this money would come our way,” she said.

Federal, state, local officials, private land owners and environmental groups have pulled together to tackle everything from water quality issues in the region to how to combat historic levels of flooding in vulnerable communities.

The watershed includes nearly 10,000 miles of streams and rivers that flow into a 2 million-acre estuary, the second largest in the country. Its system includes a portion of or all of six major river basins, including the Neuse, Roanoke, Tar-Pamlico, Chowan, Pasquotank and White Oak. The region is home to nearly 4 million people.

“There’s really not a community in the A-P that’s not experiencing some kind of climate-related impact,” Martin said.

Communities in the region have experienced everything from sunny-day flooding to saltwater intrusion on farmers’ crop fields to seeing an emergence of ghost forests.

The response to combat these climate-related problems has been through nature-based restoration solutions — living shorelines, creating substrate for oyster reefs, replacing existing drainage canals with stream-like drainage systems, and restoring submerged aquatic vegetation.

Such restoration activities are being worked on through partnerships with other federal agencies, state agencies and private land owners, all with the common goal to increase resiliency of the land.

Take North Carolina’s largest natural freshwater lake, Lake Mattamuskeet.

The lake was listed in 2016 for impaired waters because of its elevated pH and levels of chlorophyll-a.

To address the lake’s declining water quality, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and Hyde County formed a partnership that led to a large stakeholder effort to figure out what was happening in the lake.

“That is an effort where we are one of many partners interested in seeing the water quality in the lake improve,” Martin said.

State Wildlife Resources Commission Chief Deputy Director Kyle Briggs said the funding is a “huge win” for public lands on the Albemarle Peninsula.

“You talk about an incredibly diverse landscape that’s just magnificent for wildlife,” he said. “Those species all thrive in that pocosin and salt marsh and just that wonderful habitat.”

That habitat is largely going to be affected by sea level rise, he said, so it’s important to restore habitats on the refuges, game lands and private lands within the system.

“They money has to be spent either on wildlife refuges or on our game lands, but hopefully that leverages other funds on private lands,” Briggs said. “The way I see this working is really hand-in-hand with Fish and Wildlife Service and working together to get the biggest bang for our dollars.”

Martin said the next step is to identify projects that have already been or are close to being permitted as some of the first to be implemented on the ground. From there, officials will look at projects that may require some additional modeling or design work.

She said the agency will work closely with the Wildlife Resources Commission to understand shared priorities and is interested in ongoing engagement with communities to understand how increasing resiliency on refuges may help communities around those refuges.

“I would say we are going to be moving quickly to try to start preparing for the projects across the refuges,” Martin said.

Nine National Wildlife Refuges are within the Albemarle-Pamlico watershed. Those include: Currituck, Mackay Island, Pea Island, Alligator River, Pocosin Lakes, Roanoke River, Mattamuskeet, Swan Quarter and Cedar Island.

Time may be running out for the wild horses of Corolla.

The herd lives in an area accessible by four-wheel-drive vehicles only.

Wandering among the 11 miles of dunes, maritime forest, beach and sand roads between the end of the paved road and the Virginia state line, the horses were relocated from Corolla to the northern end of the Outer Banks in 2001.

In 2003, a sea-to-sound fence was completed, keeping the herd from wandering into the development and traffic of Corolla.

But development is coming even to the four-wheel-drive area, Carova, of the Currituck Banks. There are no paved roads north of Corolla, no stores and no services, yet homes are being built, almost all of them for the vacation rental market.

Some of the homes are designed specifically to handle large events with 16 to 24 bedrooms. Most are not that large, but the building has continued for some time and inexorably the open land that the horses need for their well-being is being transformed.

There are, at last count, 101 horses in the Corolla wild horse herd, according to Corolla Wild Horse Fund Chief Operating Officer Jo Langone. That’s down from 110 the previous year. There were some deaths and a few of the horses were removed from the herd and relocated to a farm that has been set aside for them because of health issues.

The Wild Horses of Corolla, or “Bankers,” as they are sometimes called, are feral animals. Introduced to North America by the Spanish conquistadores in the 16th century, they have adapted remarkably well to the Outer Banks environment, so well that they are recognized as a landrace breed.

“The Bankers are recognized as a landrace breed — one that has genetically adapted to and is able to survive its unique habitat, has distinctive and identifiable traits, has not been purposefully improved by the introduction of domestic, standardized stock, and has a historical origin in a specific region,” the Corolla Wild Horse Fund notes on its website.

Although there are other genetic markers in their makeup, there is reason to believe that the Corolla herd, isolated for decades, is directly descended from their Iberian ancestors.

In 2013, the Corolla Wild Horses Protection Act passed the U.S. House but was not taken up by the Senate. The introduction to the bill noted, “There is evidence that Corolla horses were introduced to the Currituck Outer Banks by Spanish explorers 500 years ago.”

There are 7,544 acres between the north end of Corolla and the Virginia line. Some of that is the state- and federally protected property of the 965-acre Currituck Banks Estuarine Reserve, although over half of the acreage is in the wetlands of Currituck Sound.

There is also the 3,674-acre Currituck Wildlife Refuge. Most of the refuge is marsh and wetlands, but there is a mile and a half of protected land separating the subdivisions of Swan Beach and North Swan Beach.

Yet nearly all of Carova is available for development.

The Corolla Wild Horse Fund wants its Land Preservation Initiative that was announced Nov. 16 to set aside some portion of the undeveloped land. The initiative is to be supported by a land-acquisition fund that, “allows supporters to donate towards the purchase, conversion to habitat, and habitat maintenance of property that will be held in conservation into perpetuity.” 

“The fund itself has purchased seven lots,” Langone said. An additional two lots also have been donated to the Corolla Wild Horse Fund.

There is added urgency, Langone noted, to set aside protected land for the herd. Development has been ongoing for some time in the Carova area, but recent events seem to have accelerated that development.

“It (construction) is nothing like in the last couple of seasons,” she said. “Having COVID was a double edge. It turned so many people on to this area for the first time, it was quite remarkable. And when people see it, it knocks you out, and well, ‘I want to be there,’ and a lot of people have decided they’re going to be here.’”

The lots in the Corolla Wild Horse Fund initiative are small, about a third of an acre in size, and as much as can possibly be done, the Corolla Wild Horse Fund is hoping the lots will be contiguous. The lots are in areas that have not yet been developed, and for Herd Manager Meg Puckett, owning the property is the first step.

“You acquire the land, but then we need to make sure that it’s viable habitat. Maybe there’s things that we can do to that land to make it a better environment for the horses and other wildlife,” she said. “There’s a lot more that goes into it than just buying the land, but the land acquisition is certainly step one.”

At one time, Bankers roamed freely from Carova to the Shackleford Banks. Exact numbers are hard to find. In 1926 National Geographic writer Melville Chater estimated the total number of Bankers to be between 5,000 and 6,000.

The horses thrived until the 1930s when the federal government created Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge. The belief, at that time, was that the horses, because they were nonnative, were damaging the ecosystem that migratory waterfowl needed. The decision was made to eliminate the herd and a bounty was placed on the horses. At a time when the Great Depression gripped the Outer Banks, as well as the nation, families saw the bounty as economic survival. Today, the last remnants of the 5,000 to 6,000 horses that Chater claimed live on as the Corolla wild horses and at the Shackleford Banks father south along the North Carolina coast.

It is unclear, though, if the Corolla horses are destructive to the environment. Puckett said that what she sees in her work as herd manager does not match that belief.

“I think it doesn’t take someone who’s an expert in this to take a step back and say this population of horses has not only lived here, they’ve thrived,” she said. “If they were as destructive to the environment as some people say that they are, they wouldn’t still be alive. They wouldn’t be able to survive if they destroyed their environment. They also would be very damaging to other wildlife, and we just don’t see that.”

The view that the Corolla herd is not as destructive as once thought has been gaining acceptance. Because part of the area they use is state and federal lands, the Corolla Wild Horse Fund management plan is created in conjunction with government agencies. When first presented, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had sought a herd totaling 60, a number too low to maintain a healthy population. That number, though, has been revised as evidence of what the real impact of the herd has been.

“For U.S. Fish and Wildlife and for the state of North Carolina to come to the table and say, ‘We agree to your population statement of no less than 110, no more than 130,’ I think speaks for itself, as far do the horses have a negative impact on the environment,” Puckett said.

To keep up with how the shoreline stabilization industry is evolving, a team of shoreline restoration specialists during its recent meeting invited a handful of companies to talk about their proprietary techniques to build the alternative for hardened bulkheads and seawalls.

Living shorelines are made of materials such as salt marshes, sand, rock or oysters, and are a natural barrier for estuaries, bays, tributaries and other sheltered shorelines. They protect shorelines from erosion, provide habitat for fish and other living resources, improve water quality and store nutrients, increase stability over time, can outperform hardened shorelines during a storm, and attract natural wildlife, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

Dr. Lexia Weaver, coastal scientist for the North Carolina Coastal Federation, and Jimmy Johnson with Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, an Environmental Protection Agency-funded program based in the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, co-chair the North Carolina Living Shorelines Steering Committee made up of scientists, federal and state agencies, and other invested organizations that work to identify and bring together efforts focused on promoting and implementing living shorelines. 

Weaver explained to Coastal Review that innovative options for living shoreline construction materials have really exploded in the last few years, which is why the committee brought in the companies to present their materials. Those companies were Atlantic Reef, ECOncrete, Native Shorelines, Natrx, ReadyReef Inc., Sandbar Oyster Co. SoxErosion and Living Shoreline Solutions.

The companies have their own methods and designs for shoreline stabilization systems and use local or biodegradable materials, concrete or a combination, to build their systems, most of which have wave attenuation properties to slow erosion. One company offers a product that can be added to the concrete mix to keep it from breaking down under water. 

Depending on the business, the units making up the shoreline stabilization structures are shaped like discs, rectangles, triangles, pyramids, blocks or a site-specific design. Many of the units are texturized to give oyster spat a place to hold on and grow. Most are installed in the intertidal zone either by the company or through a local contractor. 

Johnson reiterated at the beginning of the Nov. 30 meeting that the committee was not trying to compare companies or methods, rather give the members a better idea of what’s being used by those in the restoration and living shoreline business. 

Weaver said in an interview that the federation’s goal is for living shorelines to be the go-to approach for shoreline stabilization. 

“Living shorelines reduce shoreline erosion while at the same time restore and protect our salt marsh and oyster habitats. Living shorelines are also more economical and a longer-term option when compared to bulkheads and seawalls,” she said. 

Weaver added that it was important to hear these new perspectives because there is a need for an alternative living shoreline construction material instead of the traditionally used plastic mesh for bags of recycled oyster shells. 

“The ideal mesh material would last long enough — at least three years — in the marine environment to allow oysters to attach and grow. Although these plastic mesh bags of recycled oyster shells stay in place along living shoreline sills and marsh-toe revetments, and are extremely successful at reducing shoreline erosion and providing valuable estuarine habitat, they are still plastic, which is not the best material to be placing in our waterways. Even mesh bags that claim to be biodegradable are still plastic, Weaver continued. “We have been searching for an alternative mesh product to bag our oyster shells for a very long time and it may not exist or just has not been developed yet. In the meantime, multiple companies have developed materials that can be used instead of the plastic mesh bags of oyster shells and we are excited to test them and use them in living shoreline construction.”

Weaver said after the meeting that attendees now have a variety of tools to use and test for living shoreline construction. A variety of materials were presented that each can be used at specific distances from shore, wave energies and site conditions. 

“There were a lot of great before and after photos that really tell the story of how effective the products can be for use in living shoreline construction,” she added.

About the methods

Atlantic ReefMaker, based in Wilmington, has developed a flow-through, pile-based wave attenuation system with ecological benefits, co-founder Phillip Todd said during the meeting.

These artificial reef systems, designed to reduce shoreline erosion caused by tidal energy, are made of what the company calls ecodisks. A mechanical support system on a 12-inch diameter fiberglass pile holds the stack of concrete disks above the substrate. The height and length of the system are dependent on the project. When it comes to sea level change and how to adjust for it, Todd said these stacks can easily be made taller without any additional impacts to the substrate.

Dr. Andrew Rella is the technical director of business development of ECOncrete and he is in New York though the company is based in Israel. The company has a compound that can be added directly into the concrete mix that creates a hard layer to keep the concrete from breaking down. The company also has technology to make the concrete molds used to build the site-specific infrastructure have complex textures to give organisms something to grab onto and grow, holes that serve as shelter or breeding spaces, and tidepool or cave-like features that offer intertidal habitat generally missing from rocky coastal riprap, the website states.

Rella said this method can be used in any concrete in the marine environment, such as shoreline protection, waterfront infrastructure or offshore applications. 

Native Shorelines, a division of Restoration Systems based in Raleigh, has a material called QuickReef that combines the aesthetics and ecological benefits of an oyster shell bag shoreline with the stability of heavier materials and eliminates the use of plastic, according to the website.

The company’s Coastal Restoration Director Mary-Margaret McKinney, who is also on the committee, said during the meeting that the QuickReef system was designed for the intertidal zone so as to be underwater at high tide and exposed at low tide.

The system is a row of rectangular units, mostly made of native coastal materials, like limestone marl and oyster shells. These units are about 12 inches wide by 5 inches thick, weighing in at about 90 pounds. The units are arranged in a trapezoidal shape to create as much space as possible for habitat inside the structure. 

Matthew Campbell, co-founder of Raleigh-based Natrx, a company focused on coastal restoration, said the company has a manufacturing technology called dry forming.

Sort of like a 3-D printer, water is robotically injected from several needles into a dry bed of concrete mix. The water diffuses through the dry mix, creating spheres with rough surfaces.

The spheres that form merge together to create a solid structure that resembles a simple sandcastle with a similar texture. The dry forming method allows for creating different designs using different materials. 

Chris Davis with ReadyReef Inc., of the Chesapeake Bay area, said he is a marine contractor who uses a range of options for shoreline erosion control in the intertidal zone. The company “provides turnkey shoreline erosion control installations” according to its website and custom builds systems using low and high sill oyster reefs, which they backfill for living shorelines, and use nonwoven growth bags, tied concrete blocks and geobags, together or individually.

Dr. Niels Lindquist with Sandbar Oyster Co. in Carteret County said the company uses plant-fiber cloth as the foundation of its material, which is infused with different cement mixtures and molded into different shapes, such as a pillow to promote sediment accumulation and marsh growth. 

One shape they use is called a table design, which combines vertical and horizontal elements. The design can be modified to allow for the tables to interlock to create different configurations, adjust the height and add a range of elements to reef design with little effort.

SoxErosion’s Regional Manager Greg Bell, a Myrtle Beach resident, said this system can be used along any stream, lake, retention pond or the Intracoastal Waterway. SoxErosion, based in Boca Raton, Florida, this shoreline-stabilization method is designed with a double layer of technical mesh, which is a high-density polyethylene material. The pervious, flexible mesh is folded in half, like a taco, Bell said, and tethered to two or three rows of strategically placed anchors, depending on the size of the project. The ends are sewn shut making an envelope that is filled with soil material. The mesh molds to the topography of the bank itself. It is covered in sod, seed or plants to establish a root structure.

Florida-based Living Shoreline Solutions President and Founder Scott Bartkowski said the company designed wave attenuation devices, or WADs, that are three-sided pyramids made out of marine-grade concrete and fiber mesh, and are about 4.5 inches thick. These are placed in what he calls a WAD array, or designs specific to the shoreline area to prevent predominant wind and wave energy from reaching the shore. The company manufactures the forms based on the needs of the client. Those forms will be shipped to a local manufacturer that pours concrete and then the company uses local marine contractors to deploy the system. 

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.

The Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Water Resources is to continue work on a submerged aquatic vegetation water clarity standard, members of the Environmental Management Commission’s water quality committee unanimously decided during its recent meeting.

Establishing a water clarity standard, which is a type of water quality standard, is one of several recommendations in an effort to preserve and protect seagrasses, a critical coastal habitat, in the 2021 amendment to the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan. Water clarity measures the amount of sunlight that can penetrate through the water. Submerged aquatic vegetation, often called SAV or seagrasses, need light to grow.

“The major cause of SAV loss has been due to water quality degradation from nutrients and sediments, which reduce light penetration needed for grass survival. A series of steps to improve water clarity are required,” according to the protection plan, a long-term, state-managed effort to improve coastal fisheries through habitat protection and enhancement work. “Nationally, water quality, in particular water clarity, is recognized as one of the most significant factors limiting SAV distribution, abundance, survival, and expansion.”

The recommendation in the protection plan states that by 2022, the Environmental Management Commission will receive guidance from the Nutrient Criteria Development Plan Scientific Advisory Council on establishing a water quality standard for light penetration, with a target value of 22% to the deep edge, or 1.7 meters, for all high-salinity seagrasses, and a light penetration target of 13% to the deep edge, or 1.5 meters, for all low-salinity seagrasses.

The North Carolina Nutrient Criteria Development Plan Scientific Advisory Council provides advice and recommendations to the state Division of Water Resources on site-specific nutrient criteria based only on data and scientific judgments about pollutant concentrations and their effects.

During the Environmental Management Commission’s water quality committee meeting Nov. 9, Commissioner Marion Deerhake, who chairs the committee, explained to fellow board members that setting a water clarity standard is the first step before the division can proceed with drafting rules to implement the standard.

The standard is to be based on the completed work of the Science Advisory Council, expected in the next few months, as well as the input of the Criteria Implementation Committee before the draft rule is presented to the Water Quality Committee, Deerhake said. The Criteria Implementation Committee is an advisory board of stakeholders that are to look at the practicality of implementing the standard.

After the commission approves a draft rule on water clarity standard, an extensive stakeholder process will follow, then the development of Implementation rules to apply that standard, she explained.

Deerhake asked that it be noted in the meeting minutes that the water quality committee members reached a consensus that the division is to continue working on water clarity standards for seagrasses.

Dr. Jessie Jarvis, an associate professor in the biology department at University of North Carolina Wilmington and Scientific Advisory Council member, explained to the committee that seagrasses have a lot of different roles in the coastal ecosystem.

Seagrasses serve as important and essential habitat for commercial and recreational fisheries, are a direct resource for marine herbivores like sea turtles, and as waters are warming, more fish are eating seagrass directly, she continued. These underwater plants are really important because they actually improve the water quality conditions. They help increase clarity, reduce sediments and nutrients, and can store carbon.

“There’s a lot of functions that they do, so keeping them around is a really good way to keep those functions happening. It’s also a lot cheaper to protect them than it is to actually restore them,” she explained.

Jarvis said that before a standard can be set, you have to look at the minimum amount of light that seagrasses need to survive, which can be calculated based on the maximum depth at which they grow, and then how much light is available at that depth.

“We have to assume that the light at the depth that they grow the deepest is the minimum amount of light they require. And then from that we can calculate any minimum light required for them to survive any particular depth,” she said. Adding, if you have light attenuation and the maximum depth, you can determine what percent SAV actually need to survive at any depth.

“One of the reasons that we’re so focused on clarity when it comes to SAV is they are found in the water column,” and there’s lots of other things that could potentially impact these seagrasses such as changes to salinity or dissolved oxygen. “But when you look at how much light SAV actually need to survive, it’s really high compared to other plants and even other marine plants,” Jarvis said.

Seagrass require from 4 to 29% of the surface light to survive. Terrestrial plants only need .5 to 2%. The seagrass, even at its lowest light level, needs twice as much light of a terrestrial plant. The majority of plants, including those in most of estuarine systems, require closer to 20%. Comparing terrestrial plants and marine plants, seagrass really require a lot of light.

“They have a very high minimum light requirement, and so their survival really depends on good water clarity. If you have good water clarity, they are much more likely to be able to withstand any other kind of disturbance,” she said.

Noting this link between water quality and seagrass led to researchers to establish the submerged aquatic vegetation as a sentinel species for water quality changes. Seagrasses react to water quality changes like other sentinel species such as oysters. But seagrass also need light. So, in addition to those chemical parameters that affect other underwater sentinel species, seagrasses also respond to changes in water clarity.

Another benefit for using SAV as an indicator of water quality is that they’re not harvested, Jarvis said. If there’s a change in seagrasses to any extent that you’re measuring, the changes can be primarily, directly linked to changes in environmental conditions only.

“In North Carolina, we are lucky enough to have the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan with a very strong recommendation to adopt a standard for light penetration for seagrass regions based on that low and high salinity breakdown,” she said. “So low salinity would be 13% to the deep edge which they defined in the CHPP as 1.5 meters and high salinity 22% to the edge of 1.7, based on a lot of the information that went into that, and again, the robustness and the really good repeatability of these measurements in July and September the Nutrient Criteria Development Plan Scientific Advisory Committee that supported the adoption of both the low and high standards.”

Jarvis explained that she worked with the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, which mapped the entire Albemarle-Pamlico Sound in 2007 and 2013, and smaller segments in 2020.

“What we found is that overall SAV in North Carolina is declining at about a rate of about 5% of total area per year. Now that’s not the same everywhere. So, there are some problems areas for example, back in Bogue Sound that rate of loss is closer to 10%. And there are definitely areas where you could actually see these changes in SAV,” she said.

Karen Higgins, chief planning section for Division of Water Resources, also addressed the committee. She said told the members that the Nutrient Criteria Development Plan, or NCDP, is a plan for developing nutrient criteria for surface waters in North Carolina. The plan is required as part of a memorandum of understanding with the Environmental Protection Agency.

The plan was first developed in 2014 and 2019. Anytime the state updates the plan, it has to be reviewed and approved by EPA. North Carolina has approached the plan by having site-specific standards in three different types of water bodies. These are lakes and reservoirs, estuaries, and rivers and streams. The first site-specific standard was for High Rock Lake in Davidson and Rowan counties. Environmental Management Commission approved a site-specific standard for High Rock Lake earlier this year.

Right now, the scientific advisory committee is focused on Albemarle Sound and the Chowan River, in particular with seagrasses, Higgins continued. Clarity is critically important for submerged aquatic vegetation. The Scientific Advisory Council has been working with the division over the last year and a half looking at different components of the clarity standard.

The Division of Water Resources, Coastal Habitat Protection Plan and the Scientific Advisory Council are all on board with a magnitude value that is projected for seagrasses habitat. The council has also determined the duration, or when the standard applies, but there are some other pieces still under discussion such as frequency.

While the focus has been Albemarle Sound, “the direction and guidance from the Scientific Advisory Council is to expand the standard through all coastal waters, and so that’s something that we’re working through with the SAC as far as how to capture that in the standards,” Higgins said.

The Division of Water Resources is working with the Division of Marine Fisheries on plans to monitor seagrasses and they will be the primary collectors of this data. “We’re working with them and their staff to see what their existing protocols are and how we can incorporate this,” she said.

Deerhake followed up with the full Environmental Management Commission during its meeting Nov. 10, explaining that the Scientific Advisory Council was to meet soon to finalize their recommendation on a standard.

Water Resources staff is to then begin drafting rules to go before the water quality committee for consideration before reaching the full commission. “Our goal is to see it in the first quarter of 2023,” Deerhake said.

A critical habitat for recreational and commercial species like spotted seatrout, red drum, bay scallops and blue crabs, North Carolina’s seagrasses improve water clarity and quality, and decrease shoreline erosion. However, scientists are finding that the essential habitat is declining because of deteriorating water quality.

To protect this economic and ecological resource, a private-public partnership is being formed under recommendation from the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan 2021 amendment, which focuses on improving water quality.

The Coastal Habitat Protection Plan, often called CHPP, was developed by state Department of Environmental Quality staff. First approved in 2004, the plan is updated every five years. 

DEQ, The Pew Charitable Trusts and North Carolina Coastal Federation have been working this year to establish the partnership they’re calling North Carolina Stakeholder Engagement for Collaborative Coastal Habitats Initiative, or SECCHI, named after the Secchi disk, an instrument used to measure water quality. 

With the main objective of SECCHI being to engage diverse groups of stakeholders to help develop, implement and secure decision-makers for funding for actions in the 2021 amendment, this core team organized and hosted a summit Oct. 19 to bring together these potential stakeholder and decision-makers to identify and organize around voluntary actions that protect and restore coastal water quality.

“The North Carolina Coastal Water Quality Summit: Stakeholders Driving Solutions” in New Bern gave a platform for local, county and state officials, scientists, community members and nonprofit organization leaders to share with attendees facts and experiences illustrating how declining water quality is affecting seagrasses. 

“When you’re managing water quality, it requires a multifaceted approach that includes voluntary and regulatory measures, not just at the state level, but at the local and regional level. It’s not a one-size-fits-all approach. And it is very complicated. But if we all work together on these different facets of it, we can achieve the common goal,” Division of Marine Fisheries Habitat and Enhancement Section Chief Jacob Boyd said that morning.

He explained that North Carolina’s estuarine waters provide floodwater storage and control carbon sequestration, which helps with greenhouse gasses, water quality treatment, erosion control, storm protection and support a higher biodiversity of different organisms that use them. 

Water quality is the common denominator that drives the health of these ecosystems and the coastal habitats. Poor water quality is caused by the alteration of pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, bacteria, nutrient indicators, such as nitrogen phosphorus or chlorophyll A, excessive nutrient-rich sediment in the water, and nutrients in the system, which in turn decrease oxygen and water clarity. 

“Climate change exacerbates these issues with rising sea levels, higher water temperatures, saltwater intrusion, and increased frequency and intensity of rain events adding more runoff,” he added.

Dr. Jud Kenworthy, a retired National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research fisheries biologist, explained that submerged aquatic vegetation is probably one of the biggest challenges in terms of water quality because, unlike marsh vegetation or vegetation that partially grows in the air, submerged aquatic vegetation grows underwater. 

“Anything that we do to affect the quality of water, especially the clarity of the water, is going to affect our submerged aquatic vegetation. And the most important factor of course is water clarity, because these are plants, they need light to grow. And without sufficient light they just can’t grow and can’t reproduce,” Kenworthy said. 

Seagrasses are declining. Based on surveys conducted in 2007 and 2013, the state has lost between 2.7 and 10.5% of seagrasses in high-salinity habitat, in the low-sanity habitat, about 9.4 to 79.3% loss. The cost of losing seagrasses in the next decade could be around $88 million. The cost to restore the resource is about three to five times higher than the actual value of the resource. 

“The probability that you can actually restore it was about 36%,” he said.

University of North Carolina Wilmington Associate Professor Dr. Jessie Jarvis reiterated that clarity drives any kind of big change in seagrass. In the early 1990s, researchers determined that submerged aquatic vegetation are a good indicator of water quality because they don’t move, aren’t harvested and require light to grow. The only stressor can be directly linked back to environmental quality.

State Division of Water Resources Director Richard Rogers pointed out that the water quality challenges being faced are mostly human-made. Nonpoint source pollution is key, nutrients are the most widespread stressors impacting rivers and streams, about two-thirds of the nation’s coastal areas and more than a third of the nation’s estuaries are impaired by excessive nutrients, which contribute to algal blooms and can contaminate water used for recreation, drinking, wildlife, livestock, marine life and seagrasses.

Rogers said the Scientific Advisory Council is focusing on a draft clarity standard rule, also recommended in the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan, to present to the Environmental Management Commission. The council provides advice and recommendations to the division. 

Adopting clarity standards at least sets the goal post for the level of water quality needed to have healthy and productive estuaries, Rogers added. 

Importance of public engagement

Mike Blanton, a commercial fisherman and member of state Marine Fisheries Commission, said what he sees in the northern part of the state where he primarily fishes is that the waterways are extremely stressed daily, especially after significant rains.

“It’s vitally important that we start to understand these effects that it has on stakeholders like myself that are on ground zero that rely upon state resources, to ensure that there’s a coastal economy, to ensure that that we can carry on heritage and tradition of the state of what we’ve been doing for hundreds of years,” he said. 

Beaufort Mayor Sharon Harker said when people come to the Carteret County town, they don’t think about water quality “but we have to also educate them that beauty can be at risk.”  The town has developed a watershed restoration plan to help mitigate flooding but looking ahead, the town needs to continue partnering with stakeholders like those at the summit to find ways to protect its waterways.

Wilson Daughtry, a Hyde County farmer and operations manager for the Mattamuskeet Association, has been working with the Coastal Federation for more than 20 years.

“Stakeholders are necessary, a necessary group, and hopefully it’s a diverse group. Hopefully you’ve got landowners involved, state, local, federal people who have interest. That’s what it takes,” he said. but you have another subset, called the shareholders, or a person who has a vested interest in the project and is directly affected by the project. “Shareholders become your anchor point for your project. You need that shareholder to anchor that project to the local area.”

Department of Environmental Quality Secretary Elizabeth Biser commended the stakeholders during the summit.

“I don’t have to tell you all there are so many challenges facing our coastal waters. But I am so heartened to know what a strong commitment this stakeholder community has tackling these issues and making progress together,” she said. “We all know multiple sources that are contributing to contamination and degradation over time. That’s why the CHPP takes a holistic view to address these issues that are traditionally covered under different jurisdiction.”

Biser said she often talks about partnerships and the CHPP was a good example, explaining that every stakeholder has a different role to play while working toward the common goal. 

“I appreciate all of you being here today, because by sharing your expertise, you’re helping us make better decisions as an agency,” Biser said, adding that the stakeholders are not just sharing their perspective but also bringing actionable solutions, and feedback to help DEQ make better decisions to manage state resources. 

Habitat Program Supervisor for the Division of Marine Fisheries Anne Deaton said their goal through the public-private partnerships is to have additional minds at work “because people think differently, they have different expertise, different strategies. And so, we know we’ll get a better product if we work together.” Deaton is a member of the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan Steering Committee.

Next steps

Leda Cunningham, an officer with The Pew Charitable Trusts, explained after the summit that Pew’s involvement came out of its work on the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan amendment during 2021. 

The Coastal Federation and Pew formed a small stakeholder group last year to make supplemental recommendations, including the stakeholder group suggestion, for the 2021 amendment. These were presented to the steering committee that added the public-private group to the amendment. The organizations teamed up earlier this year to develop the SECCHI strategic plan, which was approved by DEQ in June. One of the outcomes was to hold the summit to bring together stakeholders to work on regulatory voluntary measures. 

Cunningham said there’s a lot of energy in water quality right now. The summit with leaders, scientists, farmers, lawyers was “meant to demonstrate, and did loud and clear, we all agree on the problem.” 

On a parallel track, Pew has been working on the clarity standard rule, she added.

Eliza Wilczek, submerged aquatic vegetation campaign coordinator with the Coastal Federation, explained that the core team invited 13 different stakeholder groups that they knew had an interest in water quality. From those groups, the 111 attended contributed ideas and possible solutions.

“We’re not totally sure what the workgroup is going to look like at this point. That’s part of our post-summit action,” Wilczek said. “The next step is creating that workgroup and trying to keep the momentum of the summit going within the stakeholder groups.”

Deaton said after the summit that she was pleased with the turnout from a variety of backgrounds that share a common concern about coastal water quality. 

“We want that energy to continue. The goal is to create a collaboration of stakeholders that can work together on a few specific strategies. While the state agencies are charged with managing water quality for a variety of public trust uses, they cannot do it alone. The public can bring innovative ideas, solutions and assistance to improve water quality through a variety of ways,” she said. 

Next, attendees are to be provided with follow-up information to see who can commit to participating in the water quality stakeholder group, or SECCHI. Others interested but could not attend are welcome to contact the Coastal Federation or DEQ. “Their participation can really make a difference,” she added.

Boyd reiterated after the summit that water quality is not a single stakeholder, agency or organization issue, rather it’s one that touches many different facets on the coast, and it’s going to take a collaboration like this public-private partnership to be impactful.

The core team plans to use the feedback to mold the next steps, “but the biggest thing is to keep the momentum going, and, and for the core team to figure out the most effective and efficient way to do that,” he said.

Joe Huie was not expecting this.

Sections of docks and roofs, lumber and handrails tossed by Hurricane Ian-driven waves and wind-littered soundfront shorelines in southern Brunswick County.

“This is the worst we’ve seen so far,” Huie said. The debris field scattered along sound banks back into marshlands from Brick Landing in Ocean Isle Beach to Sunset Beach was staggering, “for such a weak storm, to be honest.”

Huie and a small crew of fellow fishermen headed south from their base in Sneads Ferry four days after the Category 1 hurricane made landfall near Georgetown, South Carolina, a small town nearly 80 miles from Ocean Isle Beach.

Within three days, the crew filled a 40-yard dumpster with what they’d picked up so far.

Much of what is being removed makes the case that North Carolina needs to reinstate building codes for residential docks and piers and that property owners should thoroughly vet the contractors who build these waterfront structures, environmental stewards argue.

“Hurricane Ian provided a really good illustration of how persistent this kind of debris is, the docks and piers in our coastal wetlands,” said Kerri Allen, manager of the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s southeast regional office and coastal advocate. “This is a storm that really had minimal impacts to the North Carolina coast yet it still brought a tremendous amount of dock and pier-related debris.”

Huie’s crew have been removing debris for the past 3.5 years from coastal marshlands spanning from Swansboro south to Brunswick County.

On cleanup days, the crew collects about 1 ton of material a day. Their work is part of a broad-scale effort by various agencies and groups, including the Coastal Federation, to remove marine debris clogging coastal marshlands and clumping up on spoil islands. The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review.

These areas are largely tucked out of view from boaters skimming across sounds.

Until he was hired by the Coastal Federation to walk through marsh and remove debris, Huie said he never saw what lay scattered just beyond the shorelines of the New River.

“The debris we’re talking about is in the marsh and it’s everywhere in the marsh,” he said. “If you don’t get out and walk it, you don’t see it. We had no idea there was that magnitude of debris there.”

In the days following Hurricane Ian, he found an intact porch structure in an area of marsh near Sunset Beach.

“It’s very nice. The tags were still on the decking boards where it was built not too long ago,” Huie said.

Such a find is not unusual, or so debris removal crews have learned these last few years through the large debris removal program.

“That’s been something that’s been really startling for us is how many new structures that go into place that just aren’t up to par,” Allen said. “Unfortunately, there’s a number of contractors who purposely build subpar structures either to meet a price point or sometimes to keep themselves in business so it’s really important to do your research and find a contractor worth their salt who really knows the wave energy and engineers a structure that’s going to last.”

In 2020, the Coastal Federation partnered with government agencies, community groups and scholars to create the North Carolina Marine Debris Action Plan, one that focuses on cleaning debris and stopping it at the source.

One of the recommendations resulting from that plan is a push for stronger state building codes by reinstating rules pertaining to residential docks and piers.

“With all the awareness that has come about through the marine debris removal program we’re hoping to use that and lobby the North Carolina Building Code Council to put docks and piers back in and hopefully strengthen that language,” Allen said.

The council is a 17-member, governor-appointed board that adopts and amends state building codes.

A handful of local governments have amended their town ordinances in an effort to reduce marine debris by banning the use of unencapsulated polystyrene foam in the construction and repair of floating docks.

Wrightsville Beach earlier this month became the fourth town to ban the material. Over the summer, all three towns on Topsail Island added the ban.

The Coastal Federation’s work educating those beach towns about how much polystyrene litter has been found in coastal marshes has also made property owners aware of the issue, Allen said.

Funding for the cleanup came from a North Carolina General Assembly appropriation, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Debris Program.

The Coastal Federation has applied for additional funding from the NOAA Marine Debris Program to launch a full-scale education and outreach campaign around the issue.

“I think the biggest takeaway for the coastal property owners is to really just choose their contractor wisely,” Allen said. “A dock that you build in Wrightsville Beach is going to be very different than one you building Emerald Isle because of the wave energy and location and environment. No one wants to be rebuilding their dock after every major storm and so by investing a little bit more research and sometimes money upfront they’re going to have a structure that’s going to last many years longer and also not end up as marine debris on our coast.”

Allen said the federation is in the process of developing a cost-benefit analysis to give property owners an idea of the difference in costs to build a dock or pier designed to last several years through multiple storms versus those that may be damaged or destroyed in one storm.

“In general, the individual components range from about 30% to 100% more expensive in what we’ve seen,” she said.

Staff are also exploring insurance incentives where insurance companies reward customers who have better built structures by lowering their rates.

In the meantime, the Coastal Federation plans to post a brochure on its website that will give property owners tips on how to find reputable contractors and what to consider when determining the best type of structure for the area in which it is to be built.

“Really it’s making sure that you both understand what the specific conditions are at the site of your dock and making sure that they are building a structure that is going to fail at a point that you both agree on,” Allen said.

Huie said he’s concerned about marine debris from larger, more powerful storms than Hurricane Ian.

“I’m just really worried what would happen if we had a Category 2 or Category 3,” he said. “It would take us years to clean up. It may alter some of the habitats forever just from the debris.”

A map of underwater grasses in North Carolina sounds, an important tool in monitoring the coast’s environmental well-being, is newly updated.

The Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, or APNEP, worked with regional partners to create the updated map using data from 2020 that shows the amount and location of seagrasses, also called submerged aquatic vegetation, in the high-salinity areas of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuary.

“These mapping efforts are critical to understanding the locations and health of this important habitat within our sounds,” APNEP Director Dr. Bill Crowell said in a statement.

APNEP has been working for more than 30 years to identify, protect and restore resources in the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system, such as submerged aquatic vegetation.

Dr. Tim Ellis, APNEP’s quantitative ecologist, told Coastal Review that it’s important for the public to know about the health of submerged aquatic vegetation because it “is closely linked to many things people care about on the coast, including clean water, productive recreational and commercial fisheries, shoreline protection, and resiliency to major storms like hurricanes.” 

Analysis of previous mapping efforts in 2006-08 and 2012-14 show that submerged aquatic vegetation resources are declining. The 2020 data will help researchers confirm whether and where seagrasses are continuing to decline, according to APNEP.

The 2020 data are being compared to previous maps, Ellis explained. While it is too early in the analysis to share even preliminary findings for specific regions, in general, for many of the areas examined so far, seagrass continues to decline.

“We attribute some of this decline to poor water clarity that limits the sunlight these underwater plants need to grow, particularly in the more developed regions; however, two recent major storm events — hurricanes Florence and Dorian — also certainly impacted SAV,” he said.

APNEP’s submerged aquatic vegetation team used a combination of aerial flights and ground truthing via boat-based surveys in 2020 to map the Albemarle-Pamlico estuary.

Ellis is a staff lead for the team that has members with various areas of expertise in long-term monitoring and assessment. Primary partners include the state Department of Transportation and the Division of Marine Fisheries.

Monitoring, which includes mapping, and assessment, or data analysis, are core components of APNEP’s efforts to develop and implement a protection strategy for the region, Ellis said.

“In 2021, we released a metric report on changes in the extent of high-salinity SAV. We are in the process of updating that change-detection analysis to include the new 2020 mapping information. We anticipate being able to provide this information to the public later this year,” Ellis said.

Ellis said that mapping submerged aquatic vegetation takes a lot of time and resources, as well as cooperation from the weather.

“For this mapping effort, aerial imagery was first acquired in June 2019,” he said, “but these images were deemed insufficient to reliably map SAV due to low-water clarity resulting from wind and rain in the days preceding the flights.”

The region was mapped again in May and June 2020 and that aerial imagery was largely sufficient.

“Given the vast amount of coastline and estuarine waters covered, as well as limited trained staff, delineating all of the visible SAV takes months to complete. That said, APNEP and its partners were able to produce this updated map of SAV much more quickly than our prior two mapping efforts, and we expect to continue to increase our mapping efficiency going forward depending on available resources and staff capacity,” Ellis continued. “APNEP is fortunate to be able to lead a large group of dedicated partners committed to monitoring and protecting SAV.”

Collaborative monitoring and assessment with partner organizations will continue annually as part of APNEP’s new regional strategy, with findings to be reported to the public as they become available, officials said.

Ellis explained that the new regional monitoring strategy is an effort to coordinate actions led by APNEP with regional partners.

“As being part of the EPA’s National Estuary Program, APNEP is required to have a monitoring plan for the region, and we’ve chosen to begin by formalizing our long-term strategy for SAV monitoring,” Ellis said.

“Briefly, rather than trying to fly and map the entire APNEP region for SAV every five years or so, we are now flying and mapping one different subregion each year,” he said. “This approach was designed to not only improve our mapping efficiency, but also to allow us to take an even closer look at the resource in each subregion to better understand seasonal variability in extent, abundance and species composition.”

In addition to the 2020 mapping data being used to determine where submerged aquatic vegetation is declining, the data is to help guide the development of protection and restoration strategies.

“These mapping efforts are a key component of North Carolina’s Coastal Habitat Protection Plan implementation,” APNEP Coastal Habitats Coordinator Jimmy Johnson said in a statement. “Protecting SAV habitat will increase the resilience of our coastal ecosystems overall.”

The Coastal Habitat Protection Plan, or CHPP, is a long-term effort developed by the state Division of Environmental Quality to improve coastal fisheries through habitat protection and enhancement. The state Marine Fisheries, Environmental Management and Coastal Resources commissions adopted the plan in 2004.

Johnson was part of the team that developed an amendment to the plan approved in 2021 that recommends actions to protect and restore submerged aquatic vegetation through water quality improvements.

APNEP is currently hosted by the state Department of Environmental Quality under a cooperative agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency and works closely with Virginia. The program area is from the headwaters in the Virginia mountains and North Carolina Piedmont, through the coastal plain and out to the string of barrier islands bordering the sounds, according to the website.

The EPA and NCDEQ provided APNEP with funding for this 2020 map update project, with field and technical support from the Division of Marine Fisheries and other partners.

In Pamlico Sound early Tuesday afternoon, near Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge in Down East Carteret County, two excavators at each end of a barge strategically placed the day’s load of 700 tons of limestone marl and crushed concrete into the water.

They are building the new Cedar Island Oyster Sanctuary. The three-phase project, currently in phase 2, is the most recent for the North Carolina Coastal Federation and the state Division of Marine Fisheries to build up the oyster population in Pamlico Sound. The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review. 

The nonprofit organization and the state agency, along with contractor Stevens Towing, which has an office in North Carolina, have partnered since 2009 to build about 110 acres of oyster sanctuaries, which are large-scale oyster restoration reefs that provide oyster larvae that reseed the wild population and cultch-planted areas.

A handful of division officials, federation staff, members of the media and Sen. Norm Sanderson, R-Pamlico, rode out Tuesday to the Cedar Island Oyster Sanctuary construction site to see how the material is deployed to create what looks like ridges underwater for oysters to grow on and spawn.

This was the first trip for Sanderson to see how the sanctuaries are built.

“It’s pretty awesome,” he told Coastal Review on the ride back to South River, “to be that close and see how simple it is but how affective it is.” 

He said initiatives like the oyster sanctuaries are important to him because he has a heart for commercial fishermen, and always has. 

“I know that they’re in a bad place right now, and I don’t see this industry as something that can save them, but we can help give them options,” he said, adding this work benefits not only the fishing industry, but also the environment and the state’s economy and tourism. “There’s just a lot of positives about it.”

Expected to be about 75 acres once complete, the Cedar Island sanctuary is the newest in the Sen. Jean Preston Oyster Sanctuary Network in Pamlico Sound.

Now in its fourth edition, the “Oyster Restoration and Protection Plan for North Carolina: A Blueprint for Action,” which details strategies for oyster protection, restoration, harvest and education, set a goal in 2008 for 500 acres of protected sanctuary by 2025 in the network named after the senator from Carteret County who died in 2013. To date, there are 15 sanctuaries, according to the division, with Cedar Island being the newest and will contribute to the 500-acre goal. 

The division’s sanctuary biologist, Bennett Paradis, told the group on the way to the site that division staff had been busy all summer checking progress. A crew dives the sanctuaries and brings material up to the boat. Then, they count and measure oyster density to get an idea of what the population structure looks like. The larger oysters are older, and if there’s a lot of larger oysters, then he said they know it’s a thriving population.

Erin Fleckenstein, coastal scientist with the Coastal Federation, said during the trip out to the site that researchers have found that the oyster sanctuaries are successful. The sanctuaries make up 6% of all the potential oyster reef in Pamlico Sound and contribute 20% of the population. “It’s only a 6% footprint, but it’s 20% of the whole population, and then they’re contributing 25% of all the oyster babies that are floating around in the sound.”

Federation Executive Director Todd Miller told Coastal Review that the science shows that the sanctuary plays a vital role in sustaining healthy oyster populations in the sound and the coastal economy.

“This large construction project employs local marine contractors, barge operators, truck drivers, boat crews, and rock miners — and is an important economic driver in eastern North Carolina both during construction but also in sustaining our marine fisheries and tourism economies,” Miller said, adding that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association and the North Carolina General Assembly support the project. 

Jordan Byrum is the division’s artificial reef program coordinator who oversees the oyster sanctuary program.

He said during a brief presentation while heading to the sanctuary site that earlier this year, 18,000 tons of rock was stockpiled at the division’s South River site and about a third of it is left to be deployed for this phase. There have been between 20 and 25 deployments so far this year. 

About 20 acres of the Cedar Island sanctuary were completed last summer during the first phase. For Phase 2 this year, contractors have been moving material since spring from a division site in South River to the sanctuary. The same progress is expected this year, around 20 acres, totaling around 40 to 45 acres completed. He said that he expects the Cedar Island sanctuary to take another year or year and a half to be complete.

“We should wrap up year two at Cedar Island in a couple more weeks,” Byrum said in a follow-up email Friday. “That will bring us up to about 320 acres of habitat in oyster sanctuaries.”

All the limestone marl and granite for this project was purchased from North Carolina companies, Byrum said. The material is trucked to staging sites by a Vanceboro towing company, including the site in South River where Stevens Towing collects material for the Cedar Island sanctuary. 

Byrum explained to the group Tuesday that the Coastal Federation had applied for a NOAA grant that would help meet the goal of 500 acres of protected oyster sanctuary in Pamlico Sound. “We’ve put together a plan to basically create two new sanctuaries,” he said, as well as finish out some of the undeveloped areas on a handful of other sanctuaries, with the ultimate goal to meet the 500 acres of oyster sanctuary.

After next year, then three more years of construction, they’ll meet the 500 acres of sanctuary goal, Byrum said.

To put that in perspective, he said, this year 18,000 tons of rock was used. Over the next three years, the plan is to use about 60,000 tons each year, for a total of 180,000.

NOAA began supporting the Coastal Federation’s large-scale oyster sanctuary work in 2009 with a $5 million American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant and has provided more than $12 million since for oyster restoration efforts in the state, Christine Van Dyck, federation assistant director, told Coastal Review.

The federal agency also contributed funding to the North Carolina Oyster Blueprint, monitoring by N.C. State University’s Center for Marine Sciences and Technology, or CMAST, and adaptive management by the project team of the federation, Division of Marine Fisheries, the contractors and the researchers, Van Dyck said.

“We are currently on year two of our most recent NOAA partnership, and are applying to their Transformational Habitat Restoration and Coastal Resilience Grants this fall,“ in partnership with the division and CMAST for $15 million to complete the 500-acre Jean Preston Oyster Sanctuary in Pamlico Sound, Van Dyck said. 

The state has provided millions in matching funds through the partnership, she added. 

Updated to clarify length of N.C. 12 elevation

Duck officials heard late last year that the Outer Banks town had been selected for a $1.85 million grant for a proposed living shoreline and N.C. 12 resiliency project.

The funding is through the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities, or BRIC, program. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, which administers the BRIC program, announced the nearly two-dozen selected competitive projects in early November 2021, but as of Friday the town was still waiting on official word.

Town Manager Joe Heard told Coastal Review that he had received information Thursday suggesting that the town’s “official” BRIC grant award from FEMA likely will not occur until March 2022.

The BRIC program supports states, communities, tribes and territories as they take on hazard-mitigation projects with the goal of reducing risks from disasters and natural hazards by focusing on larger infrastructure projects. These projects are to enhance human health, provide ecological benefits and benefit a multitude of residents, according to FEMA.

During an earlier interview, Heard had explained that once the town gets the go-ahead, it can move forward with the plan to elevate a flood-prone section of N.C. 12 — the only north-south roadway through Duck.

Duck’s is one of 22 projects selected across the country for fiscal 2020. The projects are under one of seven categories: elevation, flood control, floodproofing, relocation, shelter project, utility and infrastructure protection, and wildfire management. The Duck project is in the elevation category.

Duck occupies a narrow swath of land between Currituck Sound and the Atlantic Ocean and is situated on the northern end of Dare County, adjacent to Currituck County. The town has around 500 year-round residents, but during peak season, the population can reach up to 25,000, according to the U.S. Census Bureau and the town. North of Duck, in Currituck County, the population can be in the tens of thousands during peak season. The only way for those folks to leave Currituck County is on N.C. 12 through Duck.

N.C. 12 is “a low-lying highway where floods frequently impact residents, tourists and emergency services,” according to FEMA – and anyone familiar with the Outer Banks. The stretch of highway at the north end of Duck routinely floods, blocking traffic and emergency services, and is threatened by shoreline erosion.

The project

The town has proposed for the project installing a living shoreline to help protect coastal habitat and mitigate shoreline erosion, which threatens the roadway and private property, according to the BRIC application. “Flooding in the project area affects a short but critical stretch of NC 12.”

“The project Includes 988 linear feet of breakwater sills, protection of 21,234 square feet of existing marsh, 12,168 square feet of marsh restoration, and 920 linear feet of riprap revetment,” the application states. The proposed revetment Is to prevent erosion and protect the roadway and adjacent private property, help reduce wave energy, and prevent debris from accumulating in the roadway.

Heard explained that the living shoreline is intended to stabilize the section of the Currituck Sound shoreline along the roadway. The town obtained a substantial grant from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for the living shoreline. The engineering design is complete and ready to be permitted.

The town also plans to add a bicycle and pedestrian pathway along this area. Duck had a fourth and final phase to complete of its sidewalk and bike lane project through the village. Coincidentally, it’s the same quarter-mile stretch that would tie into an existing crosswalk north of the area, Heard said.

Nature-based solutions to improve stormwater runoff conditions are to be put in place, specifically, an infiltration trench between the roadway asphalt and the concrete sidewalk. The town obtained a grant from the Dare County Tourism Board for this project.

“So we had these two components (living shoreline and sidewalk projects) that were already locked in, but when the BRIC came up, suddenly, we’re now looking at larger numbers — a capability to accomplish something much more significant than those two projects by themselves,” he said.

To apply for BRIC, the living shoreline and pedestrian path projects were rolled into another project to elevate that section of Highway 12, Duck Road, in that same area, “that had been identified as the single most vulnerable piece of public infrastructure by that Western Carolina study,” he said.

A 1,260-foot section of N.C. 12 will be elevated. Heard added that the town didn’t think that the road work would happen for another decade, but BRIC was an opportunity to accomplish elevating the road and the other projects at the same time. 

The town also plans to use subsurface infiltration chambers, which will provide a place to store runoff that will be filtered as it infiltrates the native sandy soils, avoiding direct discharge to the sound, the application states.

“Basically everything east of the project area rises up significantly, it’s part of a large dune, that goes up substantially,” Heard said. There was a lot of runoff from the streets and property in that area and right now it’s just a sheet of water flowing across the road, directly into the sound.

The underground component planned for north of Olde Duck Road would capture stormwater and gradually release it as the water table allows, Heard said. It’s like a system that was installed at the southern end of town more than 10 years ago, “that really made a substantial difference” in an area that flooded consistently. “And we’re looking for the same type of results here.”

Heard added that native plants are also part of the plan to help filter any remaining roadway runoff.

“That’s one of the big benefits of that as well. It’s not just recreating habitat, these plants will help filter that water before it goes into the sound,” he said.

By raising the roadway, installing the living shoreline and making the sidewalk improvements, the project will mitigate threats and loss associated with erosion and damage to critical Infrastructure, roadway infrastructure replacement costs, interfering with emergency vehicles and hospital access, blocking storm evacuation route, and disruption of safe pedestrian and bicycle travel, according to the application.

First steps

Heard explained that Duck had gone through several steps in applying for the BRIC program. The project and grant itself are the result of three town planning efforts in 2020.

One was when Duck did a vulnerability assessment in partnership with the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University in February 2020. Heard said that the assessment identified the town’s most vulnerable assets, which included this section of N.C. 12.

Then in June of that year, work was completed on the Outer Banks regional hazard mitigation plan, which includes Currituck and Dare counties as well as Dare’s local governments, Duck, Kill Devil Hills, Kitty Hawk, Manteo, Nags Head and Southern Shores — a total of eight governing bodies.

“And again, that was a project where we spent over a year identifying what some of the hazards are and the risks that all of our communities deal with,” Heard said.

In addition, each community created its own plan.

“We do have a sub plan that focuses just on Duck and the things that we hope to accomplish to make ourselves a more resilient community,” he said.

The third project took place in August 2020, when work was completed on Duck’s comprehensive land use plan.

Heard said the land use plan was a little over the year in the making.

“We interacted with the community in a variety of ways during that process to try to get input from property owners, citizens, business owners, and different stakeholders in the town,” he said.

Christian Legner, the town’s public information and events director, distributed a survey that received more than 800 responses, which was “off-the-charts” engagement Heard said for the town to only have 500 or so year-round residents.

The survey enabled town officials to “feel very confident that the types of goals, objectives and actions that we identified in that plan were the will of the community. It gives us a lot of confidence that we were heading in the right direction,” Heard added.

Not long after, Heard said that town officials became aware of the BRIC program and learned that many of the town’s planned projects were eligible.

The town worked with the North Carolina Department of Public Safety to apply for BRIC.

“We lumped it all together into a single, cohesive coastal resiliency project that would elevate the road, have the living shoreline, have the bike path and sidewalk, and we also have some stormwater management improvements in there as well that’ll help with water quality,” he explained.

Heard said he believes the project was selected because of its use of nature-based solutions, and because the road elevation would help keep N.C. 12 from becoming flooded and unpassable.  

If N.C. 12 floods in that area during the peak tourist season, based on figures from Currituck County, well over 60,000 people could be stuck.

“This little weak spot would impact all of those people’s ability to evacuate and their ability to receive emergency services were extremely important. We’re hoping to prevent the type of situation that would cause that by doing the road elevation,” he said.

Heard explained that the town hopes the project, which would fulfill key goals in previously approved plans, will also improve water quality, recreate lost habitat and increase resiliency. It could also be an educational opportunity.

It’s a highly visible stretch of road, Heard said, and particularly with the bicycle-pedestrian pathway, the public can get a close look at the work.

“We’ve got a great opportunity to educate the public about what the project is, what it’s doing,” Heard said, especially with the living shoreline part of the project, “we really want to educate people about this type of nature-based alternative. We want to let people know and give them good visible examples of an alternative. “

The town began in the fall working on the interpretive information and for the educational angle that explains the development and purpose of the project, “And hopefully give them something to think about if and when they’re looking at a similar issue along their own shoreline. They might choose to look at this rather than a bulkhead.”

The project can be an example for other communities, he said.

“To a great degree, we’re on the forefront of coastal communities that are dealing with coastal resiliency and those issues,” he said, adding there’s interest from agencies and organizations “in getting more and more examples on the on the ground, or I guess, in this case, in the water.”

Toiling through nearly two years of remote meetings, a 14-member partnership last week completed a comprehensive plan to save miles of marshlands in the northeastern corner of North Carolina.

The Currituck Sound Coalition Marsh Conservation Plan released Tuesday is the culmination of a goal seeded more than a decade ago, when Audubon North Carolina started managing 2,600 acres it acquired on Pine Island, near the village of Corolla in an undeveloped area of the northern Outer Banks.

“I think the fact that so many partners have come together to collaborate on this work, despite being in the middle of a global pandemic, despite the magnitude of some of the challenges we’re up against — like sea level rise — I think that really speaks volumes about how important this work is,” Cat Bowler, coastal resilience program manager with Audubon North Carolina, said in a recent interview.

In an ironic way, it is fortuitous timing for the plan’s release, since what it lays out is the kind of strategy that climate scientists have been urgently advising for coastal regions to mitigate the impacts of climate change. But it took multiple climate disasters for governments in the U.S. and worldwide to finally adopt programs and policies — and open their wallets — to address the increasing risks.

Last month’s global climate conference in Scotland emphasized that the climate threat had reached the emergency stage, and it must be addressed from the community level on up.

That is just where the coalition plan is poised.

“Our shared vision is to increase community and ecosystem resilience to climate change and other threats through enhanced collaboration and partnership on nature-based initiatives,” a statement in the plan explained. “Among our first priorities as a coalition was the development of this conservation plan, which serves as a starting point in an ongoing process of collaborative conservation planning and action.”

In 1979, Winston-Salem developer Earl Slick, who built Corolla’s first subdivision, donated 2,600 acres of untouched marsh, upland maritime forest and sandy beaches to Audubon North Carolina. By 2010, the nonprofit conservation group had established the Donal C. O’Brien Jr. Audubon Sanctuary and Center at Pine Island, which includes a 1913 hunt club.

Five years later, director Robbie Fearn established a steering committee to seek ways to protect the center, the sound and the surrounding marshlands. Since then, the center has hosted researchers and educators and has begun implementing a two-part restoration and conservation plan.

Located on the north tip of the Albemarle-Pamlico sound system, its watershed boundaries stretching to Virginia Beach, the 153-square-mile Currituck Sound estuary stretches along the northern Outer Banks in Dare and Currituck counties.

With the last inlet having closed about 200 years ago, the barrier islands separate the sound from the Atlantic Ocean. As a result, the water is between salty and fresh, but only slightly brackish, which scientifically makes it an oligohaline water body.

Blocked from the powerful ocean — the nearest connection is 45 miles away at Oregon Inlet — the sound’s shallow marshlands are influenced by wind tides but lack natural flushing action. Once an attraction for astonishing numbers of waterfowl and migrating birds, as well as fish and other wildlife, Currituck Sound was known for decades in the 20th century as a world-class destination for waterfowl hunting.

Calling it “a globally rare ecosystem,” Audubon says that the sound is one of the world’s most important places for birds. Its wetlands also filter water and serve as a valuable buffer from flooding.

But over time the sound, with depths ranging between 5 feet and about 13 feet, has suffered degradation of its water quality and has lost considerable amounts of submerged aquatic vegetation.

“Today, the marshes of Currituck Sound are increasingly at risk due to threats such as habitat loss and fragmentation, sea level rise, and proliferation of invasive aquatic plants — all of which may be exacerbated by climate change,” the new conservation plan said. “Loss of marsh and submerged aquatic vegetation has led to population declines in birds and fish in the sound.”

Although the coalition found that marshes are being lost at a rate of about 70 acres per year, Bowler said it could be even more, since that estimate is outdated.

“No, that is not an ongoing survey,” she said, adding that the number came from the 2011 Army Corps of Engineers Currituck Sound Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study. “So that number is about a decade old at this point. And so it very well may be a conservative figure. We need further research and monitoring to understand the current rate of marsh loss.”

Prior to release of the Corps’ report, initial research in 2001 had suggested that poor water quality was driving degradation of the ecosystem, as reported during a September 2011 scoping meeting on the feasibility study. The agency also listed 25 additional Currituck Sound-related studies, reports, programs or efforts that had been conducted earlier.

In addition, the 2001 “reconnaissance” study found other problems, including high salinity, reduced submerged aquatic vegetation and a decrease in the largemouth bass fishery. Development of a hydrodynamic flow model and analysis of alternative plans were recommended, and in 2004 the Corps and the state agreed to share costs to do the restoration feasibility study.

The Corps’ 204-page 2011 report was created with collaboration from participants that included 26 different public and nonprofit entities as well as “local environmentalists and sportsmen.”

Stuffed with information on the past, current and future state of the sound waters and marshes, illustrated with scientific charts and filled with reams of data culled from dozens of research projects, the findings were a clear warning of what the Currituck Sound is facing today.

Water in the 98,000-acre sound, which is 36 miles long and 3 to 8 miles wide, is murkier, and erosion is increasing. Sea levels are rising, and saltwater intrusion is a growing threat. Healthy grasses are depleted, and marsh is at risk of being subsumed or eroded away.

Despite the enormity — and foresight — of the effort, the draft ecosystem restoration plan was never implemented.

Then in 2016, the Corps’ built a $1.3 million research project in Currituck Sound to collect data on hydrodynamics, contaminants, nutrients, sediments, salinity, algae content, pH levels, attenuation, wind and water temperature. With numerous instruments attached to five monitoring platforms, the project was a first-of-its-kind effort to measure the range of biological and physical processes in the sound. The goal was to collect decades of data to provide scientists information on trends and impacts from climate change.

But in January 2018, the platforms, along with many of the instruments, were destroyed by a freak ice storm.

“We did collect about 2 years of data prior to that,” Patrick Dickhudt, an oceanographer at the Army Corps’ field research facility in Duck, said in a recent email, responding to a query about the project. “Those data have all been archived and are publicly available (along with all of the other data collected at the Field Research Facility).”

Dickhudt added that with the facility primarily focused on ocean processes, the Corps does not have plans to replace the monitoring platforms.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has estimated that sea levels in the region are expected to rise 1.5 feet by 2050, but there is not much available data about the rate of shoreline erosion — historic, current or projected — along the Currituck Sound. Also, limited visibility in the water has made it difficult to do accurate surveys from the air to determine the amount of submerged aquatic vegetation loss.

According to the marsh plan, “the other effects of climate change are expected to increase stress on aquatic ecosystems and diminish their ability to support and maintain a balanced, adaptive, and diverse community of species” in the sound.

“Without effective conservation action, the future of this important natural resource is in jeopardy,” according to the document.

Many of the 14 partners in the Currituck Sound Coalition have been working independently on various restoration or conservation projects in the sound region at different times, and some are ongoing.

Members represent a range of interests from nonprofits, academics, local communities and government agencies, including the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, Audubon North Carolina, Chowan University, the Coastal Studies Institute, Currituck County, Ducks Unlimited, National Wildlife Refuge Association, North Carolina Coastal Federation, North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve, North Carolina Sea Grant, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, The Nature Conservancy, town of Duck and U.S Fish and Wildlife Service.

“With a range of expertise and experience, the coalition is uniquely positioned to tackle the challenges facing marshes in Currituck Sound through ecosystem restoration and conservation,” the plan says.

Bowler said that after collecting feedback from coalition on the new marsh plan, the group will focus on addressing the myriad issues with action, with climate threats top of mind. Now that most people are taking the risk seriously, Bowler is optimistic that the coalition will be able to tap the increasing availability of funds to tackle urgent issues.

“We are losing marshes at a more rapid rate than we were in the past and that is due to threats like sea level rise and erosion,” she said.

As detailed in the plan, Currituck marshes are experiencing lateral erosion at the boundary with the sound, meaning that they’re losing height, not just width. They are also subject to “break-up,” caused by inadequate accretion with rising sea level. Potential remedies include a combination of living shorelines, submerged sills, or underwater breakwaters, and thin-layer sediment placement, which would build up the marsh. Research must be done to determine the appropriate measure at the appropriate place.

“As sea levels rise, those marshes only have a couple of options for how they can persist,” Bowler said, elaborating on the challenges. “One of those options is to stay where they are, and to accrete sediments to grow in place and keep pace with sea level rise. Another option is for those marshes to actually migrate upslope in a process that we call marsh migration.”

Thin-layer sediment placement has not been widely applied in North Carolina, she said, and “is one of the more innovative techniques” that Audubon plans to pilot in the Currituck Sound region. Marsh migration, she added, could be a good option in undeveloped areas where there is space for the marsh to move into.

Despite the impact of development on marshes, and vice-versa, Bowler said there’s reason to believe that both can coexist, to the benefit of both.

“We know that marshes provide reduction of storm surge,” she said. “We know that they help to attenuate floodwaters during heavy precipitation events. They sequester carbon. They provide wildlife habitat for the birds and other wildlife that we all appreciate seeing when we visit the marsh.

“So really, we look for places where we can create those multiple benefits to both the natural system but also to human communities.”                                                

The 2021 amendment to the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan has been approved, and the new official state recommendations to improve water quality and habitat can now be put into place.

In unanimous decisions, the Coastal Resources Commission voted Nov. 10, the Environmental Management Commission Thursday and the Marine Fisheries Commission Friday. All three commissions’ approval was required for the amendment to be adopted.

The 2021 amendment recommends five priorities: protecting submerged aquatic vegetation and wetlands, abiding by environmental rules, wastewater infrastructure solutions to improve water quality, and habitat mapping.

“We are very pleased that we received unanimous support for the document from all three commissions. I think that is a definite reflection on the amount of work that all involved put into the amendment,” Jimmy Johnson, coastal habitats coordinator with the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuarine Partnership and Coastal Habitat Protection Plan Steering Committee member, told Coastal Review Friday following the Marine Fisheries Commission meeting.

The three commissions first approved the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan in 2004. It was developed to improve and restore coastal fisheries through habitat protection and enhancement. The plan is usually revised every five years to reflect changes in the status of habitat protection in the state. The CHPP Steering Committee opted to draft an amendment to the 2016 plan rather than rewrite the entire document to streamline the process. The amendment was made available for public comment earlier this year.

Now that the amendment is approved, the next step is a 30-day review by NCDEQ, followed by another monthlong review by the Joint Legislative Commission on Government Operations.

“If we receive no comments or requests for changes, the amendment will be deemed approved. The CHPP Team and CHPP Steering Committee will continue to meet in 2022 to keep track of implementation regarding the recommendations,” Johnson said.

Division of Marine Fisheries Habitat Program Manager Anne Deaton told Coastal Review that because the amendment includes recommended actions, “We can begin implementation immediately upon final approval and we are really looking forward to that.”

Johnson told the Marine Fisheries Commission Friday that most public comments received were supportive. Public comment received by email included petitions from Audubon North Carolina and the North Carolina Conservation network totaling 1,257 signatures. There were 33 letters supporting the plan and implementation and 17 letters in support of a public-private partnership. Other public comment focused on edits to recommendations and texts. Close to 20 environmental organizations also contributed input. Johnson said while there were some concerns, the organizations felt positively of the CHPP amendment.

Deaton told the commission that the CHPP steering committee met Oct. 27 after the Sept. 21-Oct. 21 public comment period closed. After reviewing input from organizations and stakeholders, the committee decided to modify four actions related to the Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Protection and Restoration Through Water Quality Improvement priority issue. The committee also made an additional recommendation to form a public/private partnership. All of these changes are in the draft of the amendment most recently presented to and approved by the three commissions.

The modifications include broadening protentional funding sources for SAV monitoring and management and adding the directive to form a workgroup that would increase best management practices to improve water quality within SAV waterbody regions. Two other recommended actions were updated with a few minor edits for clarification.

Regarding the additional recommendation added, Deaton reiterated Johnson’s earlier comments that there was a great deal of input from the advisory committees and public pushing for a public-private partnership, and the CHPP steering committee agreed.

The new recommendation reads, “By 2022, DEQ will support the formation of a public-private partnership that will engage a diverse group of stakeholders to assist in developing, implementing, and securing decision-maker support and funding for measures in this 2021 CHPP amendment that protect and restore water quality.”

Deaton said that the concept with this new recommendation was to broaden support, having more people involved will help accomplish more, it can broaden funding opportunities and more collaboration.

“By bringing in stakeholders from the beginning, we can discuss better any obstacles in making those accomplishments happen,” she said.

The amendment also includes Appendix A, early public comment submitted by an independent stakeholder workgroup led by the North Carolina Coastal Federation and The Pew Charitable Trusts, and Appendix C that consists of written public comments.

Todd Miller, executive director for the federation, told Coastal Review Friday that he was pleased the amendment was unanimously approved, adding that “now the work begins.”

Leda Cunningham, an officer with Pew’s Conserving Marine Life in the U.S. project, said in a statement, “Pew commends all who worked on the CHPP for maintaining momentum and focus while undertaking this ambitious task with a wide range of contributors.”

Since the approval of the 2016 Coastal Habitat Protection Plan, implementation has focused on restoring oyster reef habitat, encouraging the use of living shorelines, reducing sedimentation impacts in estuarine creeks and developing metrics on habitat trends and management effectiveness, according to the 2021 amendment. “Although new priority issues were selected for the 2021 CHPP Amendment, the 2016 issues remain a continuing priority.”

The 2016 plan is made up of two documents: the CHPP source document and the CHPP Summary, or the “CHPPlet.” The source document includes issue papers, which are summaries on addressing research areas, on priority issues from 2016 including restoring oyster reef habitat, encouraging use of living shorelines, reducing sedimentation impacts in estuarine creeks, and developing metrics on habitat trends and management effectiveness. The issue papers include specific recommended actions that replace the need for a separate implementation plan.

The protection plan team that worked on the 2021 amendment includes staff from the Division of Marine Fisheries, Division of Coastal Management, Division of Water Resources and Division of Energy, Minerals, and Land Resources. Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuarine Partnership, Wildlife Resource Commission, Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources, Division of Mitigation Services, and Soil and Water Conservation District have also participated.

ST. JAMES — Years ago, the phrase “living shoreline” wasn’t well known in North Carolina outside of, say, the circles of coastal scientists and researchers.

“I don’t recall that at the time we used the term ‘living shoreline’ as much as we do today,” chuckled Taylor Ryan of St. James in Brunswick County. He’s project leader and founder of the community group, The Royal Order of the Honorary St. James Oysters.

When Ryan went to the University of North Carolina Wilmington and the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review, to ask how his town could reduce erosion along its waterfront park, he had no idea his request would result in a burgeoning, 16-years-and-counting relationship forged by a passion for education, research and resiliency.

The small, relatively young town of St. James in Brunswick County in August created an endowment fund at the university with a gift of $25,000 to support students’ work and research at the town’s living shoreline, officials announced last month.

UNCW has more than 2,000 funds that support an array of programs, but the St. James endowment is special because it was set up by the town.

“This is unique in that the town actually created the endowment fund,” said Lindsay Crighton, director of development of UNCW’s Division for University Advancement. “This is unique because it is pairing a town and the university in looking at coastal resiliency and looking at how a coastal university can partner with a coastal community and have such an impact in the region.”

It all started in the mid-2000s when Ryan attended a seminar about oysters — specifically, the value of an oyster.

A single oyster can clean between 40 to 50 gallons of water a day, Ryan learned. Their shells can be incorporated into a living shoreline, one that is built of natural materials to stabilize and protected a shore.

Such a project sounded like the right fit for the shoreline along St. James’ Waterway Park nestled along the Intracoastal Waterway.

Ryan went to St. James’ then-Mayor Shelley Lesher to ask for $5,000 to kickstart a living shoreline project at Waterway Park. Her answer was an immediate “yes.”

Fast forward through the permitting process, which was not a simple one, to the first build, one where UNCW students and their professors, Coastal Federation officials and 94 St. James residents worked together.

Since that first build, 9,000 bushels of shells have been placed along the shoreline and more than 27,000 plugs of Spartina grass have been planted, according to St. James Mayor Jean Toner.

The town’s website states that some 540 feet of shoreline has been restored and stabilized with plans to do another 2,360 feet.

“Every year, twice a year, we have students and staff join with our residents to work along our intracoastal shoreline to build up the oyster reefs,” Toner said. “It’s been an excellent project. We’ve learned a great deal from the staff and students. We’ve really enjoyed the partnership we have with them. This program, in particular, I’ve just never seen this much dedication.”

Their enthusiasm ultimately led to a natural collaboration between the town and university, one that reaches beyond the confines of St. James’ boundaries and affords college students a treasure trove of research opportunities.

Over the past year and a half, the university has been hosting presentations open to residents in the region.

Those presentations have included conversations about coastal habitats and the dynamics of living shoreline erosion, issues that are of general interest to the broader community.

“When we’re doing a build it’s not just a build, it’s also an outreach and education,” said Martin Posey, a professor and director of UNCW’s Center for Marine Science.

The benefits of the project have become multifaceted.

“That’s one of the great aspects of having this long-term study where we’ve been able to see over the 15 years how has it done as we are beginning to get more storm effects and sea level rise,” Posey said. “And, the endowment sort of solidifies this research can continue another 10 or 15 years. We’re not going to be here forever, but the endowment will help ensure that work continues and we’re able to continue to see how do these systems respond in the long term when they’re faced with these pressures of climate change.”

Posey and Troy Alphin, senior research associate at the center’s Benthic Ecology Laboratory, have been involved in St. James’ living shoreline from the get-go.

The town’s support has afforded a great opportunity for dozens and dozens of students, both graduate and undergraduate, they said.

“The classroom is good. The classroom tells you the facts and the figures and the labs give you some controlled approach. But, to actually get out there and do the research, to see how things don’t always work out the way you want them to work out, to see the fact that results can be fuzzy and you have to sort of figure out what’s happening, to learn the art of science is something that is absolutely critical that has to be done hands-on,” Posey said.

Kenneth Halanych, who took the helm in June as the UNCW center’s executive director, said the relationship between the town and the university has an even broader outreach.

“Engaging both the community and the young researches in science really helps build the trust in science from the community perspective,” Halanych said.

“One of the things we’ve had a huge problem with in this country, especially in the last little bit, is the trust in science and the trust in expertise has been greatly eroded. So, this is a chance for scientists to go and interact with the community, to interact with young researchers or young individuals and say, look, the science is critical in your everyday life,” he said. “This sort of activity I actually think is really important for helping people understand the importance of science and the scientific process. These types of partnerships between communities and universities and the involvement with students is critical for building a productive future.”

The St. James endowment will provide funds to continue the partnership at the university and support students’ work in the town.

“Our hope is eventually that other people in Brunswick County, people that are interested in coastal resiliency and marine biology and applied learning at UNCW that they will be interested in supporting this fund as well because we want other towns, communities, etcetera to look at this opportunity and think well maybe we could do this as well,” Crighton said. “As more support comes in we’re going to be able to do more work, not only in the town of St. James, but also in Brunswick County and expand the ability to have more applied learning opportunities for our students at UNCW, which is a big thing.”

University of North Carolina Wilmington alumnus Joe Oliver and his colleagues at the Bahamas-based Coral Vita have won a prestigious award for their work restoring coral reefs. The prize, along with global recognition, comes with about $1.3 million.

The Earthshot Prize is an award given by the Royal Fund of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to initiatives that are doing important environmental work. Every year for the next 10 years there will be five, $1.3 million prizes awarded, providing at least 50 solutions to the world’s greatest environmental problems by 2030, according to the Earthshot Prize website.

Coral Vita, the Revive Our Oceans winner, and four other winners were announced Oct. 17 in London. The five are the first-ever winners of Prince William’s Earthshot Prize.

Oliver was born in Wilmington, and said that marine biology called to him from an early age. He grew up playing in the water — always fishing, boogie boarding, and the like. As a preteen, he participated in UNCW’s MarineQuest program, a youth outreach initiative that provides young people with the chance to explore and become immersed in the marine environment. This experience solidified his track.

“I’m actually proof that a proper outreach education program works,” Oliver said.

Oliver graduated from UNCW in 2006 with a degree in marine biology, and went on to become an instructor for the MarineQuest program. A particular interest in coral reefs and a connection through a friend is what led him to Coral Vita, a company dedicated to regrowing the world’s dying coral reefs. He accepted a job as director of restoration operations, relocated to the Bahamas and got to work.

“I couldn’t let the opportunity to run this type of facility pass me by,” Oliver said.

Coral reefs are made from colonies of coral polyps that are fixed together by something called calcium carbonate, the hard material that gives reefs their structure. As a whole, coral reefs encapsulate an entire underwater ecosystem, and are critical to the health of the ocean. It is estimated that as much as 25% of the ocean’s species depend on coral reefs during at least some portion of their life cycle. This makes coral reefs one of the most diverse ecosystems on the planet, not just in the ocean.

But factors such as ocean warming, ocean acidification, overfishing and pollution pose imminent threats to the health of coral reefs. According to the Coral Vita website, these factors have contributed to the loss of 50% of the world’s reefs within the last few decades. Without intervention, that number will rise to more than 90% by 2050.

Enter Coral Vita. Oliver and his teammates work with aquaculture farms to regrow coral. One of the main practices they use is called micro-fragmentation. They can take a broken piece of coral and break it into smaller pieces consisting of just a few polyps apiece. They begin growing the coral fragments individually in aquaculture raceways. Then, they integrate them into plates where they can grow back together cohesively. Normally, coral grows very slowly. But the separation that occurs during micro-fragmentation stimulates growth for the coral. In this environment, they can speed up a process that normally takes much longer.

“What would take 100 years, we can hopefully do in 10,” Oliver said. “Maybe even less.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Coral Vita (@coralvitareefs)

Some corals of different species do not grow harmoniously together and will try to outcompete each other for resources. But as long as the coral is of the same species, they’ll grow back together happily. Oliver and his team are also experimenting to find out what combinations of species can grow together without conflict.

And then they can transplant the cultivated coral back to the ocean. They use ocean-friendly concrete to make the transplant, but are experimenting with other methods of securing the farmed coral in place to make sure the impact to the ocean environment is minimal.

An important part of this process, said Oliver, is to increase the adaptability of the coral before they put it back in the ocean. Using special treatments at their aquaculture facility, they can get the farmed coral used to harsher conditions than coral can normally handle. Once they are back in the ocean, the idea is that they won’t be as prone to succumbing to the hazards that currently kill coral.

Currently, Coral Vita’s success rate is high — a 50 to 70% survival rate for transplanted coral. They aim to get it even higher.

The monetary prize will go to continuing Coral Vita’s work and expanding outreach, said Oliver. The win was important for Coral Vita, but ultimately extends beyond them as well.

“We didn’t win it just for us, we won it for everybody that does coral restoration,” Oliver said. “And for me, what I hope to be (a) secondary benefit in the future, is that more people will be paying attention to these problems and looking at how to be a part of the solution.”

The other organizations to win the 2021 Earthshot prize were:

• Build a Waste-Free World Winner: Milan, Italy. The city came up with an initiative that redistributes food that would have been discarded to those who need it, thereby reducing waste and feeding the hungry.
• Clean Our Air Winner: Vidyut Mohan of India. Takachar is a technology that converts polluting agricultural outputs into usable biofuel and fertilizer that can ultimately be resold.
• Fix Our Climate Winner: Enapter Project. This technology converts renewable electricity into hydrogen gas that is free of emissions.
• Protect and Restore Nature Winner: Costa Rica. This nation developed a policy that pays citizens to plant trees in an effort to preserve the rainforest.

HYDE COUNTY — New barriers on tide gates installed at Lake Mattamuskeet are effectively blocking invasive carp from swimming into the state’s largest natural lake.

Biologists are now making preparations to remove the 4.5 million pounds of carp that are already in the lake — about 1 million of the hefty fish. Once they’re gone, much of the lake’s high turbidity and bad water clarity is expected to greatly improve.

“The problem is they’re bottom feeders,” Wendy Stanton, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist at Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge, said in a recent interview, adding that the fish are constantly stirring up the bed searching for food. “It suspends all the sediment in lakes. It just exacerbates the problem.”

In late August, the refuge and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission announced the award of a $1 million grant to remove the carp. The funds, provided from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s large invasive species grant program, will be available in fiscal year 2023. A smaller grant of $180,000 was awarded last year by the agency’s coastal funds program grant.

The project is one of the critical steps to improving the lake’s water quality that were identified in the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan. Approved in 2018, the effort is a partnership between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Hyde County, the North Carolina Coastal Federation and area stakeholders. A technical working group of scientists and researchers have developed recommendations for monitoring and studies that advance a science-based approach to bringing back the health of the lake.

An update on implementation of the restoration plan, including the carp removal, was presented at a virtual public meeting Monday, Sept. 27.

Stanton, who is also the acting refuge manager at Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, explained that common carp can only reproduce in freshwater. When the urge hits, they have been heading to the lake from the saltier Pamlico Sound. Although the lake is equipped with tide gates to keep out the sound’s brackish water, the fish had been able to slip through them.

“They swim up through the outfall canals and other tributaries to get to fresh water,” she said.

Tapping grant funds, the Coastal Wildlife Refuge Society hired a local welder to retrofit debris barriers used at the lake’s tide gates at four outfall canals. Carp exclusion fences will also be installed at the five culverts that pass under N.C 94 causeway that bisects the lake. Spaced every two inches, the flat metal strips prevent about 97% of adult carp from entering from the Pamlico Sound, but don’t block other fish or crab.

Back in the 1940s and 1950s, Stanton said, refuge managers determined that carp caused depletion of submerged aquatic vegetation, or SAV, in the lake. After the carp were removed with seine nets, the water quality quickly improved, and the underwater plants — an indicator of a healthy lake — soon grew back.

But common carp do not eat SAV, Stanton said.

Their crime, besides hogging the ecosystem, is their constant digging for food and stirring up sediment. In turn, the disturbed silt releases nitrogen and phosphorus pollutants and muddies the water, which decreases light reaching for the SAV to grow.

Eventually, the plants die, reducing the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water that aquatic life requires to thrive. The lake currently has very little, if any, submerged grasses and as a consequence, attracts fewer waterfowl and is less hospitable for fish and shellfish. It also has been plagued in warm months with noxious algal blooms.

Scientists have calculated that the body of a common carp is about 1% phosphorus and 6.5% nitrogen as measured by live weight, according to the Draft Environmental Assessment for Maximum Removal of Invasive Common Carp from Lake Mattamuskeet and Associated Canals. With the carp gone, nutrient load reduction would be 44,750 pounds of phosphorus and 290,878 pounds of nitrogen.

Common carp, scientific name Cyprinus carpio, is listed on the Global Invasive Species Database as one of the 100 world’s worst invasive alien species. The dubious recognition points to it being considered a major threat to biodiversity, as well as health, agriculture or other human interests.

According to the Chesapeake Bay Program, the fish were introduced into the U.S. in the mid-1800s as part of a carp cultivation program. Koi fish that stock small backyard ponds are a domesticated variety of common carp. Sturdy, adaptable and strong swimmers, the fish proceeded to invade nearly every waterway in the lower 48.

Not only does the female produce about 300,000 eggs per breeding season, the fish can live as long as 20 years. Common carp average about 2 feet long and up to 8 pounds, although they can reach 30 to 40 pounds. In fact, the North Carolina state record for the fish is 48 pounds, caught in March 1986 in a Mecklenburg County pond.

“What’s really interesting about the carp at Lake Mattamuskeet is that their ecology is different,” Stanton said. “They usually live until 3 or 4 years old. Although they have short life spans, they’re very prolific breeders.”

Which explains why 78,000 4-inch fingerlings of state hatchery-raised bluegill were released last winter at known spawning spots on either side of the 40,000-acre lake, she said. The fish are not only a popular game fish, they also are great at eating carp eggs and larvae.

Since bluegill hunt by sight, the conditions are not ideal, Stanton said, yet the fish have plenty of food while serving an important role in carp population control.

“They will be able to survive,” she said of the bluegill, “but they’re going to be more effective predators on their prey when the water quality improves.”

Once the grant money is in hand, the refuge is planning to place pound nets in deep parts of the lake to capture the carp. Trackers will be put on some of them, making them aptly-named “Judas fish,” Stanton said.

“That fish is going to lead us to where the fish are spawning out in the lake,” she explained.

The long nets can extend thousands of feet, attached between the fishers’ boats.

“Literally, they herd them into the net and then gently pull the fish across the lake,” she said. But the plan can be adjusted as needed.

“We’re learning as we go,” she said. “This is a very adaptive approach.”

Students with East Carolina University’s CapStone project in December 2020 completed a hoist system to lift the carp from the netted enclosures.

Local fishers will be invited to apply for a low-cost, special-use permit to fish for as much free carp as they want. Potential markets include fee fishing ponds, commercial fish markets, chum and crab bait for recreational and commercial fishers, and fish meal for animal food. They could also be used as fertilizer, as long as the carp was combined with a binder to counter its tendency to liquify.

Although the carp has passed muster for human consumption — it has been tested for PCBs, mercury and cyanobacteria — and is considered a tasty fish, it has a lot of bones. It is not listed as a gamefish by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, but historically common carp has been a food source for people.

“We don’t want the carp to be wasted,” Stanton said.

Between removal of nearly all the carp, and stocking with bluegill, she said that the refuge anticipates that about 16,000 acres of the lake will be restored.

It’s a “heavy lift,” she added, because it has to be done in less than two years to outsmart the carp’s reproductive responses. Like coyotes, the more carps’ population is decreased, the more they produce in the next generation.

In the coming months, the refuge’s “carp team” will seek assistance from local fishers in designing pound and other nets to use in the removal project. There will also be analysis of carp markets locally and nationally, and a project to retrofit additional carp barriers to enhance debris removal.

Ultimately, taking away biomass in the lake that translates to more than 4 million pounds of ecological disturbance will free up stakeholders to dig in to addressing the watershed’s nutrient pollution, drainage challenges and water level issues.

“This is going to be a long-term situation,” Stanton cautioned. “It took years and years and years for this lake to be in this condition. If we can get this carp out, it’s going to be a milestone.”

Plan name, headline corrected

Despite a steady decline in the number of permits issued for human-related impacts to wetlands in North Carolina over the past 30 years, tens of thousands of wetlands in the state’s coastal plain have been destroyed by the changing climate and nonpermitted human activities.

That information is included in the newly updated, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-approved North Carolina Wetland Program Plan, or WPP, 2021-2025, one encouraged by the federal agency to guide wetland-related work by states and tribes.

“The WPP is not a regulatory document, so it does not make any changes to rules regarding wetlands in the state,” Kristie Gianopulos said in an email response. “It is intended to be a guide for wetland-related projects and work by state agencies, in the areas of monitoring/assessment, regulation, voluntary restoration/protection, water quality standards, and outreach and education. The newly approved plan for 2021-2025 outlines objectives for the (North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality) in these areas.”

Gianopulos is a senior environmental specialist and wetlands ecologist with the department’s Division of Water Resources’ Water Sciences Section.

“This plan also serves as a communication tool, providing a unified vision and priorities for guiding wetland work in North Carolina, as well as establishing a network of partners and stakeholders in accomplishing that work,” she said.

The EPA’s stamp of approval of the plan ensures that the state, tribe or other grant applicant is eligible for program development grant funds from the federal agency.

The state Wetland Program Plan was initiated in 2012 through a group of stakeholders — an array of representatives from government offices, professional organizations, nonprofits, and universities — whose goal was to enhance the state wetland program.

The stakeholder group reconvened last year to update the original five-year plan with a focus on DEQ’s projected wetland work through 2025, said Amanda Mueller the Kenan Institute for Engineering, Technology and Science, or KIETS, climate leaders program manager and coastal resilience and sustainability initiative coordinator at North Carolina State University and author of the plan and subsequent update.

“The original N.C. WPP addressed the functions and services of wetlands and listed goals and activities needed to further understand and manage North Carolina’s wetlands,” Mueller stated in an email. “The original list of activities was extensive and provided guidance for anyone pursuing wetland projects in the state.”

Some of the projects conducted since the state Wetland Program Plan was first adopted in October 2015 include the following:

• Assessing state wetlands through the EPA’s 2016 National Wetland Conditions Assessment.
• Identifying and designating strategic habitat areas for marine and coastal fishery species in the Cape Fear River Basin.
• Assessing 16 long-term wetland monitoring sites; evaluating the accuracy of National Wetland Inventory maps, or NWI, for the state.
• Developing and testing wetland hydrology performance criteria for restoration sites.

North Carolina has 3.9 million acres and 16 types of wetlands, including basin, bog, bottomland hardwood forest, estuarine woody wetland, floodplain pool, hardwood flat, headwater forest, nonriverine swamp forest, nontidal freshwater marsh, pine flat, pine savanna, pocosins, riverine swamp forest, salt/brackish marsh, seep and tidal freshwater marsh.

Between Jan. 1, 1990, and Dec. 31, 2019, there were 12,386 permits issued with an impact to nearly 18,000 acres of wetlands.

Since 1990, most permitted impacts to wetlands have occurred in the state’s coastal plain partly because this part of the state has a majority of and the largest wetlands, according to the Wetland Program Plan.

Large permitted impacts in Beaufort, Carteret, Lenoir and Wilson counties were related to activities such as mining, aquafarming, industrial and commercial development, and reservoir creation.

Permit applicants in those instances were required to mitigate wetland impacts through a variety of ways, including preservation, restoration, creation, or in-lieu fees.

Wetland impacts from human activity that does not have to be permitted and impacts from climate change have resulted in the loss of nearly 135,000 acres of nontidal, freshwater wetlands in the coastal plain between 1996 and 2016, according to aerial imagery collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Coastal Change Analysis Program.

The greatest loss has been forested wetlands.

According to that same data, there has been a loss of 144 acres of estuarine wetlands since 2006.

The loss of those wetlands was initially attributed to the conversion of wetlands to agriculture, uplands and development, “but are more recently due to conversions to unconsolidated shorelines (2006-2016) and open water (2011-2016), most likely caused by sea level rise, erosion from increasingly frequent and intense storms, and water quality degradation,” according to information provided by DEQ.

The updated Wetland Program Plan includes goals and future directives to monitor the impacts of human-induced and natural events on wetlands to evaluate trends in the number of wetlands and the quality of those wetlands.

The plan also focuses on voluntary restoration and protection of wetlands through state-provided project guidance, low-interest loans and grant funding for proposed projects.

North Carolina’s estuaries were teeming with oysters 150 years ago. In the time since, a combination of factors has caused oyster populations to decline.

Development, urbanization, point and nonpoint source pollution, intensive farming, harvest pressure, and increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events such as freezing temperatures, hurricanes, heavy rains and prolonged winds have all contributed to the loss, said state marine ecologist Jason Peters.

As supervisor of North Carolina’s cultch planting program, Peters has been heading up an effort by the Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Marine Fisheries to rebuild the oyster population.

“Cultch planting is an oyster restoration technique employed by many states along the East and Gulf coasts to return hard bottom habitat to our estuaries. This hard-bottom habitat, usually in the form of oyster shell of fossilized limestone marl, is placed in areas with suitable conditions for recruitment, growth and survival of oysters,” said Peters, who also supervises the state’s artificial reefs and oyster sanctuaries program. “The objective of this program is to mitigate habitat loss from harvest or natural events by establishing new, successful oyster reefs.”

Fleckenstein heads up the statewide Oyster Restoration and Protection Plan for North Carolina: A Blueprint for Action. The federation was set to announce Tuesday the fourth edition of the blueprint, which provides direction and guidance for restoration, management and economic development strategies to benefit to the environment and economy for the next five years.

“Areas planted with cultch material provide a foundation for new oyster growth. As the oyster reefs grow, they provide homes for other fish, help to filter the water in the sound and as they are harvested, they support our local economy and culture — food, filter, fish as we like to refer to it,” she said.

Since 2008, on average, the Division of Marine Fisheries has gradually increased annual deployment volumes of cultch with some fluctuations. In 2020, the division planted an unofficial total of 323,589 bushels, about 20% greater than the 10-year rolling average, Peters said.

Cultch reefs, as with all oyster reefs, benefit habitat and estuaries by providing a suite of ecosystem services such as water filtration, refuge for fish, crabs and other invertebrates, foraging grounds for predator species, sediment stabilization, and wave attenuation, Peters said. “To some degree, these artificially developed oyster reefs may also help alleviate harvest pressure on more fragile natural reefs nearby.”

Cultch planting in North Carolina has been taking place since 1915, more than 100 years, in some form or fashion, he continued. Since then, more than 22 million bushels of cultch has been planted to develop thousands of sites and likely tens of thousands of acres of habitat.

“I should note though, that cultch habitat is not necessarily long-lived – about five years or so — so much of that acreage has come and gone,” he said. Now, the effort is a bit more organized and receives broad support from the public to the General Assembly, which provides 100% of the funding for cultch planting.

“General Assembly funding helps place North Carolina as a national leader in oyster restoration. Without this support, large-scale cultch planting and oyster restoration would not be possible,” he said.

He noted than in 2018, the state became one of nine to join the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Shellfish Initiative, “galvanizing support of local, state, and federal leadership to promote sustainable seafood, shellfish restoration, and clean water.”

The cultch planting program constructs expansive reef sites open for commercial or recreational harvest.

“Many commercial harvesters request the locations of cultch planting sites and others report successful harvests. For recreational anglers, these areas serve as excellent fishing grounds for popular sport fish such as trout, flounder and red drum,” Peters said.

Chris Cuthrell, an oysterman and crabber in the state’s northeast region, said cultch planting is a big help to the industry.

“The cultch planting helps give the spats somewhere to attach to help them start growing. When the shells on the bottom get covered in slime or any other growth that prohibits the oyster larvae from attaching to the shells then there is no new growth for the future,” he explained.

“The cultch program assures that there is a clean surface for it to attach to. This winter most of the boats in our area worked on places that started out as clutch planting areas. This is a big help to our industry because a lot of the natural beds have been spread out and the shells have sunk in the mud or become an unsuitable place for the spats to attach to. In my opinion the cultch planting program is vital to sustain the wild oyster stock.”

Peters explained that the division’s mission is to manage fisheries resources for sustainable use, which steers how cultch planting plans are developed. As part of that, the division reaches out annually to the public for suggestions on locations for oyster cultch planting.

“Each year, division staff evaluate decades of cultch planting data and utilize university research and mapping tools to select suitable sites for cultch planting within federally authorized areas. Before finalizing our proposed locations, we hold a series of public meetings to gather local knowledge from harvesters and other stakeholders to tweak our plans,” he said. These meetings are typically held later in the year.

Ted Wilgis, senior coastal specialist at the federation’s southeast office in Wrightsville Beach, reiterated that it’s important to have the public share their experiences and expertise with division staff to help guide cultch locations.

There’s a lot of people who hold shellfish licenses in the southern area of the state, and it’s important for these harvesters to give locations of where the oysters are being taken, Wilgis said.

“DMF knows what waterbody the shells are mostly coming from, but they don’t know all the spots,” he said. If shellfish lease holders shared the areas they harvest, the division can keep an eye on the population as well as show the General Assembly continued public interest in the project.

Wilgis added that when the division asks for comment, it’s an opportunity to voice conflict with an area or request a location. If people have any issues with potential locations because it’s their favorite kayaking or paddleboarding spot or if a fishing guide has noticed a spot is being depleted that was once plentiful, this is the time to speak up.

Wilgis said that the federation partners with the division in the sense that they’re trying to support the program by providing resources, helping work with legislators to support funding for the program, demonstrate its need, and look for ways to bring more resources and stakeholders to the process.

“We definitely do everything we can to support the program and look for ways that make it even more effective,” Wilgis said.

Cultch planting is important in state waters, especially in the southern and central regions, Wilgis said. “We’re what’s called ‘substrate limited,’ meaning with oysters, we have a fair amount of larvae in the water, which is good, but they need a place to land.”

The southeast and central areas have only about 6% of the shellfishing waters in the state but produce about 40 to 50% of the wild harvest annually, Wilgis said. Because of such a small area producing so many of oysters, the pressure is hard on the reefs, which is why enough material needs to be put back in the water to balance what is being taken out for harvest.

And, he added, “oyster reefs are great places to fish and so it also supports recreational and other commercial fisheries.”

He said that without the material being replaced, it becomes harder and harder to harvest oysters. They’re starting to see a greater decline in landings and in the population.

Wilgis said the federation is also supporting the program through shell recycling and bringing more attention to the North Carolina Oyster Trail, which provides tourism experiences focused on oysters.

Peters recognized the work that goes into this program and saluted “the talented and hardworking staff who perform this work every year. The planning, development, and implementation of cultch planting requires expertise from trained scientists to heavy equipment operators and master captains. The division gathers this expertise from a surprisingly small staff, who literally and figuratively move mountains to make cultch planting a success. Those folks are the unsung heroes of this great effort.”

Advocates say the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries’ new Shellfish Lease Restoration Permit, or SLRP, will make it easier for shellfish farmers, particularly those who cultivate oysters, to participate in restoration projects.

The restoration permit took effect April 12. Oyster farmers who apply can farm oysters on their leases to be used at restoration sites. Oysters that are farmed for human consumption must comply with stricter regulations in order to ensure safety. Officials said the conditions for the new permit were developed in a way to eliminate risk to public health in the cultivation of oysters not intended for human consumption. The permit is free, and an application is available online.

Before the restoration permit became an option, there was no clear legal pathway for oyster farmers to grow product for restoration.

For oyster farmers like Niels Lindquist, the permit is a game-changer.

“It’s really potentially a big deal,” Lindquist said.

Lindquist is co-founder of Sandbar Oyster Co., which is based in Morehead City and has a special focus on restoration. Lindquist was one of the first oyster farmers to submit an application for the restoration permit last week. He said oysters are a key aspect of restoration, but up until now, there had not been a clear way for farmers to participate in restoration projects without accidentally breaking the rules.

“It really wasn’t clear what (the rules) were,” Lindquist said. “I really have to hand it to them, to see this issue and the opportunity that was there for people to use oysters grown on leases for restoration and find the quickest way of getting North Carolina in that game.”

Oysters are key actors in restoration projects. They form reefs that serve as protective habitats for other species and guard against erosion. They are also a significant boon for water quality — the average adult oyster can filter up to 50 gallons of water in a single day.

And yet, for all of those benefits, previous legislation had never designated a clear pathway for shellfish farmers to sell their product to be used in restoration projects. The laws in place all focus on regulating shellfish cultivation for human consumption. So, in lieu of live product from oyster farms, many restoration efforts implement the use of oyster shells. The goal is that oyster shells, rock or cement will act as substrate, or the surface upon which organisms like oysters can grow, and will attract wild oyster larvae that will colonize the substrate.

But the process can take years to be effective. External factors can inhibit recruitment rate. Being able to transport live oysters to restoration sites provides a clearer pathway toward restoration.

Division of Marine Fisheries Habitat and Enhancement Section Chief Jacob Boyd said that the permit option was largely inspired by the onset of the coronavirus pandemic. Widespread restaurant closures posed a threat to the oyster industry, which had a large yield and no one to sell to. The division began meeting with other stakeholders to try and find a creative solution for farmers in the shellfish industry.

“We wanted to try to figure out a way to legally allow growers to use shellfish grown on a shellfish lease to be able to sell that product to be placed on a restoration site,” Boyd said. “Because at that time, we did not have an avenue to do that legally.”

Things came together in almost exactly one year — exceedingly quick, compared to similar endeavors. The division had to carefully work around state and federal laws and officials didn’t want to put shellfish farmers in legal jeopardy, while still ensuring public health and safety. If they could pull it off, it could offer economic security to farmers and support ongoing restoration projects along the coast.

“I very apprehensively say ‘win-win’ in my line of work,” Boyd said. “I definitely think this would be considered a win-win for everyone.”

The North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review Online, manages multiple ongoing restoration projects and was a strong advocate for the new permit. Currently, oysters are highly valued for what they literally bring to the table, and restaurants and seafood markets drive the oyster industry. But according to the federation’s founder and executive director, Todd Miller, the value of oysters goes so much deeper. Oysters are key players in ongoing restoration projects, and this new permit will change the way restoration is planned going forward.

“I think this concept of the farms actually being a source of oysters for restoration is a relatively new one,” Miller said.

The federation was a key participant in the working groups of the past year that made the new permit possible.

“We were reached out to basically by the industry to help facilitate the discussion of what could be done to make all of this work better,” Miller said.

According to Miller, the federation would like to see North Carolina’s oyster farming industry continue to grow. The restoration permit could aid in that goal by providing growers with another means of revenue.

For farmers like Lindquist, the permit protects and expands his options for participating in restoration projects. It could encourage other oyster farmers to get involved in restoration as well.

“I think it’s nice to have the option to diversify,” Lindquist said. “Having another product line there is, from a business perspective, a wonderful thing to have in your pocket.”

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.

NAVASSA — The first round of restoration and conservation projects designed to offset environmental damage at the former Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. site have been selected, with work to begin on some of the alternatives as early as this fall.

In all, 10 restoration alternatives are included in Phase 1 of the Kerr-McGee Natural Resource Trustees’ final restoration plan and environmental assessment.

The alternatives total more than $12 million worth of land purchases and work, including habitat restoration and enhancement. That figure is about half of the $23 million in restoration funds the trustees received in a 2014 settlement.

Five of those projects are within Navassa where, for nearly four decades, a wood-treatment plant was operated under various companies. Wood at the plant was treated with creosote, a gummy, tar-like substance.

Habitat restoration specialist Howard Schnabolk with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, said projects could have been found way up and down the Cape Fear River from the site, but the goal was to keep the focus closer to the Brunswick County town.

“In this case we were able to identify several projects right in the community in Navassa and then we have a few on the outlining edges, but it is a goal to get close to where the injury was,” he said. “We slowed down considerably to try to do projects in the town.”

The more than 254-acre property was added to the National Priorities List of federal Superfund sites in 2010 because creosote contamination was discovered in the groundwater, soil and sediment.

The Kerr McGee Natural Resource Trustees began looking at restoration possibilities in 2009 with the directive to focus on creating, restoring and enhancing riverine habitat, coastal wetlands and underwater, intertidal, or shoreline habitat, and migratory fish passage.

In their environmental assessment, the trustees, which include NOAA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the state Department of Environmental Quality, determined that concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, in the site sediments were enough to cause harm to organisms living in, on or close to the contaminated sediment.

PAHs are a class of chemicals that occur naturally in coal, crude oil and gasoline, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

The trustees accepted a number of suggested alternatives from everyone from town officials and residents to environmental and conservation groups.

Land Management Group, an environmental and land-use consulting firm in Wilmington, aided the town in conceptualizing some of the alternatives that were selected in the final plan of phase one.

“We’ve been working on these for a long time,” Land Management Group President Christian Preziosi said. “We’ve done a lot of work with the town of Navassa and know the folks over at the town pretty well. I’m very excited about this kind of move into that next stage and seeing these properties get into conservation.”

This is a particularly crucial time for the town to be able to preserve natural habitat and historically significant heritage areas.

Navassa is anticipating a development boom, including two major subdivisions.

“The timing of it, I think, is just great for the town to be able to capture these sites and get them into conservation at this moment because there’s definitely high development pressure in that area,” Preziosi said.

Barnes Sutton, the town’s planning director, agreed.

“We know that by any investment in our community it’s going to attract interest and it’s going to likely promote growth,” he said. “What we wanted to make sure we did with these projects is that we were securing public lands in our community. We were happy to see that the majority of the ones that we selected and submitted were chosen.”

Phase 1 projects

The 10 alternatives selected for Phase 1 of the final plan include the following:

• Alligator Creek Restoration and Conservation. The focus of this project is to restore about a 3,900-foot reach along the creek and adjacent tidal wetlands to increase tidal amplitude and reestablish subtidal and intertidal bottom habitat and primary nursery area. This project will also control and restrict the growth of phragmites, an invasive species. Estimated cost: $2.6 million.
• Battleship North Carolina “Living With Water.” In this alternative, 800 linear feet of estuarine intertidal shoreline will be restored and 2 acres of tidal marsh will be created followed by long-term monitoring. The project will be designed to provide habitat for juvenile fish species, restore or expand the benthic invertebrate community within tidal marsh habitats at the Kerr-McGee site, and deter flooding. Estimated cost: $1.3 million. That figure includes $683,931 from the trustees and $645,000 in matching funds.
• Carolina Beach State Park Restoration. This project will include the restoration of benthic and estuarine habitat and 13.5 acres of tidal marsh by building a living shoreline of offshore and intertidal and subtidal oyster reef habitat. The living shoreline will include about 5 acres to stabilize erosion. Estimated cost: $1.9 million, which includes $105,000 in matching funds.
• Indian Creek Natural Resource Restoration and Conservation Project. Located on about 310 acres a little more than 3 miles from the Kerr-McGee site, this alternative includes restoring, enhancing and preserving habitats endemic to the Lower Cape Fear region. Work will be done along a 1.75-mile stretch of the creek. More than 140 acres of tidal freshwater marsh and tidal cypress-gum swamp and about 40 acres of 100-foot buffers along the creek and Molls Branch will be protected. The project will also include refurbishing the Halls Landing boat ramp and installing a kayak and fishing ramp. Estimated cost: $2.4 million, including $110,000 in matching funds.
• Lower Black River Conservation. This project is designed to conserve about 500 acres of property that will be managed as part of the Black River Preserve, which includes more than 5,200 acres. Estimated cost: $100,000, an amount that would be added toward the total purchase price.
• Lower Cape Fear Bottomlands Conservation. Under this alternative, more than 1,000 acres of relatively pristine riverine habitat along 3.5 miles of the Cape Fear River and nearly a mile along Indian Creek will be purchased for conservation. Estimated cost: $1.5 million.
• Merrick Creek Conservation. About 250 acres of swamp forest and 2.5 miles of buffer along Merrick Creek will be purchased for conservation under this alternative. The land is 1 stream-mile upstream from the Northeast Cape fear River in Pender County. Estimated cost: $206,450.
• Moze Heritage Site Tidal Restoration. This alternative is within the Kerr-McGee site. The project will include enhancing riverine swamp forest, preserving and rehabilitating historic rice field dikes, and incorporating walking trails, a viewing dock and a pier with a kayak launch. Estimated cost: $241,500.
• Navassa Stormwater and Riparian Restoration. This project will include the development of a stormwater management plan for the town and conserving and restoring riparian wetlands and buffers. Estimated cost: $1.25 million.
• Navassa Waterfront Park. This project is immediately south of Navassa’s town hall and community center and will establish access to land water along Sturgeon and Mill creeks within walking distance of town facilities. The plan calls for securing about 50 acres of tidal wetland through a conservation easement and using an additional 21 acres for a community park with access to bordering waterways. Estimated cost: $1.5 million.

Schnabolk said the trustees are looking forward to receiving ideas for alternatives for Phase 2.

“We’re happy that we were able to get these projects approved and on the ground, but the clock’s ticking,” he said. “I think around the New Year we’re going to make an effort to look at another round of projects. Our approach from the start is we’re on a rolling mission. If somebody has a restoration idea in the community, reach out to the trustees so we can evaluate it.”

Restoration ideas may be submitted by email at howard.schnabolk@noaa.gov or mailed to:

Howard Schnabolk

℅ NOAA Restoration Center

2234 South Hobson Ave

Charleston, SC 29405

Learn more

• Read the restoration plan and environmental assessment

Nine projects in coastal North Carolina have been awarded millions in funding to go toward improving community resilience and wildlife habitat.

The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, or NFWF, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office for Coastal Management announced March 17 more than $43 million in grants have been awarded to 27 natural and nature-based infrastructure projects nationwide.

The projects are to help recover from hurricanes Michael and Florence, Typhoon Yutu, and the California coastal wildfires of 2018, which together caused more than $50 billion in damage and severely degraded a range of wildlife habitats.

These projects are expected to protect or enhance more than 20 miles of shoreline and nearly 8,000 acres of wildlife habitat and will use nature-based infrastructure such as living shorelines, wetlands, dunes, coastal forests, floodplain habitat and coral reefs to achieve the dual benefits of improving human community resilience while also improving the ecological integrity of coastal ecosystems that enhance fish and wildlife habitats, according to the announcement.

“This new Emergency Coastal Resilience Fund supports conservation projects that strengthen natural systems at a scale that will help protect coastal communities in the states that were impacted by these disasters from the future impacts of storms, floods, wildfires and other natural hazards,” said Jeff Trandahl, CEO and executive director of NFWF, in a statement. “These same projects also improve the ecological integrity and functionality of coastal ecosystems to support populations of fish and wildlife.”

In addition to the nine projects in North Carolina, projects in Alabama, California, Florida, South Carolina, Virginia and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands received funding. These projects will also receive more than $54.7 million in funds from other sources, or matching funds, to generate a total conservation impact of nearly $98 million.

“We must renew and build resilient coastal communities if we are to strengthen and grow our nation’s Blue Economy,” said retired Navy Rear Adm. Tim Gallaudet, deputy NOAA administrator. “These grants are essential to helping sustain the well being of the citizens affected by these natural disasters. Vibrant coasts power American prosperity.”

The North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, under the state Department of Environmental Quality, is among the recipients for their project, Overcoming Local Barriers to Implementation and Getting to Shovel Readiness.

The state Department of Environmental Quality, which is partnering with North Carolina Office of Recovery and Resiliency, North Carolina Sea Grant and The Nature Conservancy, has been awarded $1,141,050. Matching funds are $830,000 for a total of $1,971,050.

The division was awarded the more than $1.1 million to develop a habitat resilience plan for the Rachel Carson Reserve in Carteret County and engineering for two projects to protect the reserve and the neighboring town of Beaufort.

“The Division of Coastal Management is focused on improving the resilience of our communities and natural resources to coastal storms and flooding,” said Division Director Braxton Davis in a release about the project. “We are grateful for the financial support for these projects, which will help local governments prioritize and plan for strategic infrastructure investments, and to have shovel-ready projects prepared when future funding opportunities arise.”

The North Carolina Coastal Federation, in partnership with Carteret Community College and the North Carolina Department of Transportation, received more than $2.7 million for the project, Protecting Education Infrastructure, Critical State Roadways and Estuarine Habitats with Living Shorelines. Matching funds are $2,894,489 for a total of $5,613,838.

The project is to install three large living shorelines that will protect community infrastructure as well as restore and protect vital salt marsh and oyster habitat in Bogue Sound and the White Oak River, totaling 3,518 feet of saltwater marsh living shorelines, protecting and restoring more than 23 acres of salt marsh, oyster and upland habitat, according to NFWF.

The large-scale living shorelines will be built to protect the causeway on N.C. 24 between Swansboro and Cedar Point, which serves as a storm evacuation route and is heavily used by the Marine Corps, and to protect the community college campus from imminent storm destruction by shoreline erosion. Through this effort, 2,100 linear feet of crucial road and college campus infrastructure will be protected from future storms.

“We are thrilled to be a recipient of this grant and are eager to protect these shorelines from future erosion from storms while at the same time preserve and restore critical salt marsh and oyster habitat. Living shorelines are a more effective, economical and longer term technique to protect shorelines from erosion when compared to bulkheads and seawalls,” Lexia Weaver, coastal scientist, said in a news release from the federation.

Living shorelines help reduce shoreline erosion while protecting and restoring salt marsh and oyster habitat. They have proven to fare better through hurricanes and storms than bulkheads or seawalls, are less expensive and require little to no maintenance once established, according to the federation.

Congress provided funding under the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2019, allowing grants to be awarded through this partnership. NFWF and NOAA launched the Emergency Coastal Resilience Fund in August 2019 two months after Congress passed the emergency supplemental appropriations bill that directed this money to help impacted communities recover more quickly and be more prepared for future events.

NFWF provided the following information on other projects in North Carolina:

Brunswick Town Fort Anderson Shoreline Restoration

The North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources has been awarded $2,002,500. Matching Funds are $1,516,669 for a total of $3,519,169. The project is to install a living shoreline to protect 1,000 feet along the Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson State Historic Site by attenuating wave action and mitigating erosion. Project will protect and provide salt marsh and oyster habitat, and safeguard the site’s historical resources.

Building Adaptive Shorelines for Resilient Coastal Communities

The Carteret County Shore Protection Office has been awarded $1,513,500. Matching funds are $1,514,941, for a total of $3,028,441. The project is to construct living shorelines to naturally stabilize and protect 3,800 linear feet of eroding estuarine shorelines at two important project sites within Carteret County. Project will enable the communities of Beaufort and Down East to enhance existing resilient infrastructure, and protect important fish, shellfish, submerged aquatic vegetation habitat and the largest colony of nesting royal terns in North Carolina.

Clear Run Branch Drainage Improvement and Stream Restoration

Wilmington has been awarded $1,410,345. Matching funds are $4,500,000 for a total of $5,910,345. The project is to build a stable stream channel that can safely accommodate high flows from upstream development during storms and alleviate flooding along the channel. The project will improve wildlife habitat and decrease flood risk through stream and floodplain restoration or enhancement of 7.5 acres of floodplain habitat and 5,900 feet of stream channel.

Shoreline Restoration and Tidal Wetland Creation at the Battleship North Carolina

The USS North Carolina Battleship Commission has been awarded $1,250,000. Matching funds are $1,583,931 for a total of $2,833,931. The project is to restore 800 feet of estuarine intertidal shoreline and create about 2 acres of intertidal estuarine marsh habitat within a North Carolina Significant Natural Heritage Area. The project will remove and reconnect 2 acres of existing parking lot to the Cape Fear River, resulting in 2 acres of tidal wetland creation to build resilience.

Restoring Pocosin Hydrology to Improve Flood Resiliency and Wildlife Habitat

The Nature Conservancy has been awarded $820,644. Matching funds are $220,314 for a total of $1,040,958. The project is to restore hydrologic conditions across 7,500 acres of drained headwater pocosin wetlands on the southern portion of Angola Bay Game Land. Project will produce a finalized design and install restoration infrastructure that will enable managers to effectively control drainage levels, providing community flood resilience benefits in the Northeast Cape Fear River floodplain while enhancing pocosin wetland habitat.

Enhancing Aquatic Connectivity Resiliency and Flood Capacity in the Black River Watershed

Cape Fear Resource Conservation and Development has been awarded $500,000. Matching Funds are $500,000 for a $1,000,000 total. The project is to replace two culverts to enhance up to 2 miles of stream habitat within the lower Black River basin to improve aquatic connectivity resilience and flood capacity for local coastal communities and fish habitat. Project will improve drainage in these areas and decrease the likelihood of over-bank flooding and road overwash during storms.

North Duck Village Living Shoreline

Duck in Dare County has been awarded $384,011. Matching funds are $384,011, for a total of $768,022. The funds will be used to construct 1,100 feet of sheet pile sill and restore eroded wetlands along the shoreline of Currituck Sound. Project will create a more resilient coastal edge, improve coastal habitat, and protect the adjacent sidewalk, bike lane and road that serve as the primary transportation artery.

BEAUFORT – This Carteret County town has worked with state, county and federal partners and organizations in recent years to remove litter from its waterways, but officials here have recently taken another step toward the cleanup by endorsing a new, collaborative plan to address the marine debris problem.

As rain drenched the town Monday, about two dozen ducked into the visitor entryway of Beaufort’s town hall to hear Mayor Rett Newton read aloud a proclamation adopted Monday in support of the 2020 North Carolina Marine Debris Action Plan that was released in January.

The plan was initiated in 2017 by the North Carolina Coastal Federation and is a collaborative effort with the North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve, North Carolina Sea Grant, Onslow County Solid Waste and North Carolina Marine Debris Symposium. It was developed to provide a framework for the next five years to “strategically reduce the amount of marine debris and its impacts in coastal North Carolina through tangible and measurable actions.”

In an email announcing the event, Newton explains that Beaufort is the first community to actively endorse and continue to pursue the five goals outlined in the plan, which are leading and coordinating with partners and stakeholders to engage the plan, prevent marine debris, remove debris, prevent and remove abandoned and derelict vessels and conduct research and assessment.

Before reading the proclamation endorsing the plan, Newton noted there were “lots of different people with lots of different interests in marine debris” in attendance. Attendees included representatives from the Coastal Federation, Down East Council, University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences, Carteret County Chamber of Commerce, Cape Lookout National Seashore, Beaufort Board of Commissioners, state Division of Coastal Management, North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve and the business community.

Reading from the proclamation, Newton said that the town is working to clean up its waterways “as part of a North Carolina Clean Water Coastal Community initiative to improve the health and prosperity of our town” and is “already taking active measures in accordance with the action plan’s five primary goals.”

The proclamation notes challenges ahead but also acknowledges the partnership with county, state, and national organizations to continue the effort.

Coastal Federation Director Todd Miller told attendees that the blueprint outlined in the plan is a proactive, five-year strategy for preventing more marine debris throughout the coastal area as well as cleaning up what’s already out there in more effective ways.

“I think we all realize after the recent hurricanes just how far behind the eight ball we were in terms of really dealing with this problem, and this is trying to get out ahead of it,” Miller said.

With the town’s proclamation, Miller said he was hopeful for a new tidal wave of local government support for the effort. “This is important not only to the people that come visit this area, but it’s important to the residents that we have an environment that’s safe and good for the wildlife and the people that are here.”

Newton said that after the town’s cleanup that followed Hurricane Florence in September 2018, “where we pulled up 11 derelict vessels, 120,000 pounds of marine debris, 34 illegal moorings, seven car tires, we want to continue to clean up our waterways. And this North Carolina marine debris plan gives us the structure to be able to do this.

“This has taken years to compile and we greatly appreciate the Coastal Federation, Department of Coastal Management, the North Carolina Coastal Reserve, the waterkeepers and all the other partners part of putting this action plan together. And so, this is a really great step,” he continued. “This is really important because the current, vast amount of debris going into our waterways, it’s bad for public health. It’s bad for ecosystem health, and it’s bad for commerce. So, we need to reverse this. And it’s going to take all of us to do this.”

Paula Gillikin, central sites manager for the North Carolina Coastal Reserve & National Estuarine Research Reserve, has been in on the effort with the Coastal Federation since the plan’s beginning. Gillikin has been battling marine debris at the Rachel Carson Reserve in Beaufort since she became the site manager more than 10 years ago.

The N.C. Coastal Reserve & National Estuarine Research Reserve is part of the state Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Coastal Management. The network of 10 protected sites was established for long-term research, education and stewardship.

Gillikin told Coastal Review Online that marine debris is one of the top management issues for the Rachel Carson Reserve, and that it was also a problem for other sites, including the Wilmington area’s Masonboro Island Reserve and Zeke’s Island National Reserve.

She said reserve officials started learning from partners and through research they were conducting that big items, such as sections of docks, were washing up and smothering the marshes, potentially killing them. While marshes can revegetate, it takes time, during which organisms lose their natural habitats.

Having town support for the plan “feels surreal,” Gillikin said, likening the approval to a gold-star achievement. She said the support can largely be attributed to “a really careful” strategic process.

“It felt like we were going at a snail’s pace at times but that was by design: Slow down to speed up your effectiveness at the end of the day. We started out exploring the issues early and understanding who was involved and then trying to think of how we would address it with others.”

Over the last few years, several organizations have worked together to create the North Carolina Marine Debris Action Plan, the first of its kind for the state.

The plan, which was made public Jan. 14 and outlines how to prevent and remove marine debris along the state’s coast, was created by a team made up of representatives from the North Carolina Coastal Federation, North Carolina Coastal Reserve & National Estuarine Research Reserve, North Carolina Sea Grant, Onslow County Solid Waste, Coastal Carolina Riverwatch and the North Carolina Marine Debris Symposium.

“The overall purpose of the action plan is to guide work over the next five years that will strategically reduce the amount of marine debris and its impacts in coastal North Carolina through tangible and measurable actions,” according to the plan.

Sara Hallas, coastal education coordinator with the federation, explained Jan. 16 to the more than two dozen attending the four-day North Carolina Marine Debris Symposium held in the Duke University Marine Lab library auditorium that the completed action plan has five goals, with the first focusing on getting the plan in motion.

The other goals of the plan are to prevent marine debris, remove debris, prevent and remove abandoned and derelict vessels, and conduct research and assessment going forward.

Hallas told Coastal Review Online that the next step for the plan is to work toward accomplishing the five major goals over the next few years with actions that show results. The advisory and implementation committee created to finalize the plan and will be tasked with seeing through the next steps.

There’s no single agency or program responsible for coastwide marine debris management, the plan states.

The federation reached out in January 2017 to other organizations with a leadership role in marine debris projects along the coast and formed a team that includes Paula Gillikin, central sites manager for the North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve; Gloria Putnam, North Carolina Sea Grant; Lisa Rider, North Carolina Marine Debris Symposium and Coastal Carolina River Watch; and from the Coastal Federation, Hallas, Leslie Vegas, Sarah Bodin, Bonnie Mitchell, and Rachel Bisesi.

The team collected information and began developing an action plan for the state, Hallas said.

Rider created the North Carolina Marine Debris Symposium around 2012, she told Coastal Review Online in a follow-up interview.

“The symposium created a collaborative environment for stakeholders to work together to develop actions, “she said. “The plan is a nice new way to keep it organized. The plan also makes a nice point of reference to measure performance each year.”

Though the marine debris action plan complements the symposium’s goals, they’re separate, but there will always be time on the symposium agenda to showcase action plan performance, Rider explained.

During the next Marine Debris Symposium, time has been marked on the schedule for an update on the action plan. Those who attended this year’s symposium will receive in February a survey to provide feedback on the plan and the marine debris symposium as a whole.

Gillikin told the crowd in the marine lab’s library auditorium Jan. 16, “We don’t want this plan to go on a shelf and collect dust, we want it to be an action plan where we truly have momentum moving forward. We want to make sure that we are doing that also in parallel with the southeast regional plan, a lot of our strategies and actions are complementary to that plan.”

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 2019 Southeast Marine Debris Action Plan is a collection of recommended objectives, strategies and actions to address marine debris in Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina.

The leadership team for the North Carolina Marine Debris Action Plan distributed an online stakeholder survey in late summer 2017 to learn more about marine debris issues and collect information on programs or organizations that dealt the most with marine debris.

Gillikin said that the stakeholders were asked for two strategies or actions they could take or three issues that they think are most important at the end of the survey.

“And that was the very beginning of us starting to make a list of all of the strategies and actions that we would consider for the action plan,” she added.

Hallas said one takeaway from the surveys is that while there was a sizable number of groups that led volunteer cleanups, there needs to be a better way to collect data on what was collected. This lack of data, “is the underlying problem of understanding what’s out there and how big this problem really is for North Carolina.”

The results of the survey were shared at the 2017 marine debris symposium that fall. Gillikin said attendees were excited to see some of the results of the survey and to learn that work was being done on a marine debris plan. “The leadership team was feeling really positive coming out of that meeting because there’s so much energy and so much support moving forward with the action plan.”

Hallas said that they realized the leadership team and other stakeholders needed to meet more frequently and held additional workshops. A February 2018 workshop had the attendees split into groups to take on manageable and affordable projects that could begin immediately, such as the Debris Free NC social media campaign.

Coastal Education Coordinator Bonnie Mitchell joined in the Debris Free NC social media campaign effort in 2019 when she became part of the federation staff. She said that Debris Free NC provides education and highlights different debris cleanups along the coast and inland. Now that the action plan has been released, the social media campaign will highlight the plan and educate the public on actions being taken.

Gillikin said that groups holding cleanups or other efforts to address debris can tag Debris Free NC on social media to promote their event.

One group at the February 2018 workshop created public service announcements, another looked at how to address litter and marine debris in unincorporated areas, one group focused on Styrofoam and another group looked at data collection.

These projects launched during the workshop were included in the action plan because many are still taking place.

“The State of Marine Debris in North Carolina: An Assessment of Prevention and Removal Efforts,” released in November 2018, was put together by the leadership team and illustrates several types of problem debris including consumer waste, derelict fishing gear, abandoned and derelict vessels and that generated during storms.

The assessment, a complement to this newly released marine debris action plan, also showed that “managing marine debris issues is complex, often falling to multiple entities and jurisdictions on the local, state, and federal levels or no agency at all,” according to the marine debris action plan.

Gillikin said the state is starting to pay a lot of attention to the issue of marine debris and to the process of developing a plan, particularly for abandoned and derelict vessels.

Hallas told Coastal Review Online that the November 2018 assessment was shared with the North Carolina General Assembly, resulting in state funding for storm relief and cleanup as well as marine debris cleanups following Hurricane Florence.

“It was a great tool to show that without an overall state coordinator for marine debris, the agencies working on marine debris issues didn’t have the capacity to solve the problems Florence created with displaced wood debris and vessels,” she said.

Though the North Carolina Marine Debris Symposium was canceled in 2018 because of Hurricane Florence, the marine debris action plan stakeholders met again in February 2019 for the state Marine Debris Action Plan Workshop.

Beaufort Mayor Rett Newton told the attendees last week that during the 2019 workshop, he realized that while the federation is leading the effort, it is not a Coastal Federation problem, rather, “the problem of marine debris belongs to all of us. So, especially now that the action plan has been published, it’s incumbent upon all of us to kind of pick this up and run with it.”

Hallas said as the leadership team got closer to having a final plan, they wanted to involve more organizations. Last summer, they formed the advisory and implementation committee to oversee the action plans.

“We brought everyone together to ask some of the questions the leadership team wasn’t able to answer on their own and an effort to take those final steps in the confirming of the action plan,” Hallas said.

Following the symposium, Hallas told Coastal Review Online that it was a feeling of accomplishment to share the completed Marine Debris Action Plan.

“Reflecting back on the process to show the collaboration that took place to produce the final document also showed this networking is essential going forward to implement the action plan,” she said. “It was inspiring to meet new professionals at the symposium that are interested in getting more involved in helping advance the plan.”

Hallas said that the feedback received during the symposium was positive and energetic.

“Several attendees approached the leadership team to learn about ways to get more involved, and they were pleased to know these much-needed efforts were taking place to develop a strategy to reduce marine debris and its impacts,” she said.

Looking ahead, the leadership team plans to continue building a network of collaborating agencies that will make the action plan more successful.

“While developing the Action Plan, we made a concentrated effort to outline items that were necessary yet achievable. The fact that others are coming to us and asking how they can help, implies that we did something right to create an Action Plan that will be a useable tool, rather than a document forgotten on the bookshelf,” said Hallas.

For more information on the North Carolina Marine Debris Action Plan contact Hallas at 252-473-1607 or sarajh@nccoast.org.

This Q&A was first published Jan. 7 by The Pew Charitable Trusts. Coastal Review Online is reprinting this article as a followup to an original report in August 2018, just weeks after nursery operations began and less than a month before Hurricane Florence struck the coast, a temporary but significant setback for the business.

Like many states on the East Coast, North Carolina had a thriving wild oyster population until the mid-20th century when overharvesting, water pollution and habitat destruction began to take their toll. But in recent years, an oyster-farming movement has sparked economic and ecological benefits — and hope for wild oysters.

The Pew Charitable Trusts is working with partners in the state to advance oyster recovery, which can improve habitat and water quality, and protect shorelines from storms. To learn more, Pew spoke with Susan Hill, co-owner of Down East Mariculture, an oyster nursery on Jarrett Bay in Carteret County. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Q: What’s involved in growing oysters?

A: I usually order about 3 to 5 million oyster larvae from a hatchery in Virginia, and they arrive as a little black ball, about the size of a golf ball. Each larva is smaller than a grain of sand. We look at them under a microscope to make sure they’re alive and moving around. Since they’ve been refrigerated, it takes a little while for them to wake up.

We acclimate the larvae to the temperature and salinity of our larvae tanks, and then add them to the silos — barrels with screens in the bottom –with the goal of having each larva attach to one piece of micro cultch, ground up oyster shell that we spread on the screens. The average set rate is about 20 percent, so with 1 million larvae you’ll end up with about 200,000 spat—the name for tiny oysters. Twice a day, I feed them algae and very gently wash them; it’s like having little babies!

When they’re big enough, we move the larvae to our upwelling tanks, which allows them to feed on the algae and nutrients in the unfiltered bay water. After about six to eight weeks, they’re ready to hand off to fishermen who place them in bags or cages in the bay, and then do a lot of rotating, sorting, and thinning to help them grow. In another nine to 14 months, the oysters are ready for market.

Q: What made you decide to create an oyster nursery here?

A: When I was growing up here, the Willis Brothers’ Seafood building, what we used to just call Elmer’s clam house, was the center of business for eastern Carteret County, and an anchor for the community. After Elmer’s death in 1977, the building changed hands a few times and eventually became a dilapidated eyesore. The building was back on the market in 2015, and after three attempts, I finally had a contract. But I had no idea what to do with the building. I wanted to help the people and economy here and I learned that oyster farmers in North Carolina were having difficulty getting seed. My dad was a diesel engineer and commercial fisherman and, knowing how difficult that is, I really wanted to help the local fishermen do what they love. So my husband Robert and I decided on an oyster nursery.

When I began college in 1970, my plan was to be a marine biologist. However, I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes in 1971 and really couldn’t be out on the water. We didn’t even have glucose monitors back then. So I majored in biology and chemistry. And now, at 67, I’m getting to do what I wanted to do as a kid. And my son, John, and his wife, Adrianna, are our business partners. So, this is truly a family-owned and -operated business.

Q: It sounds like you have a strong connection to the history here

A: Yes, I remember fishermen unloading their catch on the docks behind the clam house. Women would shuck clams and scallops from early morning to early evening. I’ve often heard that in the 1940s, 5,000 gallons of clams were shipped out every week, trucked all over the country.

When we bought the building, I wanted to do something to honor the rich fishing heritage of our community. One idea I had was a mural. Then I met LaNelle (Davis), a mosaic artist, who recreated a photograph from the 1950s of women shucking clams here. To make the mosaic, she used dishes donated by family members of some of the people who worked here and clam shells reclaimed from our property. Folks from all over stop to admire LaNelle’s work. The community has been grateful for us bringing the building back to life and for honoring our heritage with the mural.

Q: What are the benefits of growing oysters?

A: Oysters are filter feeders, constantly cleaning the water and providing a healthier environment for marine life. Oyster reefs create habitats for marine life and help protect the coast from storms. Oyster farming provides local jobs and allows fishermen to continue doing what they love while providing healthy, local food.

Q: What’s going on in North Carolina right now when it comes to oysters?

A: The coast of North Carolina was hit hard by hurricanes Florence and Dorian. I hope people see oysters as a way to help protect the coast. Also, North Carolina is the sixth state in the nation to join the National Shellfish Initiative, run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The initiative prioritizes job creation, protection of water quality, protection of shellfish health, and sustainable management. And a Strategic Mariculture Plan, recently approved by the North Carolina General Assembly, charts a course to increase the state oyster industry from $7.5 million now to $100 million by 2030.

It’s an exciting time to be involved with our community and the growth of the oyster industry. I hope we can make some small contribution to move this worthwhile effort forward.

Now that the holidays are over and the work of natural Christmas trees is done, the trees can retire to the beach.

The live trees with all decorations removed are being collected up and down the coast to be used for dune restoration.

In Swansboro, natural trees with all decorations removed can be taken to Hammocks Beach State Park. Drop off trees during park hours 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. at the park maintenance area.

Jacob Vitak, park ranger with the state park, said the trees will be placed along the beach of the uninhabited Bear Island where sand dunes were before Hurricane Florence in 2018. That storm and other storms after leveled much of the dune line.

“These small pine trees act as a makeshift sand fence and it is a good way to put them to use. The park normally erects wooden fences in small areas to build new dunes. The fences and post cost money and we can offset that cost by using trees,” he told Coastal Review Online. “The trees are not as good as the fence, but they are free and can help get a new dune line started. We will be collecting trees at our maintenance area for a few more days. We will stop when we reach our capacity to move them to Bear Island.”

Fort Macon State Park in Atlantic Beach is again collecting Christmas trees for dune stabilization.

“All folks need to do is be sure to remove all Christmas ornaments and synthetic decorations like tinsel and then bring them to the park,” said Park Ranger Benjamin Fleming. When entering the park, signs are posted to direct visitors where the trees are needed.

“We take the trees out onto the beach where they very quickly start to accumulate windblown sand and usually within a couple of weeks they start to form small dunes,” he said. “Once the dunes start to grow other vegetation can take root, which helps to increase the dune stabilization, and it will start to grow larger.”

Fleming said that Fort Macon has had this program in place since the 1960s and “it is the reason why we now have the very popular recreation beach here on the inlet. It is also why we had very little direct damage to our visitor center and Fort Macon. Without the dunes we currently have, we might have received damage from storm surge like many other areas saw.”

He added that Fort Macon is not collecting Christmas wreaths because of the metal frames and is not collecting any other kind of yard debris.

Better Beaches OBX has been collecting trees since 2013 and is collecting Christmas trees this year for dune restoration projects on the Outer Banks.

“We are accepting them at Ocean Boulevard as well as at the Islander Motel in Nags Head. We could use a lot of help when we go to put them on the beach in Kitty Hawk and Nags Head after Jan. 18,” founder Donny King told Coastal Review Online. “We need either open trailers, pickup trucks, or empty work vans for transport as well as helping hands.”

The organization is currently raising funds to move 1,000 trees Chicho’s Pizza collected at their six locations in Virginia Beach, according to a Facebook post. The folks at Chicho’s are expecting to drop off the trees Jan. 18 and will help place the trees in areas on the beach. The fundraiser through Facebook is to rent a box truck for the following two weeks to transport the trees to various areas.

“With the rental of a Box Truck, we can better ensure that our volunteers can secure the trees in the best areas, making washouts less likely and giving us time to secure them so they don’t blow down the beach in bigger winds. We are also making biodegradable stakes for them where necessary,” the post states. “Any funds left over from the vehicle rental(s) will be used for more Beach Grass to plant in the areas where we put the trees as well.”

Also on the Outer Banks, Boy Scout Troop 117 in Kitty Hawk will pick up tinsel-free trees Saturday and Jan. 11.

Homeowners can make a $200 donation for the Scouts to put the trees on their dunes. Ten trees are recommended for narrow lots and 20 trees are recommended for wider lots. Tree pickup is free but the Scouts welcome donations. The donations go to protect the environment but also help provide resources for the Scouts.

The Scouts will place and the secure clean, decoration-free trees on the dune line. There are a limited number of reservations. Schedule a pickup or order dune protection at www.troop117obx.org/products.

Residents also have the option to drop off trees at Kitty Hawk Bath House, 3840 N. Virginia Dare Trail, in the grassy area or place in the right-of-way in front of residential houses for public works staff to pick up.

In Nags Head, residents can place their natural Christmas tree by the side of the road in front of their property throughout the month, according to the town. Workers will make several passes to collect the trees. Property owners and residents also have the option to drop the Christmas tree off at the bulk item/brush collection yard on Lark Avenue from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Mondays and Thursdays and 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Saturdays.

All Christmas trees that are collected by Nags Head or dropped off at the collection yard will be repurposed by Scouts.

In Southern Shores, Christmas trees may be placed in branch piles for collection, according to the town’s website.

While Dare County Public Works does not pick up Christmas trees left on the curbside in the unincorporated areas, residents can drop off trees at the Dare County Public Works Recycling Center at 1018 Driftwood Drive in Manteo, or at the Buxton Transfer Facility at 47027 Buxton Back Road, the county announced.

In Carolina Beach, the Surfrider Foundation Cape Fear Chapter and the town are holding the annual Christmas tree recycling and dune restoration project 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Jan. 25 at the Sand Piper Beach Access, per the Facebook page. The town collects the Christmas trees to be placed on the dunes during the event.

Volunteers should bring a shovel, tape measure and scissors for the yearly project that helps rebuild natural habitat, protect oceanfront property and divert the old trees from the landfill. There will be donuts from Wake N Bake Donuts and coffee from North End Cafe to-go. The Cape Fear chapter of the Surfrider Foundation and the town have worked together since 2011 to reuse the Christmas trees collected by the town to help sustain and expand the protective dune field.

New Hanover County residents can recycle their Christmas trees through Jan. 15. The real trees and wreaths can be dropped off at one of three locations in New Hanover County during daylight hours: Home Depot in Monkey Junction, Home Depot on Eastwood Road or the county landfill. Call 910-798-4400 for more information about the service that is a partnership of New Hanover County Environmental Management, the Wilmington Solid Waste Division and Home Depot.

Wilmington will recycle the Christmas trees of city trash customers, according to the city’s website. All decorations and lights from the tree must be removed before putting the tree curbside with any other vegetative debris on normal service day.

Brunswick County Landfill is recycling natural Christmas trees at no charge through Jan. 31. The trees can also be dropped off at a county convenience center for $5. String lights and cords can be recycled at the convenience centers year-round, according to the county. Brunswick County adds the recycled trees to yard waste and made into mulch, which is available to residents for free.

Know of other programs collecting trees? Send the information to jennifera@nccoast.org to be included.

Typically, once a landowner learns about living shorelines, one of the first questions is “How much does it cost?”

Cost is the question that dominates the living shoreline conversation. The answer isn’t all that straightforward.

Baseline numbers presented at workshop recently held in Beaufort point to the standard living shoreline being the less expensive option to help reduce shoreline erosion.

But first, what is a living shoreline?

Lexia Weaver, coastal scientist and central regional manager with the North Carolina Coastal Federation, told Coastal Review Online that living shorelines are environmentally friendly shoreline stabilization techniques that help reduce shoreline erosion while protecting and restoring valuable salt marsh and oyster habitat at the same time. The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review Online.

Living shorelines have several benefits including reducing and dissipating wave energy rather than reflecting it, reducing scour of both the salt marsh wetlands and uplands, and incorporating natural elements such as salt marsh grasses and oysters, which naturally function to protect shorelines from erosion, and benefit fish and shellfish habitat. The salt marsh grasses and oysters also help to improve water quality through their filtering capabilities.

And, living shorelines can weather the storm. Weaver said that living shorelines fare better during hurricanes and storms than bulkheads or seawalls, are less expensive, and require little to no attention once established.

Depending on site conditions, there are a variety of methods and materials that are used to build living shorelines.

“Living shoreline construction typically involves the planting of salt marsh grasses alone, or in combination with a slightly offshore structure comprised of oyster shells or rock that is placed parallel to the shoreline to reduce wave energy,” Weaver said.

As for cost, Weaver said, that’s hard to determine because the cost varies depending on site conditions and materials and whether volunteers are used rather than paid contractors.

“In North Carolina, ballpark, I would say that living shorelines made with bags of recycled oyster shells are about $75 per foot and those made with granite rock are about $350 per foot. The cost of bulkheads also varies with conditions and typically ranges from $200-$450 per foot,” she said.

Those numbers are similar to what Joshua Merritt, field ecologist, and Grainger Coughtrey, forestry technician, with Carolina Silvics Inc. presented during the two-day Living Shoreline Tech Transfer workshop recently held in Beaufort, hosted by Restore America’s Estuaries and the Coastal Federation.

Established in 1999 as a forestry and natural resources contracting firm, Carolina Silvics has been working with the federation for 14 years on many of the conservation organization’s projects. In 2017, the combination of a slow season for Carolina Silvics and increased demand for living shorelines pushed the firm into the new business venture.

Carolina Silvics specializes in offshore sill and marsh toe revetments, Merritt said. Offshore sills consist of bags that are placed just off the shoreline to help rebuild eroded shorelines. Marsh toe revetments are bags placed up against marsh grass shoreline to protect the property from further damage.

Coughtrey explained that there have been challenges transitioning living shorelines into a business including securing materials, minimizing footprint and pricing must be affordable and appealing to the landowner while also allowing Carolina Silvics to make a profit.

“Shoreline pricing depends on how long it will take and how long the shoreline will be,” he said.

Merritt said that bulkheads usually start at about $135 per foot of length but actual prices paid are generally more expensive than that starting price. Bulkheads are often damaged during storms and repairs can be expensive. In addition, bulkheads direct wave energy toward neighbors’ properties, accelerating their shoreline erosion.

The starting price for bagged oyster shell living shorelines is $75 per foot. “We started living shorelines three years ago and, through two hurricanes, they have proved their durability after and during large storms with minor damage,” Merritt said.

Merritt added that the price will increase depending on what type of shoreline selected. “Offshore sills are generally more expensive than marsh-covered revetment and the degree of escarpment will affect the price of materials.”

Coughtrey said that there is some early-on maintenance required after the shoreline is built and a storm can affect the shoreline before it is fully established, but living shorelines have a proven track record. “We all know that storms are getting stronger, we’ve had huge hurricanes in the past year and we’ve had shorelines that have survived those,” he said.

Riprap revetments start at $90 per foot, Merritt explained. Concrete is cheaper to use but not as durable as granite, the preferred material, he said.

The cost of breakwaters starts at $90 per foot and these structures require a major permit under the Coastal Area Management Act. Breakwaters, usually made of stone and parallel to the shore but not connected, are usually designed by an engineer and are generally more expensive because of the amount of stone required.

Merritt said that Carolina Silvics worked with the federation during the past three years to learn about living shorelines, techniques, where to obtain materials, how to construct the bags and the best techniques to build a uniform and stable shoreline following the natural contours.

“The main goal for both organizations was to combine ideas to find the most environmental, practical and economical solution for each unique property,” he said.

Weaver said that the federation has been working with Carolina Silvics for more than a decade on coastal restoration projects.

“As forestry contractors, they initially worked with the federation to plant thousands of tree seedlings and salt marsh grasses at the federation’s 6,000-acre wetland restoration project at North River Farms in Carteret County,” she said. “In 2017, however, these types of projects began to unfortunately slow down for them and the federation then began to partner with the company to train their staff to design, permit and build living shorelines through hands-on training. This significantly increased the amount of living shorelines that the federation was able to build each year since then.”

Weaver said that as a result of this partnership and training, Carolina Silvics now offers living shoreline installation as one of the services they provide. “Today, they are one of only two contractors in the state that build living shorelines with bags of recycled oyster shells.”

Coughtrey explained that the steps to have a living shoreline built by Carolina Silvics begins with meeting the landowner to discuss objectives and options. Once it’s determined what project they’re going to build, then its determined whether a general or major CAMA permit is needed. They then look at property ownership information and determine property lines, as well as collect contact information for the neighbors to ask approval to begin the project.

Once the neighbors approve, Coughtrey said they start working on a project map and schematics to help the property owner apply for the permit as well as meet with officials to explain the project. Once the permit is in hand, they begin obtaining materials to build the living shoreline.

“There’s been some very positive permit changes in the last year for offshore sills,” he said, adding that these recent changes to the permitting process for sills in North Carolina have made it much quicker and easier to acquire a less cumbersome general permit.

“The requirements for this permit are a project map, written project plan and adjacent property owner approval,” he said. “These improvements help contractors and landowners because we can now just go in much faster and the turnaround is much quicker.”

Merritt said that the business is working to “decrease our initial cost so that living shorelines may be more affordable for all economic statuses. This is a very important thing the coast needs.”

Merritt and Coughtrey spoke during the two-day workshop as part of the presentation, “Engagement and changing attitudes – What makes people and sectors adopt living shorelines?”

Jeff Benoit, President of Restore America’s Estuaries, called the workshop a success.

“We brought together people from all across the U.S. and Canada to learn from not only experts in the field, but from each other as well,”Benoit said in an email. “The feedback has been very positive – we’re thrilled to offer such a cutting-edge workshop.”

It’s the time of year when North Carolinians feast on that culinary delicacy, the humble oyster. But dining on oysters needn’t, and shouldn’t, be the end of the story. After the oyster’s gone, there’s the oyster shell, and advocates say it should be returned to the water where it can provide a safe harbor for future oysters.

That’s where the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s Oyster Shell Recycling Program can help. The federation is publisher of Coastal Review Online.

“The North Carolina Coastal Federation is working with volunteers, local governments and businesses to rebuild the oyster shell recycling effort in North Carolina,” said Ted Wilgis, the federation’s coastal education coordinator in Wrightsville Beach. “We know oyster shells are important and that people want to be a part of the recycling effort.”

Oysters’ Vital Role in Our Ecosystem

Oysters could be called the powerhouses of the sea. These small organisms provide food, filtration and fish habitat, said Leslie Vegas, a coastal specialist with the federation’s Wanchese office.

First, oysters are central to the food chain. They are a food source for numerous animals including crabs, sting rays, skates and birds. And oysters, in turn, eat phytoplankton, the small bits of algae in the water. Second, oysters are one of nature’s most efficient and hardworking filtering systems: Just one oyster cleans 30 to 50 gallons of water per day. Third, oyster reefs are not only home to 75% of the fish and shellfish we eat, they also serve as spawning sites and nurseries for several species, said Wilgis. Finally, oyster reefs help stabilize the shoreline by buffering it from erosion.

Because they are necessary for both habitat restoration and ensuring a healthy oyster population, oyster shells may be as important as the oysters themselves.

“Oyster shells are essential to having a sustainable or resilient oyster population,” said Wilgis. “Oysters need coastal reefs, and coastal reefs need oyster shells.”

Though coastal reefs are often made of cultch material, such as crushed concrete, limestone or granite, this base must also include oyster shells, and the more the better. Oyster shells provide a hard surface with lots of nooks and crannies that oyster larvae prefer, because they can easily latch onto it and then grow their own shells.

“They (oyster larvae) prefer to land on themselves,” said Vegas. “If they don’t find a place to land in the water, they’ll die off.”

Oyster shells are deemed so valuable that in 2010 the North Carolina General Assembly made it illegal to dispose of them in landfills.

A Declining Resource

The state’s coastal regions are in dire need of oyster shells. Years of overharvesting has interfered with the oyster reproduction cycle, so much so that the state is at 15% of its historical harvesting rate, according to Vegas.

Climate change, too, has contributed to the decline of the oyster population. Changes in the ocean’s acidity and salinity as well as extreme weather patterns can make it difficult for oysters to spawn, make them less healthy and thus vulnerable to predators, or cause them to die. As an example, the influx of fresh water into the Cape Fear River during Hurricane Florence killed many of the river’s oysters.

“The Cape Fear River went from a brackish mixture of fresh and saltwater to a freshwater river, even almost to the mouth of ocean, for three weeks,” Wilgis said. “Oysters can’t tolerate that amount of fresh water, so most of the oysters in the Cape Fear River died.”

With the declining oyster population, demand for their shells is high. North Carolina and other coastal states compete for the same shells. In addition, businesses such as chicken feed manufacturers also vie for the shells. As a result, oyster shells are at a premium. The cost of a bushel of shells has risen from 25 cents in 1998 to the current price range of $3.50 to $7 a bushel, Wilgis said.

Oyster shell recycling fills the gap between the number of shells organizations can buy to build oyster reefs and how many are needed.

“Shell recycling is a way to get every last bit of shell that we can while trying to get it at the same cost as the other materials out there,” Wilgis said.

Rebuilding the Recycling Program

The Coastal Federation is working to rebuild the state’s oyster shell recycling program, which was phased out last year when it lost the last of its funding. In southeastern coastal areas of the state, the organization is partnering with counties and nonprofits to provide shell dropoff sites. In addition, New Hanover and Orange counties are hauling shells to the stockpile sites at no charge.

“The program is slowly getting off the ground, but we’re excited about the opportunities and that local governments are interested,” said Wilgis. “The local municipalities are excited because it keeps valuable shells out of the landfill. They also get the benefit of recycling and getting the shell back into the water.”

Wilgis said he plans to expand the program in the future. In addition to increasing the number of shell-collection sites, he wants to involve more businesses in the program. Wilgis said he is looking to convince restaurants, which are often big contributors to oyster shell recycling, to recycle their shells. Another goal is getting private waste hauling and recycling companies to take shells to stockpile locations at no charge. Through these efforts, Wilgis said he hopes to increase the number of shells recycled in the area from last year’s 1,000 bushels to 30,000 bushels.

“That’ll involve a lot of partnerships and getting the private companies and restaurants involved,” he said.

The federation’s northeast region is piloting a Restaurant to Reef recycling program. Volunteers, with backup help from federation staff, collect shells from participating restaurants and deliver them to public drop-off sites. The federation also, on a case-by-case basis, helps organizations holding large events coordinate the transport of their shells to a drop-off site, said Vegas. A third prong of the recycling effort is educational programming provided by the federation.

Like Wilgis, Vegas is working to grow the recycling program by securing more drop-off locations, adding more restaurants to the program and engaging more volunteers. Vegas said she also wants to secure funding for educational materials, outreach and supplies.

Volunteers are needed for both programs. Their assistance can be as extensive as volunteering regularly or by simply bringing a bag of five or six shells to drop off points.

“People get very excited about oyster shell recycling,” Wilgis said. “They feel a connection, that they can do something to help, whether it’s just a few shells or a lot of shells.”

The federation urges the public to enjoy oysters and then to take the next step: participate in oyster shell recycling. Volunteer or ask restaurants to participate in the oyster shell recycling programs and recycle oyster shells from family’s and friend’s dinners and oyster roasts.

BEAUFORT –  As a covered sightseeing tour ferry circled the Sandbar Oyster Co.’s shellfish lease at the mouth of the Newport River, David Cessna gestured and told the about three dozen aboard that “On the starboard side of the boat, that’s right for you landlubbers, you’ll see some white objects sticking out of the middle of the river. That is a community of approximately 40 million oysters.”

Cessna, who goes by Clammerhead, is a seventh-generation Carteret County commercial fisherman. He and his business partner, professor Niels Lindquist of the University of North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences in Morehead City, created a biodegradable surface for oysters to grow on and thrive as part of living shorelines. Together, they founded Sandbar Oyster Co.

With his face etched from years working the waters in the commercial seafood industry, Cessna explained the ins and outs of their business during one of the three field sessions that kicked off the Living Shorelines Tech Transfer Workshop held last month at the Beaufort Hotel. The workshop was hosted by Restore America’s Estuaries and the North Carolina Coastal Federation, which publishes Coastal Review Online.

“North Carolina practitioners – and (the federation) in particular – are pioneering living shorelines research and implementation. It was a natural fit for us to host the workshop there. Beaufort was a fantastic location that offered both a beautiful venue and proximity to real world, on-the-ground living shorelines projects,” said Jeff Benoit, president of Restore America’s Estuaries.

The workshop brought together more than 200 from across the country and Canada to learn about techniques, regulation, community engagement and changing attitudes toward living shorelines.

In addition to the Sandbar Oyster Co.’s shellfish lease at the mouth of the Newport River, the Beaufort/Morehead City field session included visits to living shorelines on Pivers Island, which is home of the Duke University Marine Laboratory and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Beaufort Lab, and the Rachel Carson Reserve, a part of the N.C. Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve. Attendees could view salt marsh grass plantings, granite sills, loose oyster shell placement, oyster shell bag marsh toe revetments and marsh toe revetments.

Learning about living shorelines pic.twitter.com/y2VmmV7aKt

— Jennifer Allen (@AllerJenn) October 8, 2019

Those not on the Morehead City/Beaufort field session either visited Hammocks Beach State Park’s Jones Island in Swansboro or toured living shorelines at the Trinity Center and North Carolina Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores on Bogue Banks. In addition to the morning field sessions, the two-day workshop featured presentations, poster sessions and networking.

“The Coastal Federation is one of Restore America’s Estuaries member organizations and together they feature and promote the benefits of living shorelines nationwide,” Lexia Weaver, coastal scientist and central regional manager for the federation, told Coastal Review Online. “We were thrilled about the opportunity to host the workshop in coastal North Carolina to show other living shoreline practitioners our work and exchange successes and lessons learned.”

She explained that living shorelines are environmentally friendly shoreline stabilization techniques that help reduce shoreline erosion while protecting and restoring valuable salt marsh and oyster habitat. They’re also an alternative to shoreline hardening.

“Living shorelines have proven to fare better through hurricanes and storms than bulkheads or seawalls, are less expensive and require little to no maintenance once established. Living shorelines slow down and dissipate wave energy rather than reflecting it, thereby reducing scour of both the salt marsh wetlands and uplands,” Weaver said. “They incorporate natural elements such as salt marsh grasses and oysters that naturally function to protect shorelines from erosion in addition to their fish and shellfish habitat benefits. The salt marsh grasses and oysters also help to improve water quality through their filtering capabilities.”

Cessna told the group on the ferry, who were bundled up against the rain and wind on that chilly, cloudy morning on the first day of the workshop, that he and Lindquist picked the location for their lease in the Newport River because it was intertidal and faced the roughest conditions plus, he didn’t know of anything else that been in that spot in his lifetime.

“We wanted somewhere we could try and challenge some of the things that we face in both living shorelines and aquaculture, and this seemed like a good place to do it,” he said.

When Cessna and Lindquist created their trademark Oyster Catcher substrate, the primary goal was to be seed farmers, Cessna said. But if they were to stumble across another use for the material, they would go in that direction.

“Now we’re constantly looking for ways to improve our living shoreline and restoration techniques using this material and we don’t do so much aquaculture anymore. But our passion is trying to save some of this environment,” Cessna said, adding that sea level rise is what got them interested in living shorelines.

The ferry then made its way to the 24-acre Pivers Island to visit two shoreline-stabilization projects.

Carolyn Currin, a microbiologist with the NOAA lab was standing by one of the living shorelines located on the east of Pivers Island, facing downtown Beaufort.

“This was a sandy beach when I got here in 1983,” Currin said. Then during the 1990s, a series of hurricanes hit the area and caused massive erosion, spurring an effort to plant marsh there.

In May 2000, a group of NOAA and Duke staff planted Spartina alterniflora, a smooth cordgrass. Oyster cultch was placed there July 2000, July 2006 and August 2007 by the Division of Marine Fisheries. The staff volunteered their time, the plants were collected from nearby donor marshes and the oyster cultch was provided by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries.

“Within a number of years, sediment accumulated behind the oyster reef, the marsh grew out, the oyster reef is up, really high vertically,” Currin said of the NOAA living shoreline. “It’s been a really successful project.”

Across the small island, Rachel Gittman, assistant professor in the Department of Biology and Coastal Studies Institute at East Carolina University, and Devon Eulie, assistant professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences at the University of North Carolina Wilmington, were standing near a stone sill living shoreline, the Duke living shoreline.

Gittman explained that in the early 2000s, a series of stone living shorelines were installed throughout Carteret County. “This is a classic example of a stone sill living shoreline in this part of the state.”

The site has been monitored for decades and shows a consistent pattern of accretion, Gittman added.

Eulie explained that many of the natural marshes are not growing at the same pace that a sill-protected site is, “But even those sites, as quickly as they’re accreting, are still not keeping up with sea level rise for the area.”

Additionally, many of these sites were monitored during recent storms and most are resilient to the hazards of storms. Compared to bulkheaded sites after storms, these sites show that the living shorelines fared well.

The big question though, Eulie said, is that in the long term, 50 to 100 years, how are the living shorelines going to hold up? “That’s something that the living shoreline community is working on.”

Currin told Coastal Review Online in a follow-up interview that when the NOAA living shoreline was established in 2000 using Spartina transplants and loose oyster shell placed offshore of the marsh plantings, oyster recruitment – the natural accumulation and growth of oysters – quickly led to a cohesive live reef, and the salt marsh expanded behind the reef.

“The current oyster reef-marsh shoreline has experienced the recent hurricanes without damage, and we have found that the marshes are able to trap sediments from the overlying storm tides, which increases the marsh surface elevation and increases its long-term resiliency,” she said.

The Duke living shoreline, which consists of a rock sill and planted marsh, has been part of the NOAA- National Estuarine Research Reserve System’s long-term monitoring effort since 2004. The surface elevation tables, portable devices used to measure relative elevation changes, at the site document a significant increase in marsh surface elevation over time, and expansion of marsh habitat. Similar to the NOAA living shoreline, hurricanes have deposited sediment here.

“At both sites, although the current marsh habitat and shoreline edge have been maintained, large storm surges have caused some erosion on the uplands adjacent to the marsh, demonstrating the need to maintain a graded, vegetative buffer between the marsh and upland property,” Currin said.

The final stop of the field session was the nearby Rachel Carson Reserve. Gittman pointed across the water to Carrot Island from the ferry, one of the handful of islands making up the reserve. The weather and water were not cooperating to allow on-foot exploration.

Gittman, who has worked at the site since 2012, told the crowd,“The reserve’s goal is managing their resources but they also want to be a public demonstration site for science, research and now living shorelines,” adding that the reserve has allowed researchers to experiment with material.

“Right now, this is a playground for scientists to decide ‘can we figure out other materials besides stone that we can use for living shorelines in a place where we know we have really good oyster recruitment?’” Gittman said. “I don’t think anything we’re using is a viable option if you don’t have intertidal oysters because you’re not going to grow oysters on it. It’s intended for oyster-based shoreline stabilization.”

Weaver told Coastal Review Online that shoreline hardening, such as seawalls and bulkheads, which have been the norm for years, destroyed much of the state’s estuarine habitats that are vital to commercially and recreationally important fisheries, and affected coastal water quality.

“We need to think outside the box, get out of our comfort zone, and protect the natural shorelines that we have left with the significantly more effective, economical and longer-term living shoreline techniques,” Weaver explained. “We are slowly getting the word out about these practices, and the use of living shorelines has increased in the state, but unfortunately, we are still a long way away from making living shorelines the norm instead of bulkheads and seawalls.”

In recent years, Ron Sutherland, chief scientist for the Seattle-based Wildlands Network, has seen increasing numbers of coastal and warm-weather species of frogs and anoles around his home in Durham and in the Research Triangle Area.

“They’re moving (from the south and east) as the winters get warmer,” he recently told Coastal Review Online. “It’s fairly obvious if you look.”

In particular, he’s noted an increasing abundance of squirrel frogs and green anoles, which have long lived in warmer and more coastal, even tropical, climates.

“They didn’t use to be here in nearly such large numbers,” he said, and the latter are now widespread at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill.

But the change in the geographic distribution of critters isn’t limited to amphibians and reptiles. Some fish species are showing up in more northerly waters than in the past, said Sutherland. Manatees, famed in Florida, are making more appearances in North Carolina coastal waters, to the point where it’s almost normal to see them.

Armadillos – synonymous with Texas, according to the familiar song by Gary P. Nunn – are moving north and east and have been spotted in western North Carolina.

If they are moving, so are larger animals, like bears and wolves and foxes, not only because of climate change, but also because of rampant habitat loss as cities and towns sprawl into areas that once were wild, said Sutherland.

But the questions arise, how to protect these species? How to connect old habitats to potential new ones, across countless ever-growing ribbons of highways that serve hordes of pedal-to-the-metal motorists east of the Mississippi River? How, indeed, to preserve what’s left of wildlife in the East?

The Wildlands Network recently released a map, called the Eastern Wildway, which it announced Oct. 22 as “a bold vision for reconnecting and restoring wildlife habitat across eastern North America.” It’s a counterpart to the organization’s existing Western Wildway Map.

The new map covers much of the eastern North America, which the organization says is “home to a broad diversity of wildlife, including red wolves, Canada lynx, cougars, martens and other native carnivores. Many resident plants, birds, fish, salamanders, and butterflies are found nowhere else on Earth.”

The map is among the first large-scale conservation plans to show an ecologically prioritized, cross-section view of an entire continent, specifically the populous yet biodiverse eastern side of North America.

The map, Sutherland said, is intended to be “inspirational,” a way to encourage people and organizations to voluntarily protect existing habitats and find ways to connect them. He recently handed out 350 copies at a national land trust rally sponsored by The Nature Conservancy in Raleigh. Among the trusts represented were the North Carolina Coastal Land Trust, based in Wilmington and New Bern, which works to protect the state’s coastal habitat.

The dream, Sutherland said, is simple, the ambition big and the difficulty of achieving it high. But the need is great. A 2015 report by the Center for American Progress found that one in five species in the United States is threatened to become extinct because of habitat loss, fragmentation and climate change.

“Wildlands Network’s Wildway concept offers a solution for protecting native plants and animals by connecting the wild spaces these species need to survive, and supports renowned Harvard Biologist E.O. Wilson’s vision of designating ‘Half-Earth’ for nature in order to safeguard our planet’s biodiversity,” according to the announcement.

The goal, simply put, is to find ways to connect cores – large areas of intact natural habitat – through corridors, which wouldn’t be off-limits to people, to other cores.

The idea is to use existing parks, national forests and other protected areas, as well privately owned lands, and to get wildlife organizations, land trusts and conservancies and other environmental groups to help find ways to connect those. There’s also the chance, Sutherland said, of getting government funds.

“We’re proud of the way we’ve used the best available science to map out a robust vision for saving 85% or more of the biodiversity of the East Coast from extinction,” Sutherland said in a statement. “If protected, the Eastern Wildway habitat network would allow almost all native species to survive the ravages of rapid climate change and habitat destruction.”

Sutherland said he knows the federal government, as presently configured, and some state governments won’t be amenable to spending money. But, he said, there is bipartisan support in Congress for better funding of wildlife protection, noting as examples Reps. Don Beyer, D-Va., and Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., and Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M. In May, they introduced the Wildlife Corridors Conservation Act of 2019.

Sutherland also has hope that state governments will eventually see the wisdom of the idea and goal and commit more funds to habitat protection.

Finally, he said there are possibilities to induce substantial incentives for private landowners to participate voluntarily in protecting natural habitats and to encourage “significant ecological restoration, such as replanting native vegetation to establish wildlife corridors and expand core natural areas to sufficient size.”

Sutherland may be best known for his efforts to reintroduce and save red wolves in North Carolina and his successful efforts a few years ago with North Carolina State University’s forestry and environmental resources professor Fred Cubbage to keep the university from selling and allowing development of its Hofmann Research Forest in Jones and Onslow counties. Sutherland said he knows the challenges ahead.

“But there are,” he said, “a lot of people who believe in this concept.”

The key will be getting those people to work together, to commit to making it eventually happen, he said. Even under the best of circumstances, he said, it will take “a few decades, or more.”

But it’s not an impossible dream. Sutherland said he’s buoyed that conservation and environmental groups in North Carolina, ranging from those dedicated to protecting scenic rivers in the mountains to those in the east protecting coastal waters, believe in habitat protection for wildlife.

The groups have, he said, seen “large-scale development coming in” for decades, and understand the risks of not responding quickly.

“Once it’s gone,” he said of habitat, “it’s harder to get it back” than it would have been to protect it initially.

That problem is often particularly acute along the coast, he said, because as coastal cities grow, they can’t go farther east – the waters stop them. To expand, they must go west, tearing into habitat between their existing boundaries and those of towns farther inland.

It’s clear, Sutherland said, that time is of the essence to protect habitat. The longer it takes, the less land there is to protect and the less chance there is to make the crucial connections between them.

He said it will be important to mitigate barriers to animal migration, such as highways, using proven techniques like wildlife overpasses and underpasses. Fencing can also be used to keep wildlife off roads and funnel animals to the crossings.

There are, Sutherland said, plenty of examples where those things have worked. Examples include Canada’s Banff National Park, which is separated by the Trans-Canada Highway; along Interstate 75 in Collier and Lee counties in southern Florida; and in southern California.

The Florida crossings are largely intended for endangered Florida panther, but also benefit bobcats, deer and raccoons. In California, crossings work for bobcats, coyotes, gray fox, mule deer and long-tailed weasels, in such places as Orange, Riverside and Los Angeles counties. In Banff National Park in Canada, they aid deer, elk, black bear, grizzly bear, mountain lions, wolves, moose and coyotes.

Advocates say the crossings also reduce the incidence of dangerous and sometimes deadly – to humans and wildlife – vehicle-animal collisions.

The Eastern Wildway map, Sutherland said, serves as a blueprint for how and where all of this could work.

“The biggest challenge,” Sutherland said, is “to identify the species most at risk,” and begin, as soon as possible, steps to protect them.

He said the Wildway map is a tool to help that process.

Wildlands Network Eastern Program Director Christine Laporte put it this way: “This is a unique and high-value resource for anyone working on conservation in eastern North America. We invite partners to contact us to see how it can provide inspiration and robust scientific information for your work.”

Sutherland said the Wildlands Network staff had been talking about the wildway concept even before he arrived, but got serious about the Eastern project in early 2017.

To create the Eastern Wildway Map, Wildlands Network used a wide range of existing datasets and feedback from conservationists across the region. Data sources include Wildlands Network’s own connectivity models, as well as state and federal agencies, other groups, such as The Nature Conservancy and The Wilderness Society, and academic researchers.

“It took a lot of work by a lot of people,” Sutherland said. “We’re proud of it.”

Reprinted with permission from the Carteret County News-Times

CEDAR POINT — The North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund awarded the town a $1,011,756 grant Friday to help pay for 56 acres it purchased in April for a park on the White Oak River.

The town worked with the North Carolina Coastal Federation to get the grant from the state organization, which gives nonprofits and local governments money for projects and acquisitions that protect or enhance water quality.

The Cedar Point grant was one of the largest of the 34 the Clean Water Management Trust Fund board approved in a 2019 package that totaled more than $14 million.

The state Clean Water Management Trust Fund was established by the state General Assembly in 1996 as a nonregulatory organization. It receives money from annual appropriations by the legislature and the sale of scenic river license plates.

Mayor Scott Hatsell said Saturday he was “floored” when he got the news.

“I’ve always thought this project was deserving, and it helped to have the Coastal Federation working with us,” he said. “But you never know what the people who control this money are thinking, what they think is worthy. Evidently they were thinking right, and we’re very grateful.

“I’m excited, really pumped, and so is Jayne (Calhoun, town clerk and interim town administrator who worked on the grant application),” Hatsell, an avid kayaker and hiker, added. “We really want to get the water (adjacent to the property) cleaned up the best we can.”

Already, the mayor said, he’d reached out to Todd Miller, founder and executive director of the Coastal Federation, for a list of things to do – like planting oysters and creating living shorelines – that will help in that effort.

Hatsell knows these projects can work and cited the city of Jacksonville, which has worked for many years to clean up the New River.

On Jacksonville’s Facebook page, officials state that the river was so polluted in 1995 that a “massive hog waste spill did not have significant negative effects because the river was so organically dead.”

Jacksonville officials, scientists and volunteers led efforts to restore the New River with water-filtering oysters, aeration, bolstered wetlands and stormwater mitigation efforts. Now it’s a magnet for fishing and other water-based recreational activities.

Hatsell said the White Oak, adjacent to the town’s property, isn’t nearly as bad off as the New River was, but there’s room for improvement.

He and other town officials have stressed the purchase was intended not just for a park, but also to maintain and possibly improve water quality in the river.

The Cedar Point grant is listed on the Clean Water Management Trust Fund website as a “military buffer” acquisition project, because the town’s purchase of the land off Masonic Avenue will preclude development of the property, which is within the flight path of jets that use Bogue Field, an auxiliary landing facility for U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in Havelock. Bogue Field, in the town of Bogue, is 2.6 miles east of Cedar Point on N.C. 24.

The land had been zoned for multi-family development, which could have put residents at risk if a jet crash occurred.

It also would have dramatically increased impervious surface, which would have increased the flow of polluted stormwater into the river.

The town closed on the $2.8 million purchase from the North Carolina Masons after a more than yearlong process that led first to a successful $2.5 million bond referendum.

A 3-cent property tax increase, from 6.25 to 9.25 cents per $100 of assessed value, went into effect July 1 to help pay for the purchase.

Town officials told residents they would try to use grant money to reduce or eliminate the tax increase, which had to go into effect before the fate of the Clean Water Management Trust Fund grant application was known.

The town already received one grant for $250,000 from the North Carolina Coastal Land Trust, and used that money as a down payment on the purchase, reducing the amount borrowed. The town has also applied for a $500,000 grant from the North Carolina Parks and Recreation Trust Fund and should get word on that soon. That money could be used for park development.

Sterling National Bank of New York bought the bonds, and the town is scheduled to pay the bank back over no more than 20 years with four payments each year.

Hatsell said he knows property owners in town will expect some kind of a tax decrease next fiscal year and he’s convinced it can be done.

The bank that bought the bonds allows two “buy-downs,” he said, “and you want to make sure that when you do that, it’s a big chunk of money.”

The land is to be used mostly as a passive recreation area. It has existing trails, which the town has already marked, and a master plan developed for the town by The Wooten Co., a Raleigh-based engineering and planning firm, calls for an entrance off Masonic Avenue.

Other planned improvements include a parking lot with a restroom and shelter, paved and natural trails, a nature play area, three water view platforms, a fishing pier, a kayak and canoe launch with a drop-off area away from the water, a single-stall waterless bathroom closer to the water, a bench, swing and hammock area close to the shore, an open space events lawn, a picnic area and a living shoreline to protect against erosion.

There are also proposals for a kayak and canoe storage area, boardwalks, an outdoor classroom and shelter, a pond and a vegetative buffer between the park and nearby residences. Wetlands, which are scattered through the site, will be protected, and the project is designed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

None of this will happen right away.

The goal for now is to get the natural trails open to the public. Hurricane Florence in September 2018 downed many large trees and left other trees with dangling branches. The town hired a contractor to remove the trees and branches.

Hatsell said Saturday the town is “getting really close” to opening the land to the public.

HYDE COUNTY — A casual observer gazing out over the serene waters of the 40,000-plus acre Lake Mattamuskeet may not know that the lake is in trouble.

But the state’s largest natural lake, the centerpiece of the 50,180-acre Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge on the Albemarle-Pamlico Peninsula, needs help.

In recent years there has been declining water quality due to an excess of nutrients and suspended sediments, increasing water levels, recurrent algal blooms, and the majority of submerged aquatic vegetation, an important habitat for fish and food source for the migratory waterfowl, had disappeared by 2017.

Hyde County, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, which manages the refuge, and North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, in partnership with the North Carolina Coastal Federation and the community, have been collaborating on a plan to save the lake.

The work paid off.

After nearly two years of planning, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s Nonpoint Source Planning Branch approved last week the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan, which includes the history of the lake, how it functions, the lake’s health and identifies several ways to address water quality and flooding issues. The approval makes the plan eligible to apply for restoration implementation funds administered by the state, according to the federation, which publishes Coastal Review Online.

“This approval helps to propel efforts forward to address the water quality and flooding problems that plague Lake Mattamuskeet,” said Todd Miller, executive director for the federation, in a statement. “It took the entire community that cares about the lake to devise this plan and it will continue to require everyone’s participation to execute the plan so the lake can be restored as one of North Carolina’s environmental treasures.”

Established in 1934, the refuge, which consists of open water, marsh, forest and croplands, is along the Atlantic Flyway and attracts more than 200,000 ducks, geese and swans from November through February. About 58,000 visitors make their way to the refuge annually to hunt, fish and observe and photograph wildlife, according to refuge officials.

“The Wildlife Resources Commission considers approval of the restoration plan to be a milestone in our collaborative efforts to reverse the declines in water quality in the watershed,” Doug Howell, migratory game bird coordinator for North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, said in a statement.

Michael Flynn, coastal advocate for the federation’s Wanchese office, told Coastal Review Online Thursday that the watershed restoration plan was developed voluntarily to address water quality issues before it was necessary to establish total maximum daily load, or TMDLs, a regulatory tool used to address water quality issues. Each state must develop TMDLs for waters identified on the list of impaired waters, depending on rank, according to the Clean Water Act.

“The Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan is somewhat unique in that it seeks to address flooding issues as well as implement active water management on primarily agricultural land rather than solely focusing on reducing nonpoint source pollution from stormwater runoff, which is a typical objective of watershed restoration plans that are developed for more urban or suburban areas,” said Flynn, who served as a facilitator with other federation staff during the stakeholder meetings and is the primary author of the watershed restoration plan.

The stakeholders held public meetings to collect feedback and input over the course of 18 months before the final draft was introduced Dec. 3, 2018, during a symposium in Engelhard. The plan was submitted Dec. 7 to the Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Water Resources. After a July 19 addendum was added, the final approval was given Aug. 7, according to the federation.

“Approval of the plan is excellent news and a tribute to the partners and stakeholders who worked diligently for two years to get us to this point,” Pete Campbell, refuge manager for Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge, said in a statement. “Now the time to cooperatively implement the plan’s strategies begins!”

Flynn explained in an interview that the NCDEQ Nonpoint Source program approval meets the main eligibility requirement for the 319 grant program.

“The EPA distributes funds to state governments who in turn distribute funds to eligible candidates to implement water quality restoration activities under section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act,” he continued. “So, in short the approval means that Hyde County or the federation can apply for these funds to implement priority management actions that are identified in the plan. This did not preclude us from applying to other funding sources, but the approval does provide additional validity since it has been reviewed by subject matter experts.”

Other funding sources include an application to the Clean Water Management Trust Fund, which they hope to receive a notification of award in November. There is $100,000  in the state budget for flood mitigation activities in Hyde County but that is on hold because of the budget stalemate, Flynn added. They are also looking to apply for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Emergency Coastal Resilience Fund and will work on an application to the 319 grant program for next spring.

This funding will be used to implement priority management actions including the development of a hydrologic and hydraulic model of the watershed, develop preliminary engineered designs for how to sheet flow drainage water over existing or restore wetlands, establish a service district and develop an active water management plan, he said.

Funding has been awarded by the National Science Foundation to Randall Etheridge, assistant professor in the engineering department at East Carolina University, and fellow researchers. This group will use the funding to implement a program where undergraduate engineering students will work with the community to develop preliminary engineered plans for projects to be identified in the spring of 2020 through the fall of 2021.

The Fish and Wildlife Service has also submitted a grant application that would fund a carp removal program in Fiscal Year 2022 if awarded. April Lamb, North Carolina State University master’s student has been evaluating the effect of carp removal on submerged aquatic vegetation restoration in several pilot enclosures on the lake, he said.

Flynn explained that the plan was essentially the result of climate change and sea level rise, although a variety of factors are at play.

Originally excavated to drain the lake in the late 1800s and early 1900s, the canals operated on different head pressures between the lake and Pamlico Sound, even when the pump station was not operational, he said. The canals are still in use today to provide drainage when water levels in the lake are higher than the sound. There are gates in place to keep salt water in the sound from entering the lake.

This passive system is no longer providing adequate drainage capacity because the water level in the sound has been rising, resulting in less days throughout the year that the lake can drain, Flynn continued. This will also cause the groundwater table to rise, reducing storage capacity during rainfall and result in flooding neighboring agricultural land and residential property even during minor storms. As a result, farmers need to use pumps to drain the water from the agricultural land in order to save the crops. That water eventually discharges to the lake, carrying nutrients and sediments.

“Sea level rise and more frequent high precipitation rainfall events will exacerbate this issue,” Flynn said.

Flynn added that support from the principal funding partners, community stakeholders and the academic research community has been tremendous. The refuge, located at the center of a watershed, is surrounded by Hyde County residents, farmers, hunters, fishermen and others and working with the diverse group of stakeholders was one of the greatest successes of the entire process.

“The perspective provided by the stakeholder team was a critical component of understanding the historical and current land use and identifying management actions that are both a priority and practical. Those stakeholders relayed the information that was shared during stakeholder and public meetings to other residents who were unable to attend and responses were shared during future meetings,” he said. “Efforts to improve water quality and mitigate flooding within the Lake Mattamuskeet watershed will need to come from cooperative and collaborative partnerships, and I am glad that they are already in place so that we can build upon them.”

Daniel Brinn, water and flood control coordinator for Hyde County and a key partner in developing the plan, said in a statement, “Hyde County has been fortunate to be the beneficiary of some incredible partnerships throughout the process of writing the plan. Now that it has been approved we look forward to utilizing those same partnerships to move towards implementation as we seek to restore the environmental, cultural and historical gem that is Lake Mattamuskeet.”

As the plan is implemented, there will be updates on watershed restoration on the Coastal Federation website.

For more information about the watershed restoration plan, Flynn can be reached at 252-473-1607 or michaelf@nccoast.org.

BEAUFORT – Two excavators moving in a noisy but graceful dance Wednesday chipped away at the tons of limestone marl piled on a 250-foot-long by 52-feet-wide barge, offloading the oyster bed base material at the Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary, where work is wrapping up this week on the three-year restoration project where the Neuse River and Pamlico Sound meet.

As he stood at the back of the tugboat watching the two excavators scoop up piles of rock from the dredge platform to place in the sound, Will Hollowell, operations manager for Stevens Towing Co. North Carolina’s office in Morehead City, described how the crew members operating the excavators strategically place the rock.

Hollowell oversees the contractors who have been working to build the 40-acre Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary, a three-year project of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Marine Fisheries and the North Carolina Coastal Federation and one of the 15 sanctuaries in the Pamlico Sound making up the Sen. Jean Preston Oyster Sanctuary Network, which was built to promote oyster growth and named after the longtime state lawmaker who represented Carteret County before her death in 2013.

As contractors, Stevens Towing Co.’s role in the project is to operate the tugboats and barges and to deploy the material using guidelines set by division.

The work has taken place mostly during spring and summer 2017, 2018 and this year. Over the past three years, the dredge has made in total 70 trips to the site, carrying more than 1,000 tons of rock each trip.

The project used, overall, nearly 80,000 tons of material, with the first phase in 2017 using 30,600 tons of marl and the second phase in 2018 using 25,000 tons of granite and 25,000 tons of marl this year.

Hollowell said that the barge is loaded with about 1,200 tons of material per trip at the division’s South River facility. The crew coordinates with the division on where to place the rock, and once the dredge gets to the site, excavators and loaders begin deploying rock, or moving it from the barge into the sound.

While waiting Wednesday at the division’s South River facility boat ramp before heading to the Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary work site, Cameron Luck, oyster sanctuary biologist with the division, gestured to the mountains of granite and marl. He said the piles of marl are being used to build the ridges for oysters to colonize and that there was only about 1,500 to 2,000 tons left to be deployed of the 25,000 tons used this year.

Erin Fleckenstein, coastal scientist in the federation’s Wanchese office and project manager for the restoration project, said all the material should be in place as soon as Saturday.

“Swan Island Sanctuary, when it’s concluded, will be about 40 acres of total oyster reef made up of both limestone marl and granite, providing the substrate for other oysters to land on, grow up and create a new reef structure,” said Fleckenstein to the small gathering at South River before embarking on the boat ride to the sanctuary.

Fleckenstein, holding a map of the Sen. Jean Preston Oyster Sanctuary Network, explained that the network is part of an overall strategy to restore the oyster populations in North Carolina. “There’s 15 sanctuaries placed throughout Pamlico Sound and the idea is that it will serve as a safety net or insurance policy for our oyster population.”

The 15 reefs total between 250 and 275 acres of oyster sanctuary, and research is showing that these reefs support 27 times more adult oysters than the other reef types in the waterways.

“The research is also showing that their footprint is only 6 percent of all the oyster reefs but contributing to 30 percent of the oyster population in the sound,” Fleckenstein said. “Small footprint, big impact is the take-home message.”

The ridges making up the sanctuary vary in height but leave plenty of room for boat traffic above. “I think the maximum is about 4 feet tall, so there is still plenty of clearance for navigation across these reefs, which is a requirement from Army Corps of Engineers for navigation purposes,” she explained after handing out a reef map the division created. Higher ridges are shown in and cooler colors represent the lower ridges.

Oysters in the sanctuaries are not open to harvest but do support numerous finfish species, and the reefs are open to hook and line fishing.

The reefs help build up oyster populations by providing a sanctuary for adult oysters, that are then able to spawn and seed other nearby reefs that may be harvested, including the cultch-planted reefs that division is also instrumental in building, Fleckenstein said.

Cultch are shells and rock strategically placed to enhance shellfish habitat in potentially productive shellfish areas. These sites are open to oyster harvest when the oysters on them reach legal size, or about 3 inches, according to the division.

Because of the success of the sanctuaries in general, she continued, a comprehensive survey of oyster populations in Pamlico Sound was recently performed. The survey looked at the oyster sanctuaries, cultch-planted reefs, subtidal and inner-tidal natural reefs and fished reefs.

“Data is showing that these sanctuaries are very successful and a good strategy to continue pursuing.” Fleckenstein said.

She explained that the division invests a great deal of time and effort in determining where to place sanctuaries to ensure they’re feeding the other harvested reefs and ensuring that they’re creating an interconnected network that serves as an insurance policy for maintaining the state’s oyster population.

The division also works with restoration researchers to plan future sanctuaries for the network, Fleckenstein said. There are four potential reef locations being explored for the next sanctuary and the division is collecting information on the sites’ bottom type, water quality and salinity, and to make sure they’re suitable for a sanctuary.

Luck said during the tour that division researchers are using what is called a habitat suitability model, which takes into account the different factors that drive a healthy oyster sanctuary. In addition to water quality, the researchers look at where the larvae from other sanctuaries comes from and to try and understand how currents and wind affect larvae movement in the system.

Once areas that are most suitable are pinpointed, Luck continued, the division will look to make sure reef construction is not going to impede boat traffic.

They’ll then go assess the site and study the bottom composition to find out if the rocks and material that we’re going to deploy won’t move. “Are they going to stay in the site for many years to come? That’s the point,” Luck said. “And then we also want to make sure that by applying all this, the sanctuary is going to grow oysters.”

The three-year Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary project was funded with more than $3 million in state appropriations and nearly $3.3 million in grant funds from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s community-based restoration program, with additional funding from Grady White Boats and federation members.

Fleckenstein added that Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary “has been a great partnership between the Division of Marine Fisheries, North Carolina Coastal Federation and contractor Stevens Towing to bring some additional resources from the federal government through the NOAA community-based restoration program to match state appropriations to build these reefs.”

Reprinted with permission from the Carteret County News-Times

OTWAY — About 20 years of restoration work on about 6,000 acres of farmland is almost complete, and the finishing touches should be done by October at the latest.

This is what North Carolina Coastal Federation staff had to say Thursday while hosting a tour of the nonprofit organization’s North River Wetlands Preserve, a restoration project at the former North River Farms in Down East Carteret County.

The project began in 1999 and is the largest wetlands restoration project in North Carolina to date. During the tour, federation coastal specialist Bree Charron detailed for those in attendance the work that’s gone on over the last 20 years at the site.

“In the 1980s and 1990s this area was ditched and cleared for farming,” Charron explained. “The Coastal Federation worked with the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund to purchase the first tract, about 2,000 acres.”

In the following years, additional tracts were purchased with the help of the federation’s partner organizations, and in 2003, work began on restoring the natural wetlands that existed prior to the property being turned into farmland. The federation’s partners on the project include private hunting club 1804 Wildlife Partners LLC and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service Wetlands Reserve Program, now called the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program.

The project was completed in 11 phases over the years. Charron said the last phase should be complete by sometime in October.

During the tour Thursday, the group stopped at an area being restored by contractors.

“These emergent wetlands will be grassy wetlands surrounded by forested wetlands,” Charron said. “It (the project) is under a permanent federal conservation easement, which means nothing can ever be built.”

At another stop along the tour, Coastal Wildlife Consultants contractors were installing a water control structure.  Charron said these types of structures are often built to allow an area’s water level to be controlled, and the Coastal Federation intends “to hold back as much water as possible” to protect nearby waterways.

Coastal Wildlife Consultants owner Mike Johnson was also on hand at the installation site.

“My specialty is waterfowl habitat,” Johnson said. “There’s a lot of fruit to our labors. We create habitat and then manage that habitat. “

With the majority of the active restoration work complete at North River Farms, wildlife has been seen with increasing frequency. Local birder John Fussell, who was on the tour, said he’s been bird watching in the North River Farms area since late 2002.

“We’ve seen about 250 bird species here,” Fussell said. “This property includes some of North River marshes.”

Among the species seen is black rail, which has been proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act as a threatened species.

“The endangered peregrine falcon sometimes feeds here,” Fussell said.

Other wildlife sighted at the project site include alligators, otters, beavers, bears, raccoons, snakes and terrapins.

Another reason the federation and its partners have been restoring the wetlands is to control stormwater runoff.

Stormwater is the No.1 nonpoint source of water pollution in the state. When rain events occur over areas with impervious surfaces or with poor water retention, the water flows quickly to drains and then to local water bodies. It often picks up pollutants along the way, carrying them into the water.

“When this (land) was all forested, the rain was all absorbed,” Charron said. “Once we started ditching and draining, it started running off into the adjacent waterways, caring nutrients and pathogens. One of these drainage canals can have seven million gallons of water leaving the farm a day.”

With the wetlands restored at North River Farms, the land will have better stormwater retention, filtering it instead through the ground.

“If you look at North River Farms as a whole,” Charron said, “we capture over 1 billion gallons of water per year.”

SWANSBORO – After pulling up to one of the many small, uninhabited islands dotting the waters near downtown on Valentine’s Day, a crew of around half-dozen men carrying 42-gallon black contractor trash bags hopped off one of two boats at the shore.

They worked their way across the marsh and into the trees on the island near Huggins Island, collecting a range of trash, from as small as a hunk of Styrofoam to as large as a few feet of pontoon boat fence.

The commercial fishermen and others who that day called the waters their “office” will be working on public land for the next few months.

The crew has been contracted by the North Carolina Coastal Federation as part of a Hurricane Florence recovery effort, a large-scale cleanup project underway to remove the marine debris the September 2018 storm hurled across parts of the coast. The first phase of the 2019 Post Hurricane Florence Marine Debris Collection Project, which began Feb. 11, has the contracted watermen working through the end of March focusing on Carteret and Onslow counties.

Crew leader Matthew Littleton, captain of Friendly City Fishing Charters based in Swansboro, has been with the project since it began.

Littleton said that everyone on the team, including himself, is a commercial fisherman or works the water in the Swansboro area. The team includes project leader Tim Simpson, Howard Littleton, Joseph Sewell Sr., Brad Scott, Kelly Maxwell and Chris Briley.

In the first five days of the project, the team picked up the islands lining the waterway from East Channel to the mouth of Queens Creek. “Looking at it from the mainland, we have covered from Cedar Point to the Queen’s Creek side of Hubert. Broken down we have covered seven islands in the five working days,” he said in an email last week.

Littleton told Coastal Review Online in a follow up email Thursday that the group, between Feb. 18-21, had collected debris from Ski Beach in Bogue Inlet Channel, to the Hammocks Beach Ferry Channel and planned to begin on Huggins Island Friday, Feb. 22.

Littleton said he hopes the cleanup effort has a lasting impact on the regular watermen in the area.

“The project has already drawn lots of attention from boaters, commercial fisherman, and recreational anglers in the area. I want to use this project to show everyone the true impact we have on the islands and coast,” he said. “If we can use this project, and the attention it has garnered, to influence other watermen to grab that bag of trash they see while they are out, to turn around to grab that bottle that flew out of the boat, and just be generally more conscientious of the everyday negative or positive impact we who spend the most time on the water can have.”

Coastal Federation Executive Director Todd Miller said the cleanup was orchestrated to remove all kinds of debris from coastal waters and public lands that would otherwise be left if not for the program, including chemically treated lumber that is considered hazardous waste by the Environmental Protection Agency. “Much of this material has exposed nails and other hazards that could cause serious injury to people that use our waterways and islands.”

The federation plans to contract work to remove larger material like pieces of docks and other construction-related items using mechanical equipment and barges.

“We also anticipate that some abandoned boats will be removed,” Miller said.

He added that he thinks that this is the first large-scale coastal cleanup of this nature that has ever occurred. “It is the first time that our public lands and public trust areas have gotten this type of housekeeping attention.”

Miller said that the project will “eventually expand to the entire coastal region that has been impacted by Hurricane Florence and potentially tropical storm Michael.”

The program is part of the marine debris cleanup effort funded by the North Carolina General Assembly with a $400,000 appropriation as part of its post-Florence disaster bill, he explained.

The General Assembly provided the initial funding last fall. The legislature also approved another $250,000 in state money for the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, contingent on whether the agency can leverage that money with federal funds for such cleanups.

“The division is working with the federation right now to secure funding from the Natural Resources Conservation Service under its Emergency Watershed Program. Total federal and state funding might eventually exceed $1 million, and this will allow for a massive scrubbing of the coast and the potential removal of many of the sunken and abandoned vessels that now litter our waterways,” Miller added.

Littleton learned about the cleanup from Rachel Bisesi, education coordinator at the federation’s central office in Ocean, while he was participating in the federation’s 2019 Crab Pot Removal Project earlier this year. He worked in the White Oak River, Queens Creek and marsh by Hammock Beach State Park.

“After she gave me some details about the project I was immediately interested. The North Carolina Coastal Federation is always making great efforts to maintain a healthy coast, and given the opportunity to help clean up and maintain that in the same area where I grew up, live, and work, I jumped at the opportunity,” he said.

Littleton explained that while there’s a great deal of debris on the islands caused by Florence, the amount of litter that has been left on the islands is alarming.

On the first island they visited, someone had been living there for nearly a year before Hurricane Florence. “There was anything and everything you could find in a home on the island, even a full-sized refrigerator,” as well as a portable toilet tethered to a tree.

“The second group of islands yielded a boat motor cowling, dock power pedestal, marine gas tanks, liquid propane tanks, and even an outdoor picnic or dining table from a fast food restaurant. Bottles, cans, tennis balls, golf balls, shotgun shells, Styrofoam, sheet metal, home siding and more flip flops, sandals and crocs than you can imagine, but never a matching pair,” he said.

Littleton explained that everyone on the crew was loosely acquainted from the industry, but the project gave them a chance to work together.

“Everyone cares deeply about the area, having grown up and worked here. I have lucked into the best team I could have ever asked for on this project. One large part to how much progress we have been able to make is the pride the team is taking in the work being done,” he said. “It is an immensely rewarding feeling to know that you are a part of a project that is not just rewarding to yourself, but to everyone with ties to the coast and the generations to come. We have a great dynamic and all work incredibly well together. I’d take my team against any other cleanup crew.”

The federation reached out to project leader Simpson with Lady Swan Tours to see if he would be interested in helping with the cleanup project.

“Since my business is related to our local waters, I was very excited to have the opportunity to get involved,” Simpson said. “I am also very glad the project targeted some of our local commercial fishermen to be involved since the hurricane has had a huge impact on their livelihoods.”

With this project, he hopes they can make a “big dent in the amount of debris and trash that accumulated during the hurricane to make it cleaner and safer for wildlife and people. There’s a lot of stuff out there that will still be on the ground or floating around for a long time if we don’t get it picked up.”

Simpson extended his gratitude to the federation for getting the cleanup organized and the legislature for providing the funding to make this cleanup possible. “I would also encourage people to get involved in volunteer cleanup programs in their local communities.”

Miller said that it’s important to have the periodic cleanups because some debris will always be let loose in the environment after storms and through accidental releases.

“It is also important that we take steps to prevent this type of trashing our coast by having better construction standards for docks, bulkheads and other built things we put in harm’s way, and through education to encourage boaters and tourists not to trash our coast,” Miller said.

RALEIGH – The North Carolina Coastal Federation is taking the next steps toward realizing its vision to make the state “the Napa Valley of Oysters” with its 2019 North Carolina Oyster Summit in March.

The limited-seat summit focusing on the future of oysters in the state is from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. March 12 at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. A legislative reception will follow 5:30-7:30 p.m. at Transfer Co. Food Hall featuring North Carolina oysters and local craft brews.

The daylong oyster summit is geared toward elected officials, fishers, educators, scientists, resource managers, shellfish growers, those involved in establishing public policy and oysters growers and researchers, according to the federation.

“The focus of the summit is to reflect on the progress made on oyster rehabilitation efforts, the growing mariculture industry and highlight the opportunities for continued success,” said Erin Fleckenstein, coastal scientist with the federation. She added that she hopes attendees see that there has been a great deal of progress and that the state is a national leader in oyster restoration efforts and a growing player regarding oyster farming.

Early-bird tickets for the summit can be purchased for $95 through Monday, Feb. 18. From Feb. 18 to March 5, registration for the summit is $125. Tickets for the legislative reception are $50. All tickets are available online.

“The summit brings together the broad diversity of people who support the rebirth of oysters along our coast,” said Todd Miller, the federation’s executive director. “It will help to show how clean water, thriving oysters and good jobs all go hand-in-hand.”

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Secretary Michael Regan will give opening remarks the summit. Regan announced in 2018 the state’s participation in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Shellfish Initiative.

North Carolina is the first state in the Southeast, joining Washington, Connecticut, Alaska and Rhode Island, in modeling a program based on NOAA’s National Shellfish Initiative. The state initiative is a partnership with the federation, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries and North Carolina Sea Grant.

During the summit, the status of the North Carolina Oyster Blueprint and North Carolina Shellfish Initiative are to be presented and discussions are planned on oyster rehabilitation work, wild stock enhancement and the importance of water quality protection and restoration.

Also on the agenda are a series of panel presentations exploring the recommendations of the recently completed North Carolina Strategic Plan For Shellfish Mariculture: A Vision To 2030 that was submitted to the General Assembly Dec. 30, 2018.

“The mariculture plan has the potential to provide more than a 1,000 new jobs to coastal residents in a way that will benefit our coastal environment and economy,” said Miller.

The 177-page report was created at the behest of the General Assembly and “presents a strategic vision for a decade (to 2030) of sustainable growth of the shellfish mariculture industry,” according to the report.

In 2016, the North Carolina Policy Collaboratory was directed by the General Assembly to organize stakeholder meetings aimed at boosting the state’s shellfish industry. The Senate in 2017 added a mandate to the legislation that the legislature-established collaboratory at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill prepare a shellfish mariculture plan by Dec. 31, 2018.

The collaboratory, which facilitates and funds research related to environmental and economic components of the management of natural resources, then formed the Shellfish Mariculture Advisory Committee to produce the report of findings and recommendations “that would promote the growth of a socially, ecologically, and economically responsible shellfish mariculture industry,” the report states.

Committee meetings began in early 2017 to discuss ways to support the state “shellfish industry, identify barriers to industry growth, and generate recommendations aimed at overcoming natural, business, and management challenges,” per the report.

The Shellfish Mariculture Advisory Committee’s “overarching goal has been to leverage a broad base of expertise to generate a comprehensive plan to grow the industry while balancing the needs of diverse North Carolina stakeholders to whom coastal public trust waters belong,” the report states.

Referring to strategic plans used by other states and counties for shellfish mariculture and based on input from members in the group that represented academia, regulatory agencies, non-governmental organizations and industry stakeholders, the committee identified in the report five major areas of concentration requiring legislative action: key business metrics and climate; industry governance and leadership/promotion; siting shellfish mariculture; water quality; and applied research and development.

Included in the report 21 major and four supplementary recommendations are to help the General Assembly determine legislative actions to encourage responsible growth of shellfish mariculture.

Ana Zivanovic-Nenadovic, senior policy analyst for the federation, who was on the advisory committee, explained that “The estuarine waters of North Carolina are underutilized when compared to waters of other states with similar biological productivity. I think the combination of the potential of our waters, and the realization of the economic benefit mariculture would bring, along with the increased interest — higher number of lease and permit applications — led to the strategic plan funding.”

The mariculture strategic plan will have multiple benefits to the coastal area and the state, she continued. “The first thing that comes to mind are ecosystem services. As filter feeders, oysters contribute to better water quality. They also provide healthy and sustainably raised food,” she said.

“The mariculture plans will also bring important economic benefits to the state and the coastal region. The plan’s stated plan is to bring in $100 million in 10 years and is estimated to support more than 1,000 jobs,” Zivanovic-Nenadovic said. “The plan also lays out efficient governance and promotion structures for the mariculture industry that will put North Carolina in a competitive position.”

Now that the plan has been submitted to the General Assembly, “The immediate next steps are to work on bill drafting to implement the plan recommendations and secure appropriations through the General Assembly,” said Zivanovic-Nenadovic.

The Coastal Federation and partners, North Carolina Sea Grant, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, and the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, are hosting the March summit.

A block of rooms has been reserved until Monday, Feb. 18, through the federation at Holiday Inn Raleigh Downtown Capital at a  rate of $124 per night for single and double rooms, including parking.

For more information about the summit, contact Fleckenstein at erinf@nccoast.org or 252-473-1607.

The summit is sponsored in part by Albemarle Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, Grady White Boats, the Kenan Institute, Restoration Systems, Rob Lamme & Associates, The Nature Conservancy, North Carolina Sea Grant, Fred Adams Paving, Backwater Environmental and Little Environments, PLLC.

To help sponsor the summit, contact Catherine Snead at catherines@nccoast.org.

In Kitty Hawk, the encroaching waters of Kitty Hawk Bay threaten to close Moor Shore Road, one of the oldest roads on the Outer Banks.

For lifelong resident Amy Wells, the rising waters and disappearing shoreline is something she has observed over her lifetime.

“Along Moor Shore road there were trees. My father had aerial photos, you could see there were trees out there. That was in the 1970s,” she said.

Moor Shore Road is a short but beautiful road that parallels Kitty Hawk Bay. One of the oldest roads on the Outer Banks, it is the route the Wright Brothers traveled to get from Bill Tate’s house in Kitty Hawk to their campsite at the base of Kill Devil Hill.

At one time the road was on the north end of a series of roads and paths that followed the shoreline of Roanoke Sound, connecting Nags Head and Kitty Hawk.

A United States Geological Survey map as early as 1876 shows a road paralleling Kitty Hawk Bay, and a 1938 state Department of Transportation map depicts Moor Shore Road.

More easily seen in the highway map, but in all of those early maps, one thing is apparent: there is a marsh or land between the water and the road.

The road is important even today. In November, it is part of the Outer Banks Marathon. In the summer, when traffic is backed up on the main roads, it is a welcome if brief respite from the madness of summer traffic. When ocean overwash from tropical storms or nor’easters close the main roads in Kitty Hawk, it is part of an emergency route that allows traffic to keep moving.

To protect the road, a living shoreline is being constructed.

Living shorelines deflect and dissipate wave energy through offset sills or breakwaters, allowing sediment to accrete on the landward side of the protection. As the sediment increases, grasses and reeds take root recreating the marsh that was lost. The plants of the marsh further dissipate wave energy.

Although an effective means of shoreline protection, there are limits to what a living shoreline can accomplish.

“The way that water is pushed into a system is critical. They’re not going to stop a 10-foot or 20-foot storm surge,” explained Erin Fleckenstein, coastal scientist and manager of the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s northeast regional office in Wanchese.

Hardened structures like bulkheads can be effective in certain situations, but they can create significant environmental damage.

Bulkheads work by deflecting wave energy, but do very little to dissipate the energy. Typically that energy goes to either side or in some cases, down. After a few years, land on either side of the bulkhead often shows significant erosion, or land behind a bulkhead is sometimes eroded.

Carlos Gomez of Coastal Engineering noted what he has seen with bulkheads.

“They put in a bulkhead and in five years they have no marsh,” he said.

It is an ambitious undertaking. At almost 700 feet, it is significantly larger than most living shoreline projects. The $270,000 cost of the project and how residents, federal, state and local governments came together seems to set this project apart from others.

“The number of entities involved in this, I don’t think I’ve seen this before. And I doubt many of us have seen it,” Kitty Hawk Mayor Gary Perry said. “And it all started with a homeowner that said it will also benefit the greater good and the public, so the public trust entering into this is not untoward.”

As a homeowner with property facing Kitty Hawk Bay on Moor Shore Road, Wells knew the marsh had disappeared and that the road was prone to flooding.

She had become aware of living shorelines as a method of shoreline protection from volunteer work she had done with the University of North Carolina Outer Banks Field Site, a precursor to the Coastal Studies Institute. The lessons stayed with her and as she witnessed the disappearance of the marsh, she came to the conclusion that a living shoreline would be the best way to protect her property.

“I had seen it through the UNC Field Site,” she recalled. “That’s how it all got started.”

One of the lessons she took from working with the field site was how important it was to engage the public.

“They had what seemed like a real incentive to do (projects) where there was a real public exposure. So maybe somebody else could see it,” she said.

And Moor Shore seemed like the perfect location for that visibility. She had made the decision that even if she was the only property owner on the road with a living shoreline, she was going to install one.

“If nobody else wants to do it, I wanted to try it. It’s kind of a visible piece, where people can see it, and if it works, maybe somebody else would see it,” Wells said.

She had, in the past, worked with Gomez, an engineer, and mentioned to him she felt her property would be a good candidate for a living shoreline.

Gomez was familiar with the concept of living shorelines but had not worked with them, however a 2015 North Carolina Coastal Federation seminar in Columbia convinced him Well’s idea was worth pursuing.

“After the workshop (Gomez) reached out to me to see if Amy’s property would be a good candidate for a living shoreline,” Fleckenstein said. “I said it could be, but would be more effective if we could work with the neighbors to extend it along that whole stretch of road.”

“Her property was (only) 75-100 feet wide,” Gomez said. “Talking to Amy, I said, ‘Maybe we can talk to other people.’”

“I could tell the man on the other side of me (north), he really didn’t want a hardened structure there,” Wells said.

Other property owners also signed on and the project was selected for a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration cost share on living shorelines with private property owners.

With the NOAA grant in hand, Gomez and the federation made a presentation to the town of Kitty Hawk. The presentation went very well.

“We budgeted $180,000,” Perry said. The funds, he pointed out, are to protect access to properties that rely solely on Moor Shore Road.

“We’re saving the road, we’re not saving the property,” he said.

Although property owners were concerned about protecting land, a significant portion of funds for the project are dedicated to protecting infrastructure, which is how NCDOT became involved.

According to Perry and Fleckenstein, Kitty Hawk and the federation approached NCDOT about the project. There was interest, and for the first time the state’s transportation department contributed to a living shoreline as a way to protect a road.

“NCDOT is … contributing about $30,000 on the $270,000 project,” NCDOT Public Information Officer Tim Hass said. “We’re certainly at the table on this one, and we certainly have an interest in protecting the road and seeing how well this project works …”

Dare County also contributed to the project, Fleckenstein said, “An application was submitted to the Dare Soil and Water CCAP (Community Conservation Assistance Program) grant in August 2017 for additional cost share funds.”

With so many funding sources, some of the money Kitty Hawk has earmarked may not be needed, although it will remain available.

“Right now we’re coming in under that ($180,000 town grant) … If they should run short, we maybe can help with that,” Perry said.

The permitting process for the project has been unusually drawn out, something Fleckenstein acknowledged.

“It did have a lengthy permit process,” she said. “Part of the hurdle we overcame was there were a lot of moving parts and pieces. A lot of people involved and trying to keep everyone coordinated and moving toward the same end goal.”

After two years, though, the sills are being installed. With the nearshore protected from the full force of the wave energy, phase two will soon follow.

“The sills should be in place by March 2019 and marsh grass plantings will occur this summer and next,” Fleckenstein said.

COASTAL NORTH CAROLINA – Fresh-cut Christmas trees once decorated for the holidays are being returned to nature, now that the season is coming to a close.

Several towns and organizations are collecting the trees that will be used for dune stabilization and restoration or the trees are being turned into mulch.

On the Outer Banks, Better Beaches OBX has since 2013 collected trees for use in dune restoration projects.

Better Beaches OBX founder Donny King explained that the organization uses the trees that are dropped off at the parking lot of The Islander Motel in Nags Head and Ocean Boulevard Bistro and Martini Bar in Kitty Hawk, where King is chef and owner.

King added that this year, Boy Scout Troop 117 in Kitty Hawk has offered to pick up trees from houses on Saturday and Sunday. The Scouts will deliver the trees to Better Beaches OBX. Text the address to 252-202-4949 or 252-202-1672 for pick up and let them know where the tree is located. The Scouts are accepting tax deductible donations that can be taped in an envelope to the door.

King said that the trees, which are strategically placed at the bottom of the sand dunes or in low spots to collect sand, are buried halfway or placed against existing structures like a sand fence to keep the tree from moving.

“Better Beaches OBX also provides consulting as to how to trap sand in more desirable areas around oceanfront homes and businesses and teaching people how to plant and distribute the proper dune grasses,” he said. “Most of our time is spent planting American beach grass during the fall/winter months with a large group of volunteers.  We also plant sea oats in the spring in more established areas.”

Oceanfront owners wanting to learn simple processes to protect their property from low- to mid-level impact storms, volunteers and those wishing to donate to the organization can contact Better Beaches OBX via the group’s Facebook or email bbobxfriends@gmail.com.

“We are aware that out time on the Outer Banks is limited, and larger storms can change everything, but we believe we can make an impact (and this has been proven in recent years) by better maintaining our shoreline.  The wind blows in a lot of different directions throughout the year and using that power to build up desired areas through mostly natural means pays off,” King wrote in an email.

Nags Head and Kitty Hawk are collecting the natural trees from residents.

Ralph Barile, public works director for Nags Head, said that the town will collect the natural Christmas trees, which will be used for mulch, or a resident can request the trees be delivered to be used for dune stabilization. Curbside collection is by appointment. Call 252-441-1122 to schedule.

Willie Midgett, public works director for Kitty Hawk, said that the town collects trees and are stored at the public works building, where trees may also be dropped off. Residents that want the trees for dune stabilization are welcome pick them up. He added that Better Beaches OBX also uses the trees for their projects.

Kill Devil Hills will begin Jan. 9 collecting natural Christmas trees. No later than Jan. 8 should the undecorated tree be placed in the right-of-way adjacent to the property.

Steve Albright, public services director for Kill Devil Hills told Coastal Review Online that the trees are available for use for beach stabilization. “We sometimes have some interest in them and allow them to be recycled. Any left, will be added to the limb pile and mulched to be used for landscaping.”

Dare County Manager Bobby Outten said that Dare County does not have a recycling program for trees. Residents of the unincorporated area of the county including Wanchese, Hatteras Island, Colington, Martin’s Point, East Lake and Stumpy Point are encouraged to bring their used Christmas trees to either the Buxton or Manteo Recycling collection centers, where it can then be recycled into mulch, according to a statement.

Southern Shores town manager Peter Rascoe said that that the town does not have an official program for natural tree recycling. The trees may be placed in the limb and branch piles for collection by Southern Shores, though wreaths will not be collected, according to information from Dare County.

Duck’s Waste Management will collect trees from residents Jan. 7 and Jan. 14 and Manteo residents should have the trees curbside by Jan. 10 and Jan. 15 for the town to collect.

Currituck County Manager Dan Scanlon explained that although the county has had a recycling program in the past, “We do not have a plan this year to utilize Christmas trees for dune growth and stabilization.”

Hyde County, according to Donnie Shumate, the county public information officer, does not have a program, but “I do think it is a great idea and will bring it up at our next meeting with the National Parks Service since they manage the beaches in Ocracoke.”

Fort Macon State Park in Atlantic Beach has had a successful tree recycling program in place since the 1960s.

Paul Terry, park ranger with Fort Macon State Park, said they collect about 2,000 trees each year, and in the five years he’s been at the park, that number has been fairly consistent. The fort will wrap up collecting trees on Jan. 27.

Ranger Paul Branch explained that depending on the year and what the park’s needs are, they set aside times for individuals and groups to come help put out the trees.

“We use our own park staff, Boy Scouts, church groups, and groups of U.S. Marine and Coast Guard personnel. It is very labor intensive loading up and dragging trees out on the beach. It is so early we have not determined our needs for this year,” Branch added.

“The trees are placed in wind erosion areas to build up sand. The trees stop wind-blown sand and cause the sand to build up in and around the trees,” Branch said. “Eventually the trees will be completely covered, and more trees will be added over them in successive years to keep building up the sand. In this way, new sand dunes are created, and wind-damaged dunes are repaired.”

Terry added that the trees are usually placed in the “Sand dunes where erosion is taking place at a higher rate than normal, or where we want to encourage dunes to grow larger to protect important locations,” Terry said. “We will place the trees in these areas and they act much like a sand fence. As wind blows sand into the trees, the many branches will catch some of the sand making it accumulate around the tree. Trees that are placed in areas that see fairly constant wind can be buried so deep that you can’t move them by hand in just a week or two.”

Park Ranger Randy Newman explained that the trees also provide nutrients to the soil. As the trees decay, allowing beach grasses to claim the area quickly, the beach grasses form a root mass that helps rebuild the dunes.

He added that the park sometimes has areas used frequently by visitors, which can cause the loss of vegetation. The park places the trees in these areas to stop the wind from blowing the sand. The trees also provide cover for song birds that deposit their droppings in the soil, which contains seeds. “The tree again provide nutrients and hold some water, which cause the grasses to return. The tree decays and the final product is a vegetative dune.”

Terry said that, over the long term, this has been a very successful program. The fort has been contacted over the years by several different agencies working on copying the program.

“We started doing this in 1964 by the park staff getting trees out of the town dump to use for erosion control. It worked so well they continued doing this in successive years. Finally we needed so many we began calling for the public to bring in their old trees and it has become an annual event,” said Branch. “Other communities have contacted us over the years to get information on how to start Christmas tree recycling programs of their own.”

Newman said that they have to attempt to limit tree donation from just the local area. “We receive calls from all over eastern North Carolina where groups want to collect trees in their neighborhood and bring them to the park.”

For anyone wishing to donate a tree, Terry added, make sure to triple check your tree for ornaments. “Every year we get quite the collection of left-behind ornaments that have to be thrown away.”

Terry said that the fort is only collecting natural Christmas trees, and asks that folks not bring wreaths, yard brush or hurricane debris. He also wanted to make emphasize that the trees should be delivered intact, even if it’s cut in half or thirds. A bare trunk doesn’t work for catching sand and helping the dunes.

Pine Knoll Shores also collects natural Christmas trees to be used for dune health.

Sarah Williams with the town said that the natural trees can be dropped off at the parking lot of the Iron Steamer beach access, 350 Salter Path Road. Town staff will collect the trees to place on the beaches.

In Emerald Isle, natural Christmas trees placed curbside will be picked up as part of the weekly yard debris collection.

Oceanfront residents can place their natural Christmas trees in the dunes to promote sand accretion, and are welcome to use the discarded trees from the curbside as well, according to a release from the town. Residents are asked to be careful not to impede public access or vehicular access on the beach strand.

Folks also can deliver trees to the Eastern Ocean Regional Beach Access, 2810 Emerald Drive, until Jan. 11 to be used by the Surfrider Foundation’s Bogue Banks Chapter. The group will use the trees to help restore structure to the dunes in Emerald Isle.

Volunteers of all ages can join in the effort by meeting at 9:30 a.m. Jan. 11 at the Eastern Regional Beach Access.

In Surf City, natural trees with all the lights and ornaments removed can be brought to 214 N. New River Drive through Jan. 25 and stacked neatly beside the garage in rear parking lot. The trees will be used to promote dune system health and improvement, according to a post on the town’s Facebook. For more information, call 910-328-4131.

North Topsail Beach residents, property owners and visitors can bring their trees to the New Jeffries lot at 315 New River Inlet Road for three weeks following Christmas. Once the trees are collected, town staff and volunteers will place the trees along the oceanfront to facilitate and promote sand accumulation, according to a release from the town. Volunteers should contact Cameron Kuegel at clkuegel@gmail.com.

Pender County residents can bring the natural Christmas trees with all lights and ornaments removed to the Rocky Point Convenience Center at 16232 N.C. 210 from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays or the Hampstead Convenience Center, 250 Transfer Station Road, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Mondays through Saturdays and 1-7 p.m. Sundays.

“We will accept Christmas trees through Jan. 15,” said Kenny Keel, Pender County Public Utilities director, in a statement. Christmas trees left in storm-related debris piles will not be accepted by the contractor.

Onslow County Solid Waste & Landfill will collect the trees, which will be used for mulch, for a small fee, or trees can be delivered to 415 Meadowview Road in Jacksonville from 6:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday.

Possumwood Acres Wildlife Sanctuary in Onslow County’s Hubert is accepting real Christmas trees without decoration to be used in the animal cages for insulation and enrichment, per the organization’s Facebook. Trees can be dropped off from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. any day of the week at the at the facility, 119 Doe Drive.

Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune announced via Facebook that it will not be accepting recycled Christmas trees for Onslow Beach.

Surfrider Foundation Cape Fear Chapter has coordinated with Carolina Beach to rebuild dunes using natural Christmas trees. The annual project is set this year for 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. Jan. 26. Volunteers should bring a shovel, tape measure and scissors and meet at the Ocean Grill and Tiki Bar in Carolina Beach.

Cape Fear Surfrider Foundation has collected trees for the past five years and average about 100 a year, Kevin Piacenza, the organization’s chairman, told Coastal Review Online. Coming up on the program’s sixth year, he estimates the organization has placed 500-600 trees.

“Last year we did nearly 150 and we are expecting to increase that number this year to 200,” he said. Carolina Beach delivers the collected trees to the beach access.

Piacenza said that the organization relies on volunteers to bring a hammer and shovel.

“We had about 120 people last year and based on interest may have even more this year,” he said. “It’s popular with families.”

The volunteer will place the trees about 10 feet apart, just on the front slope of the dune field. Then, the tree is staked and tied off with twine, with the front third buried in the sand, he explained. The trees are angled to catch sand moving from north to south, because the northeast is most effective wind direction. Sea oats are planted in the late winter or early spring in rows along the line of trees.

“It’s really been very effective, and most of our work has remained in place despite the impact of northeasters and hurricanes,” he said, adding that the town and residents have been very appreciative.

Through the New Hanover County Environmental Management Department, in collaboration with the Wilmington Sanitation Department and Home Depot, residents can recycle their natural Christmas trees, with the lights and decorations removed, through Jan. 15.

“We want to provide residents who live in the unincorporated areas of the county, outside of city limits, with the option to recycle their live Christmas trees,” said Environmental Management Director Joe Suleyman in a statement. “They are biodegradable and we are able to recycle them into mulch or compost.”

Trees can be dropped off in Wilmington at Home Depot, 5511 Carolina Beach Road; Home Depot, 210 Eastwood Road; and New Hanover County Landfill, 5210 US Highway 421 North. The trees collected by the county will be used for mulch and compost, said Jessica Loeper, communications and outreach manager with the county.

If you know of a natural Christmas tree recycling program that should be added to this list, email the details to jennifera@nccoast.org.

CARTERET AND CRAVEN COUNTIES — In recent years, the North Carolina Coastal Land Trust has worked to conserve land in all corners of eastern North Carolina.

Efforts include work at Site X of the Lost Colony in Bertie County and preserving thousands of acres near Lake Waccamaw in the south. More recently, the organization turned its attention to the central coast with two acquisitions, one using funds from the North Carolina Department of Transportation to purchase land near the Croatan National Forest and another adding acres to the Brice’s Creek preserve.

“The two properties aren’t really related, except that this will be an area of focus for the next 12-36 months,” said Camilla Herlevich of Wilmington, executive director of the Coastal Land Trust. “And we are very excited about this first use of settlement funds.”

Rare Habitat

As soon as news spread about the preferred route for the long-planned U.S. 70 bypass of Havelock through a protected forest that’s habitat for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker, members of the Croatan Group of the North Carolina Sierra Club began to fight the project. It was an effort that lasted years, said Cassie Gavin, director of government relations for the organization’s North Carolina chapter. The Sierra Club filed a federal lawsuit in 2016.

The Sierra Club reached a $7.3 million settlement earlier this year with NCDOT, and in turn reached out to the Coastal Land Trust to explore possibilities for preservation that would make the most strategic sense.

“The goal is to protect the land and water,” Gavin said, adding that working with the Coastal Land Trust in this regard was a good fit. “Longleaf pine forests used to be all over the Southeast, and now they are a rare habitat. We’re excited about conservation possibilities.”

Adding to the excitement is that news of this first acquisition in the area came just months after the settlement was announced.

“This happened quickly because we’ve been looking at this area for a long time,” Herlevich said. “We just didn’t have the money to purchase it.”

When the property was listed for sale as part of a larger tract with commercial frontage on N.C. 24, the Coastal Land Trust was able to make an offer to the seller, Talton Enterprises.

“One of the great things about having access to these funds is that we can act in the real estate market,” Herlevich said.

Using part of the settlement, and a private grant from Fred and Alice Stanback, the organization purchased a 113-acre tract of longleaf pine forest, pocosin wetlands and about a half mile of frontage along Gales Creek, which empties into Bogue Sound near Newport. The land adds to the organization’s Gales Creek Nature Preserve and abuts a portion of the Croatan National Forest in Carteret County.

“It’s the first time in 26 years that we’ve been able to do this with the national forest,” Herlevich said.

While the area is important for a number of reasons, preservation of scenic ecosystems isn’t always the main goal.

“Another reason to save land is to help carry out certain management regimes,” Herlevich said. “That’s the case here.”

The land is strategically located to make it easier to carry out the necessary prescribed burns to maintain and restore important habitat, said Janice Allen, Coastal Land Trust deputy director in New Bern.

Other provisions of the settlement call for NCDOT to employ a conservation easement, that the department use environmental practices during construction, which is scheduled to begin in early 2019, and that they close the bypass for these burns, when asked by the U.S. Forest Service.

With this addition, the Gales Creek Preserve totals more than 360 acres, and adds to the other thousands of acres the group has protected in the area along Mill Creek, Turnagain Bay and Long Bay, and at Brown’s Island and near Core Creek.

Craven County Preserve Expanded

The Land Trust also recently announced the purchased 37 acres that will be added to its Brice’s Creek Preserve in New Bern, which now totals more than 60 acres.

“This is a little oasis,” Herlevich said. “It could easily have been developed, and the lands all around there are being developed.”

The area offers a haven for wildlife, floodplain protection along the creek for the community, and stands of bottomland hardwood, Allen said.

The group bought the property from Overlook Holdings LLC, the owners and developers of Carolina Colours, a residential community next to the preserve. Funds for the purchase were provided by a grant from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and donations from the members of the Land Trust.

“It’s not a large piece of land, but it is beautiful,” Herlevich said.

“Right now, there are no plans for the area to be open to the public. Some of what we do is banking land for the future,” she said. “It becomes more valuable over time.”

Looking Ahead

“This will be an important area for our work for the next few years,” Herlevich said of central North Carolina.

With the mandate to preserve habitat and ecosystems about the Croatan National Forest, the organization is compiling a kind of wish list. And as news spread about the funds, landowners are also reaching out to the Land Trust.

“I’m sure we will have more big announcements ahead,” she said.

ENGLEHARD – After 18 months of development, the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan has been submitted for final approval by the state.

Once the state Division of Water Quality 319 Grant Program approves this plan, which was created to improve the habitats and water quality of the lake, the centerpiece of the Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge in Hyde County, stakeholders will be able to move forward with securing 319 grant funding that can then be used to implement the steps identified in the plan.

Originally 110,00 acres and 6 to 9 feet deep, the now 40,000-acre, 2 to 3 feet deep lake is the largest naturally formed in the state but, due to 200 years of hydrologic modification, is no longer considered a natural lake. In 2016, the lake was listed as an impaired waterbody on the state 303(d) list because of high levels of chlorophyll-a and alkalinity. Additionally, the lake in the last few years has lost all submerged aquatic vegetation, or SAV, a food source for waterfowl and habitat for fish.

Flooding is another issue in the watershed due to a passive drainage system that has been compromised by rising sea level. There are four major outlet canals that were excavated before 1950 to move water from the lake to the Pamlico Sound, according to the restoration plan. “Each of the canals have a set of tide gates that operates on differences in head pressure to ensure Lake Mattamuskeet remains a freshwater system by preventing saltwater intrusion from the Pamlico Sound. Rising sea levels and siltation of the main canals connecting the lake to the Pamlico Sound are thought to be contributing factors in the decline of drainage function, and those conditions are anticipated to exacerbate flooding in the future.”

During the 18-month drafting process, Hyde County, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and other stakeholders identified three goals for the plan, which are to protect the way of life in Hyde County, actively manage the lake water level and restore water quality and clarity. The stakeholders identified six objectives and several actions to reach these three goals.

The North Carolina Coastal Federation, which prepared the plan, led a public symposium Dec. 3 to present the final draft.

The planning development process began in May 2017, and since then there have been five public meetings and 14 stakeholder meetings. A draft of the plan became available Oct. 16 and the final, 200-page document available on the federation’s website.

“We all came together to see if we could figure out a path forward to improve the lake and conditions around the lake … we have a vision for where we are going and we’ve identified some key steps to move forward.”

Bill Rich, Consultant, Hyde County Economic Development

Bill Rich, Hyde County Economic Development consultant, explained to the about 100 gathered for the plan’s unveiling in Martelle’s Feed House Restaurant that Lake Mattamaskeet is “important to us for many reasons,” including serving as the centerpiece of the county, playing a vital role in the county’s recreation, namely birding and hunting, tourism, “and is also the blood of Mattamuskeet Lodge. Without a healthy lake we do not have a healthy lodge.”

Rich said that a diverse group teamed up to write the plan. “We all came together to see if we could figure out a path forward to improve the lake and conditions around the lake … we have a vision for where we are going and we’ve identified some key steps to move forward.”

Erin Fleckenstein, coastal scientist and northeast regional office manager for the federation, explained that during the planning and development process, there were many concerns about the lake, watershed, agricultural and residential property flooding, the loss of SAV in the lake, “which is an important indicator of the health of the lake,” and water quality parameters tested in the lake.

“The levels of pH and chlorophyll-a in the lake are higher than the state standard for them. We also had concerns about elevated nutrient levels of nitrogen and phosphorus,” Fleckenstein said. “The elevated pH and chlorophyll-a is what caused the lake to be listed on what is called the 303(d) list for impaired waterways, that means the lake is not meeting its current use standards and steps need to be taken to make sure it can be returned back to its health.”

Michael Flynn, coastal advocate in the federation’s northeast office, said that there’s no active management at the lake, which has contributed to the flooding of private property, extended septic tank use interruptions and inadequate croplands drainage. There is turbid and hypereutrophic, or extremely nutrient-rich water, SAV has been documented as absent since 2017, plus there’s an abundance of common carp, an invasive species.

Flynn told the crowd that the stakeholders came to the conclusion that active water management within the watershed is a top priority.

“We want to see active water management that addresses the lake level. Helping to manage water throughout the watershed would result in less-frequent flooding of residential property and fewer septic system failures and adequate drainage of croplands will be available,” he said. “We’d like to see it move from turbid and hypereutrophic to clear and mesotrophic, have the right amount of nutrients to support the habitat that’s desired, see an increase of SAV along the lakebed and emerging vegetation along the lakeshore, reduction in common carp population … and ultimately, removal of the lake from the NC 303(d) list of impaired waters.”

One priority action listed in the plan is to create a formal body that provides managing authority for active water management within the watershed in close coordination with the refuge, Flynn said. Another priority action is to perform a hydrologic study of the watershed to get a better idea of how the water should be managed.

To transition from the study to designing plans for active water management would help identify what infrastructure improvements would be needed, he added.

Wendy Stanton, terrestrial ecologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, said that one of the purposes of the refuge is to protect and conserve migratory birds, especially waterfowl, and other wildlife resources, through the protection of wetlands in the lake.

The splendor of the lake was the SAV, she said, “There were massive mats of SAV in the lake and that provided important habitat for waterfowl and fish and many other species.” Now, the current condition of the lake is turbid, unclear water with the SAV pretty much completely disappeared, dominated by cyanobacteria and other phytoplankton.

“In summary, we have excessive nutrients in the lake, we have lost our SAV, but on the bright side, we have this whole group here under the leadership of the federation and great partnerships to try to restore the SAV and improve water quality in the lake and help our adjacent communities,” Stanton said.

April Lamb, graduate student at North Carolina State University, explained that she was evaluating the feasibility of removing the invasive common carp introduced mid-19^th century, as well as the potential for a vegetation restoration project to get SAV back in the lake.

As part of her project, about 140 acres of the lake has been sectioned off that around 3,200 carp will be relocated from, and monitor water quality changes. Alongside the carp removal process and monitoring to see how carp are impacting the system, wild celery and white water lily will be planted and caged to prevent carp and turtles from grazing on the new plants.

Randall Etheridge in the agricultural and ecological engineering department at East Carolina University said that he is still working on data collected about the waterfowl impoundments’ potential impact on lake water quality, but “to summarize what we know so far, waterfowl impoundments, no matter what type, at least from what we’ve seen, are contributing nutrients and sediments to the lake.”

Etheridge also studied the canals in the lake and discovered that the insides of the canal pipes are filled with sediment, and that along with sea level rise, are causing the reduction of flow. Another factor is the tide driven by water levels in Pamlico Sound.

Pete Campbell, refuge manager, reminded the audience that Lake Mattamuskeet is the premier waterfowl refuge on the Atlantic Flyway, but is also important to Hyde County and the waterfowl community, which depends on birds being at the lake.

“The visitation has really gone through the roof at the refuge in the last five to 10 years,” he said, adding the waterfowl counts are very high. “Up until a point it could change, we don’t want that to change. Therefore, we are committed with working with our partners not to put this on the shelf but to move forward with it and to exhaust every opportunity to acquire necessary resources to make this thing happen.”

He added that everyone realizes the lake didn’t get in this condition overnight and will not return to its normal condition overnight.

With reports of the effect of sea level rise and climate change in the area from 2050 to 2100, Campbell said he knows the county has been looking at resiliency actions and what looking at what the communities can do to prepare for those conditions. “And we can do the same in the watershed but sooner than later, we can only do so much and we have to understand that. It’s the reality of the situation. Can we buy time? Yes. Can we buy time and clean the lake? Yes, can we protect property? Yes, for how long? if I knew that answer, I’d be a rich guy.”

Wilson Daughtry, an Englehard resident with the Mattamuskeet Drainage Association, told the crowd that a few years ago the association partnered with the federation on a watershed restoration plan for the 42,000 acres the association manages, which was a very similar to the process of  the Lake Mattamuskeet plan.

Daughtry told Coastal Review Online after the symposium that he is an adjoining land owner who has has worked with the federation in the past on a watershed restoration plan and was a sounding board for this project. Now, moving forward, the plan will need to be approved to become eligible for funding, “And then the real work starts.”

Campbell said in an interview that in the springtime, the refuge will have to post warning signs about the toxicity of the lake. When the temperature rises, cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae, increases, which causes the toxicity level goes up.

“The refuge has been part of the 18-month process from the get-go, and one of the three primary stakeholders that contributed to the funding to hire the Coastal Federation to facilitate the planning process,” he said.

“It’s going to take a lot of heavy lifting and a lot of cooperation between the refuge and the service district that will be part of the rest of the watershed.”

Pete Campbell, Manager, Lake Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge

The water quality of the lake is very bad, Campbell said, and he’s hoping that through this joint effort they can reverse the trend and “get it back to a manageable state where the vegetation can be established, the water quality will improve and those signs will go away, as an example.”

He added that it wasn’t an overnight degradation process, and it’s not going to be an overnight restoration process. “It’s going to take a lot of heavy lifting and a lot of cooperation between the refuge and the service district that will be part of the rest of the watershed,” Campbell said. “It’s going to take a lot of financial resources, we will need a lot of support, not only from the community here, but from folks at the state and even at the national level.”

Flynn said after the meeting that the final plan is a result of participation from stakeholders, and the implementation of this plan will require the same.

“I think the quantity of residents, members of the scientific research community, and staff from regulatory agencies and nonprofit organizations in attendance at the recent public symposium held to unveil the final plan is an excellent indication of the vested interest and commitment to the implementation of the plan,” he said. “It was also very encouraging to see representatives from the offices of Sen. Burr and Sen. Tillis in attendance at the public meetings and symposium.”

Even with a federal judge’s recent ruling in favor of conservation of red wolves in northeastern North Carolina, uncertainty remains whether reinvigorated management of the endangered species would be able to reverse course to save the world’s only wild population of the species – or whether the conditions exist to even try.

Only two or three dozen red wolves still roam the swampy forests and farmland within the 1.7 million-acre recovery area in Hyde, Tyrrell, Dare, Beaufort and Washington counties, down from the peak in 2006 of about 130. About 200 wolves also live in captivity.

In the Nov. 5 decision, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina Chief Judge Terrence W. Boyle declared the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service violated multiple provisions of the Endangered Species Act by discontinuing successful management tactics that controlled coyote hybridization and integrated captive wolf pups into the wild population.

Boyle also ordered a permanent ban on the capture and killing of red wolves on private property without proof that people, pets or livestock were endangered.

It was a clear victory for the plaintiffs, the Red Wolf Coalition, Defenders of Wildlife and the Animal Welfare Institute, at least for now. But the wolves’ future in the wilds of North Carolina will hinge on how Boyle’s decree is reflected in Fish and Wildlife’s  final management rule, which was expected to be published by Nov. 30.

Inquiries to the agency seeking information about the impact of the ruling were referred to the U.S. Department of Justice, which did not respond to emailed questions.

The ruling stated that there no impediment for the court providing relief to plaintiffs “pending publication of a final rule.”

Released this summer, the “Proposed Revision of the 10(j) Rule for the Nonessential Experimental Population of Red Wolves in North Carolina” would dramatically downsize the wolves’ range to land in Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge and the Dare County Bombing Range in Dare and Hyde counties. Animals that strayed beyond that protected area could be killed. About two packs – 10 to 15 wolves – are estimated to currently live in the proposed range. Also, the proposed final rule would not restore coyote controls or release more captive-born wolves into the wild population.

“The proposed rule will not in any way remedy the legal violations,” said Sierra Weaver, senior attorney in Chapel Hill for the Southern Environmental Law Center, or SELC, which represents the plaintiffs. “You can’t simply take away these management measures.”

Weaver said much of the rule-making process was done “behind closed doors,” so she said it is not surprising that the agency has not communicated about its response.  As of this publication, the law center had not heard from Fish and Wildlife.

“What the agency is going to do is up to the agency,” she said. “To comply with the judge’s ruling, they’re going to have to go back to … those measures that they know had worked.”

D.J. Schubert, wildlife biologist with the Animal Welfare Institute, said it is a “bit of a waiting game” to see what the final rule will be when Fish and Wildlife finally puts it out, but the mandate in the Boyle’s ruling is not in doubt.

“It’s black and white on paper that a federal court has said (to) a federal agency . . . ‘What you’re doing is wrong and you have to fix it ’,” Schubert said. “The Fish and Wildlife Service knows what the tools are, so it’s not some mystery. They know what to do – it’s just a matter of them doing it.”

Local Opposition

Red wolves once roamed vast swaths of the southeastern U.S., but by the 1960s, predator controls, habitat loss and overhunting left the population decimated.  Listed as endangered in 1967, the species was declared extinct in the wild in 1980.  Some surviving wolves captured along the Gulf Coast were successfully bred in captivity for 10 years.

In 1987, four pairs of pups were released in the Alligator River refuge, and within five years, there were about 30 wolves. At some point along the way, the recovery area was expanded to its current 1.7 million acres, encompassing public and private land in five counties. Before long, much to the surprise – and resentment – of farmers and other landowners, red wolves started wandering onto their property.

That was when the agency’s relationship with the community started to sour.

“Who gave the Feds the right to spread an endangered species throughout those 1.7 million acres of private or state ownership?” Wilson Daughtry, owner of Alligator River Growers and part-owner of Lux Farms, both in Engelhard, asked in a recent email.

Boyle’s ruling, Daughtry said, appears to have “given the pro-wolf advocacy groups the green light to try and force these animals upon the private landowners again, by applying pressure to FWS through his ruling.” And that, he added, “is a classic taking of private land for public use without just compensation.”

The problem is not so much that a wild predator is trespassing on their land – bear and fox are also prolific in the region – it’s that the landowner can’t do anything about it, he said. Red wolves are protected under the Endangered Species Act, which is administered by Fish and Wildlife, and it is unlawful to kill them.

From Daughtry’s telling, it seems as if the program may have gotten off on the wrong foot soon after it started. Recounting an incident where a Hyde County landowner was arrested for shooting a red wolf that was in his pasture with his cows, he said the man was charged with a federal crime. Part of his penalty, in addition to a fine, he added, was cleaning the wolf pens.

“That guy thought he was going to serve some serious time for what he did,” Daughtry said. “How do you think he, his family and his community now feel about the Red Wolf program?”

Without compensation, no landowner that he knows in the recovery area would back the program, Daughtry said. On the contrary, he said, people feel as if the agency is “shoving the wolves down our throats” and that the agency misled them and can’t be trusted.

Tyrrell County landowner Jett Ferebee took the helm about six years ago for other landowners in the recovery area who oppose the red wolf program. Since then, he has been a vocal advocate for elimination of the program, and has succeeded in getting attention and support from state and federal public officials. Ferebee has contended in numerous published letters and comments that the red wolf is really just a coyote hybrid and undeserving of protection, and that the recovery program is a failure and a waste of taxpayers’ money. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission also contends that coyote inbreeding has doomed the recovery program.

But intentional killings by gunshot and poisoning may have been more of a threat to the wolf, with incidences increasing over the years. Some of the shootings were the result of mistaken identity, with the shooters confusing the wolves for coyotes.

When the recovery program was going full steam in the 2000s – the program’s goal initially had been 220 wolves in the wild – biologists were having wonderful luck with mother wolves accepting captive wolf pups, sprinkled with a little urine from a wild pup, that were added to dens when she left to hunt. Many wolves were fitted with tracking collars, and the number of packs, dens and births every year were counted and monitored by a recovery team based at the Alligator River refuge.

Another very successful management technique to limit coyote hybridization involved capturing and sterilizing coyotes, and then returning them to where they were captured. The coyote instinctively would hold the territory, in the process keeping out fertile coyotes. As the law of the jungle – or forest – would have it, a bigger wolf would eventually show up, dispatch the coyote, and move in.

But when more wolves were killed, whether by vehicle strikes or gunshots, it disrupted the balance, allowing fertile coyotes to slip back through holes created by absent wolves. Furthermore, the deaths would sometimes remove half of a mating pair, or a mother caring for pups, negatively affecting their reproduction.

By 2012, Fish and Wildlife, responding to decreased political and community support, started scaling back the program, and eventually eliminated much of the active management, including pup fostering and coyote sterilization.

Schubert said that, despite the antipathy from some landowners, many have been very supportive of the red wolf recovery program. Still, successful management efforts have to include working together with landowners and hunters, she said. “Fish and Wildlife has learned over the year that engaging with the local community is critical,” she said. “I hope they would reconsider how they view the red wolf and not view the red wolf as an enemy … They can be part of a conservation success story.”

Additional habitat also must be found for the red wolf, otherwise the species recovery range is in danger of going from “one to none,” Schubert explained.  “It’s really risky to have a single recovery area.”

The Endangered Species Act, “one of the strongest and best laws in the world” for recovery of species, Schubert said, operates with an understanding that the act wouldn’t be capable of recovery of every species only on federal land. “It really requires buy-in and cooperation from private landowners,” she said.

The best science is supposed to dictate management, Schubert said, but it doesn’t mean landowners’ rights can be ignored. They should be kept informed of management actions. At the same time, she said, landowners also have responsibilities to participate in the rule-making process.

“But the reality is, if we are to protect the amazing diversity we have in North American, that includes uses of the land to protect endangered species. It just requires more effort to make sure you get the required permits.”

An analysis by Wildlands Network provided in a Nov. 1 press release found that nearly 99 percent of the more than 108,000 comments on the proposed rule submitted to Fish and Wildlife supported strong federal protections for red wolves. The same percentage of support was evident in comments submitted just by North Carolinians, and by nearly 80 percent of comments submitted by those living in the five-county recovery area.

Gov. Roy Cooper also expressed support for the recovery program in a comment submitted to the wildlife service.

‘Dastardly Acts’

Ron Sutherland, conservation scientist with Wildlands Network, said that in light of Boyle’s stern rebuke of Fish and Wildlife, it would great if the agency went back to its prior adaptive management strategies. At least, he is hoping that the ruling will result in more oversight over the agency’s management of the red wolves.

“It makes me feel good inside that the federal agency is not getting away with violating the spirit of the Endangered Species Act,” he said. “There were so many dastardly acts that were done in the last three or four years.”

Sutherland said that the wolves have been blamed unfairly by hunters for decreases in deer populations.

Since 2015, he has led an effort by Wildlands Network to photograph wildlife in northeastern North Carolina using motion-detection cameras with infrared light for night shots. Thousands of photographs, posted on the photo-sharing site Flickr, show wolves, coyote, bear, deer, fox and various other wild animals going about their business. It also showed, Sutherland pointed out, that there are plenty of deer.

Recent photographs, he said, captured groups of two or three wolves in the Alligator River refuge.

In July, the group hired a woman to conduct outreach in the community, Sutherland said.  One project they’re planning is to partner with landowners to install motion-detection cameras on their property.

Sutherland said he is “cautiously optimistic” that Fish and Wildlife will do more to help the red wolves and that the recovery effort can turn the corner.

Whatever the agency’s response turns out to be, Weaver said that community outreach by Wildlands Network and the Southern Environmental Law Center’s clients could go far in restoring “peaceful co-existence” with wild red wolves.

“What we know is that the public overwhelmingly supports red wolf conservation,” she said. “There has been a very, very small number of incidences with these animals … that’s all a red herring.”

COLUMBUS COUNTY — Earlier this year, nearly 3,000 acres along the Waccamaw River was protected thanks to the North Carolina Coastal Land Trust and a host of conservation partners in an effort initiated by a $1 million court-ordered hog farm pollution settlement from 2012. In the weeks since, environmentalists have had more reasons to be grateful for the preservation work.

“A month after completing the Waccamaw purchase, Hurricane Florence ravaged the coast, and our preserve was under water,” said Camilla Herlevich, executive director of the Coastal Land Trust. “We know that preserving, reclaiming and restoring our natural wetlands can’t prevent the damages of catastrophic storms like Florence and Michael, but it certainly can lessen the impacts — by spreading rising floodwaters out over larger areas, and by slowing down and filtering floodwaters as they move downstream.”

And that’s what’s happened. The land that was undeveloped had a better ability to mitigate the damages from the storm, said Cara Schildtknecht, the Waccamaw Riverkeeper.

“I was able to visit the northern Waccamaw recently,” she said. “The river levels are getting back to normal and the water chemistry is getting back to normal.”

Easing potential storm damage wasn’t the first reason that the area was protected. Perhaps higher on the list, when it isn’t hurricane season, are the many endemic species, unique habitats and critical wetlands of the Waccamaw. It all began with the settlement of a Clean Water Act violation brought by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina against Freedman Farms and Columbus County hog farmer Barry Freedman, accused of dumping 324,000 gallons of untreated hog waste into a tributary of the Waccamaw in 2007. He pleaded guilty to negligent violation of the law and was ordered to pay the $1 million.

“That was the catalyst. And instead of using that money outright, we leveraged it by working for other grants,” Herlevich said. “You’re in a much better position for many of these grants if you have matching funds.” Project WOW, for Waters of Waccamaw, was years in the making but the end result, completed with the help of a dozen other organizations, has a much larger impact in terms of land saved, she said.

“Since 2013, we utilized the $1 million court award to secure more than $5 million in matching grants,” she said. The thousands of acres include blackwater bottomland hardwood forests, cypress swamps, and 7 miles of Waccamaw River frontage.

“The area has a rare water chemistry and many of the plants and animals that flourish in the Waccamaw are found nowhere else on Earth,” she said. “It’s a treasure chest of natural wonders.”

“What we’re excited about is that it covers so much of the area around the river,” Schildtknecht said.

Although the Waccamaw, which runs about 140 miles across southeastern North Carolina and eastern South Carolina, is considered a clean river, there is a persistent worry about the effect that development can have on water quality. This conservation effort should help, she said, and draw more attention to the river.

“I think in North Carolina, the river doesn’t get a lot of attention. But it is such a beautiful, wild, blackwater river,” she said.

Part of what makes this ecosystem unique is the limestone that underlays the basin. The alkalinity is one reason there’s such a high level of species diversity and endemism. The Waccamaw Basin supports six endemic fishes including the Waccamaw silverside and the ironcolor shiner, several rare mollusks and is a system with 62 documented fish species. Rare plant species include the greenfly orchid, Plymouth gentian and swamp forest beaksedge.

The 3,000 acres is the third of three acquisitions in the area, Herlevich said. The Land Trust also closed on 670 acres in October 2014 and 670 acres in May 2016. The Coastal Land Trust purchased the property managed by Campbell Global, a global investment manager focused on timberland based in Oregon, with offices in Wilmington.

“We were able to work with them in terms of what would be better for conservation and what tracts worked better for their goals,” Herlevich said.

She added that another success of Project WOW is that it joins lands to other conserved properties. These 3,000 acres are located directly across the river from the Columbus County and Juniper Creek Game Lands, which encompass more than 28,000 acres. It also connects to 17,000 acres of The Nature Conservancy’s Green Swamp Preserve, resulting in one of the largest conservation corridors in the state.

“By linking there’s a much bigger protected corridor,” she said. “Bigger is better in terms of habitat, especially for larger animals.” Although smaller tracts of protected land have their place, conservation theory shows that larger animals need more acres to thrive and larger tracts result in less interference with people, she said.

The Coastal Land Trust transferred about a thousand acres of the property to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission as an addition to Columbus County Game Lands for public game lands, which will be managed through timber thinning, prescribed fire, and restoration of distinctive remnant forest types to benefit wildlife such as white-tailed deer, wild turkey, wood stork and Swainson’s warbler, according to Brian McRae, land and water access section chief for the commission.

The Coastal Land Trust will retain the remaining 2,000 acres for management as a nature preserve. Herlevich said the organization hopes to restore and preserve stands of Atlantic white cedar and is leasing the property to a hunt club, which will help it maintain and monitor the property.

The Coastal Land Trust secured grants from a total of 12 different funders including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s North American Wetlands Conservation Act program, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Fred and Alice Stanback, the state’s Environmental Enhancement Grant Program, Open Space Institute, Enviva Forest Conservation Fund, The Conservation Alliance and the Merck Family Fund.

Considering recent hurricanes, Herlevich said the organization plans to continue to conserve this critical area.

“We’d like to protect much more land along the Waccamaw — for wildlife, flood control, and clean water.”

HYDE COUNTY – An ambitious plan to restore the aesthetic and natural majesty of Lake Mattamuskeet would require exquisite coordination and cooperation between a community of scientists, public agencies, nonprofit groups, recreational users and residents.  But an intensive, 18-month focus on saving the state’s largest natural lake appears to have resulted in that very real possibility.

The draft Lake Mattamuskeet Restoration Plan is set to be presented Tuesday, Oct. 16, in Swan Quarter at the fifth and final public meeting to discuss research findings, ongoing and planned scientific studies and a detailed plan of action.

“It’s just a sense that this will involve total teamwork from all the stakeholders and all the people that depend on the lake,” said Bill Rich, chairman of the Mattamuskeet Watershed Committee who recently retired as Hyde County manager. “It’s just a tremendous, tremendous asset and it has to be saved.”

In 2017, a partnership of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Hyde County hired the North Carolina Coastal Federation to develop the restoration plan, along with an 11-member stakeholders group that represented different community interests, including farming, hospitality and duck impoundments. A total of 13 meetings were held.

“We’ve always known that this is just a beginning and almost everything in this restoration is to allow us to get funding,” Rich said, “and it’s also the beginning of a long, long effort to clean the lake up.”

The 50-page draft report reflects the complexity of the myriad issues facing restoration of the lake, but also offers clear objectives.

“We tried to look for complementary research we could draw from,” said Michael Flynn, coastal advocate at the federation’s Wanchese office.

But Mattamuskeet is a unique environment, with numerous public and private jurisdictions, interests and difficult-to-determine boundaries.

Further study of the watershed, its water budget and the hydrological map were some of the suggestions in the plan that could provide more understanding of management of the lake restoration.

A productive first step that could be taken in the near term, Flynn said, would be directing stormwater into a wetland area to allow nutrients to drain into the soil, and then redirect the filtered water to its historic drainage area.  Restoring the health of the lake, stakeholders seems to recognize, is the big get that everyone wants – but it will take persistence.

“It’s a working goal and I think they’re at least going to try,” he said.

Mattamuskeet’s challenges are the cumulative impact of modifications in the land and hydrology, the draft report says.

“Today, areas of the watershed experience chronic flooding and residents have raised concerns about their ability to continue to live and work in the watershed,” it says. “An inability to actively manage the lake water level has created problems for residents and farmers in the watershed, and will only be exacerbated as sea level continue to rise.”

The 40,000-acre lake, the centerpiece of mainland Hyde County, attracts hundreds of thousands of waterfowl – most famously white swans in the late fall and early winter – and is known for its kayaking, fishing, crabbing, duck hunting and, of course, birdwatching.  The area, which has a high population of black bear, also is popular with bear hunters.

But for more than a century, Lake Mattamuskeet, which is 6 miles wide, 18 miles long and averaging 2 feet in depth, has suffered more than its share of insults to its ecosystem – from both human and natural causes – resulting in its current unhealthy state. In 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency put the lake on its state list of impaired, or more commonly called “dead,” waterways.  All of the submerged aquatic vegetation that once covered the lake bed is gone. With no SAV, fewer ducks and swan visit.

But Mike Piehler, director of the University of North Carolina Institute for the Environment in Chapel Hill and a member of the Mattamuskeet science advisory group, said the lake may be impaired, but it still has plenty of life.

“It is in a less preferable state, for sure, but it is by no means dead,” he said, “It remains a valuable ecological resource, but its function is impaired because it is dominated by algae in a way that is not natural.” Although the algae may have toxins, he said,  the toxicity has not reached a level where it is dangerous to people or animals.

Piehler, who has studied the lake for years, is hopeful that with local input and support, a scientifically driven process will be able to bring the lake back from the ecological abyss.

“There’s not a simple well-worn path to restoration,” he said. “I think it’s worth the effort to attempt to rehabilitate the lake.”

The lake’s water is plagued by toxic algae blooms, fed by high nutrient levels from fertilizers and bird droppings that drain into the lake.  Rising seas make salinity and lake levels harder to maintain. The water has lost much of its clarity due to suspended sediments. Oxygen levels are often low.  Heavy rains likely made worse by climate change more frequently flood nearby farmlands and overwhelm drainage ditches with stormwater. Invasive carp have contributed to depletion of the SAV and to other fish species, and invasive plants have clogged the water.

But despite the problems, little has been understood about the exact causes or what would remediate them.

“That’s the reason we launched this watershed restoration project,” Pete Campbell, refuge manager of the 50,000-acre Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge, said in a recent interview.

Campbell said the draft plan, working off scientific and local insights, provides a mix of short-term and long-term objectives that can lead to a manageable approach to restoration of the lake – and importantly, local buy-in. Earlier criticism directed at managers and policy makers from some in the community, he said, has diminished over the course of the meetings of the stakeholders’ team, which included numerous area residents.

“I think people are understanding what condition of the lake is and they want to move forward to make positive changes,” Campbell said. “I think the consensus in the community is the lake is important to them and they want to see the lake improve. It’s an incremental process, and we’re all on the same page, I think.”

A technical working group of scientists and researchers was created in 2013 to start studies of the lake issues, including monitoring. Ongoing or recent research in and around the lake includes waterfowl impoundments’ effects on water quality; carp population impact and control; SAV restoration; and the lake’s input and output of water.

Campbell said that the research will help determine “a path forward with what’s the best bang for the buck.” When the plan is finalized in the near future, funding for projects will become more available from different sources, he said, including federal and state grants.

“The political climate is very good,” Campbell said, “in that our representatives support what we are doing together.”

By looking at complicated issues such as water quality in a holistic way, he said, strategies such as creating incentives to remove nutrients, or devising alternative ways to drain and redirect stormwater from farmland, can foster cooperative solutions.  Implementation would be greatly helped by establishment of a more formal structure to oversee the plan, he added.

“It took years to get into this condition, and we can take steps to restore the ecosystem,” Campbell said. “It’s not going to happen overnight.”

WILMINGTON – The Army Corps of Engineers is looking into the possibility of disposing of or removing the locks and dams in the Cape Fear River.

Corps officials will determine whether the federal agency should take no action, deauthorize Locks and Dams 1, 2 and 3 and hand them over to a nonfederal entity, such as the state or local governments, or demolish the structures.

The Corps launched a so-called disposition study earlier this year because the locks and dams, built decades ago to maintain a navigable channel for commercial barges traveling from Wilmington to Fayetteville, are no longer needed for the purpose in which they were constructed.

Commercial use ceased in 1995, according to Lisa Parker, chief public affairs officer of the Corps’ Wilmington District.

“Occasional recreational and small-scale sight-seeing lockages have occurred,” Parker wrote in an email responding to questions.

Maintaining the locks and dams, which were built between 1915 and 1935, costs the Corps about $800,000 a year and refurbishing them would be a “considerable investment.”

“One of the alternatives that must be evaluated is the possible removal of all or part of the structures, to render them ‘safe,’ and related impacts from removal,” Parker wrote. “There is no way of knowing the environmental effects of removal options at this time. Effects could include: changes in vegetation and species, changes in groundwater levels and flow direction in the floodplains, changes in water surfaces within the channel, and other effects. Impacts to communities and industry could be substantial, and will also be evaluated.”

But demolition of the locks and dams is “unlikely given stakeholder interest,” she stated.

Local communities and industries draw water from the pools behind all three dams.

The locks and dams help protect water intakes and they’ve become popular recreation areas complete with boat ramps, restrooms, picnic tables, grills and picnic shelters.

The North Carolina General Assembly noted some of the concerns associated with the removal of the structures from the Cape Fear River when it enacted in 2008 a bill accepting, with conditions, the transfer of the locks and dams.

House Bill 2785 identifies the following concerns:

• The absence of locks and dams No. 2 and No. 3 “jeopardizes existing and/or potential water supply intakes” above those structures.
• Removing Lock and Dams No. 2 and No. 3 “would lower the river surface by upwards of 20 feet and potentially compromise water quality in the middle and lower subbasins” of the river.

Under the bill, the state would accept the transfer of the locks and dams and all federally owned adjacent lands with the stipulation that all three structures be “properly refurbished” and rock arch rapids fish ladders constructed at each one.

The cost estimate to restore locks and dams 2 and 3 is to be identified in the study.

Currently, Lock and Dam No. 1 is the only one of the three structures with a rock arch rapids designed to allow migratory fish such as shad, river herring, striped bass, Atlantic sturgeon and shortnose sturgeon to travel upstream. Lock and Dam No. 1 is at Kings Bluff, about 39 miles above Wilmington on the river.

That project, completed in 2012, was paid for with Federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and state funds as a mitigation requirement for the Wilmington Harbor 96 Act navigation deepening project. The project cost $10.9 million.

An additional $3.4 million was spent to fill a scour hole so that the structure could support fish passage, Parker stated.

Less than a month ago, Cape Fear River Watch submitted a Section 408 application to the Corps requesting a proposal to improve passage at Lock and Dam No. 1 by creating wider gaps in the rocks and larger pools for fish such as striped bass and sturgeon, according to Cape Fear River Partnership Coordinator Dawn York.

More than $3 million, $1.6 million of which was funded by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources, has been allocated to the design of fish passages at Locks and Dams 2 and 3, York said.

It is unclear when an application for those proposed projects would be submitted. York said she was unsure whether the Corps could consider an application while the disposition study is underway.

The study is expected to be complete within 12 to 18 months, according to Parker.

“Things could really change depending on who would take over the locks and dams,” York said.

At this point, that’s anyone’s guess.

“I know that some conversations have been initiated,” York said. “So far no one has stepped up and said we’ll take care of it. No one has been held to the fire to say this is it, this is what we’re going to do with them. It can be a little complicated, but there’s a lot of potential. Certainly, we can look to who would have the resources and willingness to take them on. You may have different parties taking on different parts.”

Take Elizabethtown, for example. The Bladen County town leases the federal land at Lock and Dam No. 2, which is 2 miles from the town’s courthouse, for recreation. What if the town were to take over the lockmaster house and use it as an education center?

Or, what if Bladen County or the state permanently closed the locks and maintained the dams?

What if the Fayetteville Public Works Commission, which has been vocal about future water supply for the city and Army base Fort Bragg, took control of Lock and Dam No. 3, which is just 17 miles southeast of the city?

“It’s sort of just a guessing game as to who’s going to step up to the plate,” York said. “What’s the liability if we have another hurricane like Hurricane Matthew? There was a lot of damage and the Corps spent quite a lot of money to get the lock chambers up and running. Obviously, the cleanest would be for one entity to take them all over. We just want to see a good outcome.”

The Corps expects to host a public scoping meeting of the study sometime this month in which representatives of various agencies, municipalities and counties will be given the opportunity to comment on the study in the morning. The Corps will accept comments from the general public during the afternoon.

MOREHEAD CITY – There’s a plan by some to soon market North Carolina as “The Napa Valley of Oysters.”

With the launch Thursday of the North Carolina Shellfish Initiative during an event at North Carolina State University Center for Marine Sciences and Technology, or CMAST, they’re one step closer.

The first state in the Southeast, North Carolina joins Washington, Connecticut, Alaska and Rhode Island in modeling a program based on the National Shellfish Initiative, organized by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

In addition to NOAA, initiative partners include the North Carolina Coastal Federation, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries and North Carolina Sea Grant. The initiative aims to create jobs, protect water quality, protect shellfish health and ensure sustainable management.

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Secretary Michael Regan explained that he spends more time than he had expected focusing on fisheries issues.

“Passionate voices fill the discussion around this industry because it’s an integral part of our culture, our economy and the protection and the enhancement of our natural resources,” he said.

The event Thursday demonstrates that environmental protection and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive but go hand in hand, he continued.

“Without a doubt, it is impossible, or hard to imagine North Carolina without the industry and tradition that surrounds our oysters and mariculture,” Regan continued.

With the new state shellfish initiative, “I see an outstanding opportunity for DEQ, the state, county officials and NOAA to leverage all of our resources to focus on rebuilding and improving the shellfish industry,” Regan said

“Gov. Cooper also recognizes the benefit of this industry to our entire state, not just the coast. Investing in shellfish restoration and mariculture are good for the coastal economy, the state economy and again, environmental protection and the enhancement of our natural resources,” Regan said.

“Joining the NOAA National Shellfish Initiative confirms that North Carolina is making a notable progress in rebuilding our shellfish resources and provides a catalyst for our state’s oyster industry at all levels of government,” he said. “It also makes North Carolina more competitive for federal shellfish and coastal restoration investment.”

Regan said that by investing the time, money and effort into the partnership, “we are continuing our journey to ensure that these resources last for generations to come.”

Will Best, coordinator for special projects with the North Carolina Department of Commerce, highlighted some of the economic opportunities this initiative is expected to offer.

“Shellfish mariculture development provides opportunities for increased economic resiliency, revitalization of our working coastlines, and support for healthy ecosystems for food, recreation and commerce,” he said.

He continued that the state is currently home to a number of marine science facilities and institutions that play a vital role in protecting the coastline and solving major problems involving the coast, oceans and shellfish and the industry. “They provide advanced technology and work together with partnerships such as Department of Commerce and DEQ to make shellfish mariculture improve and grow and continue to grow.”

This in turn provides opportunity for jobs, which the Commerce Department is focused. He said an example is the Pamlico Sound where 56 jobs were created in oyster restoration projects.

Sen. Norm Sanderson, R-Carteret, Craven and Pamlico, said that over the last several years the North Carolina General Assembly has realized the importance of investing in and rebuilding the state’s oyster industry.

“We have invested funds to increase our state’s shellfish harvest and to support the men and women who are pioneering this old, but now new again, industry on our coast,” he said.

“We have provided millions of dollars to rebuild the sanctuary of oyster beds in the Pamlico Sound. … We have increased investment in cultch planting along the coast to ensure our wild oyster harvest remains strong,” Sanderson continued, referring to the process by which shells and rock are placed in coastal waters to enhance shellfish habitat in potentially productive shellfish areas. “We have also increased funding state agencies that regulate the oyster industry with more to come.

“I promise you that my colleagues and I in the Senate and in the House will continue to do everything that we can to support you and to help make the oyster industry prosper in our state,” Sanderson said.

Ken Riley, a marine ecologist with NOAA, thanked the partners for helping lead and steer the effort toward this statewide initiative. “North Carolina is the sixth state in the nation to take on its own state-led initiative that aligns with our national shellfish initiative. It’s the first in the Southeast region and oysters, both in restoration and aquaculture, are big business and a bright future for North Carolina,” he said.

Shellfish are great potential for a prosperous future for the coast, said Todd Miller, director of the Coastal Federation. “They are the best indicators of the health of our coastal environment and they can help grow our coastal economy in ways that are sustainable for both coastal residents and the natural environment,” he said. “The initiative we are here today to launch will help us achieve these outcomes by providing more resources and talent that we all need to restore healthy populations of shellfish and to cultivate shellfish farming in a way that benefits both our coastal environment and its people.”

Steve Murphey, director of the Division of Marine Fisheries, said that DMF has a long tradition of shellfish enhancement and mariculture. Today, mariculture oysters represent just under 50 percent of total oyster harvest, so the potential is huge for the industry, though it does come with growing pains that are being addressed, such as public trust issues, Murphey said.

Executive Director of North Carolina Sea Grant Susan White said the state and federally funded conservation and education program is proud to be a partner in the shellfish initiative.

Chuck Weirich is the aquaculture specialist for North Carolina Sea Grant and spoke briefly about the work. He said there is a great deal of interest in shellfish aquaculture and they work with a number of producers to provide research-based information for potential and existing growers.

Ryan Bathea, owner of a small farm by Cape Lookout called Oysters Carolina, said that the expected funding will increase opportunities in the shellfish industry.

“You’d be surprised how excited kids are about oysters,” Bethea said, “kids that aren’t normally interested in a lot of things are pretty excited about oysters and aquaculture and it’s really going to help us get our next generation in.”

After the event, White praised the partnership among NOAA, the state and the nonprofits. “I think that’s really something that’s going to strengthen the initiative. All those pieces really do have to be in place, and then with the industry leaders coming in, I think that actually will strengthen, moving forward, where we’re going to see the initiative grow.”

Following the presentation, Murphey said there is great potential here, adding that the initiative will provide additional tools, such as planning and education.

Also attending was North Carolina State University doctoral student Olivia Caretti, who is studying cultch reefs in the Pamlico Sound.

“I think this is really exciting to see the policymakers, the managers, the scientists doing the research on these projects and the commercial fishermen and growers coming together on this issue and working together to move forward,” she said about the launch of the state shellfish initiative.

Wading nearly chest-deep in Bogue Sound that morning outside the CMAST building was Christian Bayer of My Lord Honey Seafood based in Beaufort and an aquaculture student at Carteret Community College. He was working with shellfish-growing gear in the water during the event.

Bayer said he’s been in the aquaculture industry for about five years, and My Lord Honey Seafood owns about five farms in waters across Carteret County.

“I hope that (the initiative) has a big impact on us. I hope to see that more people become interested in shellfish aquaculture and I hope that it helps the environment as well, because they’re filter feeders constantly cleaning the water,” Bayer said. “The way I look at it, hopefully all around it will be major benefit.”

Learn More

• National Shellfish Initiative
• North Carolina Oysters

MOREHEAD CITY – A little more than 30 visited the state port here Monday for a glimpse of the construction of a large-scale oyster restoration project.

Representatives from the North Carolina Coastal Federation, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, North Carolina Sea Grant, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other partners were joined by the media and citizens for the behind-the-scenes tour of the port.

The port is the staging area for year two of the three-year Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary project that’s part of the Sen. Jean Preston Oyster Sanctuary Network, a system of oyster sanctuaries. In March, 25,000 tons of granite were delivered to the port for the project.

The Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary in Pamlico Sound near the mouth of the Neuse River is the largest project of the federation’s 50 Million Oyster Initiative, which aims to restore 50 acres of oyster reef by 2020. In the first year of the project, 15 acres were built. Ten more acres are expected to be added this year.

“These additional acres are a big step forward in achieving our goal of making North Carolina the ‘Napa Valley of Oysters,’” Todd Miller, executive director for the federation, said in a statement. “We are excited to get the second phase of the project started and to see its continued benefits for the coastal economy and environment.”

An oyster sanctuary is created by building reefs on previously viable oyster-producing sites using material that attracts oyster larvae. Sanctuaries are closed to harvesting, which allows for the oysters to develop.

The second phase of the Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary began May 11 and is expected to be complete by the end of June. Stevens Towing Co. based in Edenton is transporting the material to the sanctuary site from the port.

Jason Peters, reef enhancement program supervisor with the Division of Marine Fisheries, who oversees the oyster sanctuary program and other artificial reef work in the state, told the group that oysters are important because they serve valuable functions that include wave attenuation and carbon sequestration. They also provide an economic benefit because of their value as seafood, provide habitat for different marine organisms and their capacity to filter water helps keep waterways clean.

The division in 1996 instituted the oyster sanctuary program and has built 15 sanctuary sites, mostly in Pamlico Sound, that range in size from a few acres to more than 70 acres from Roanoke Island down to areas in the mouth of the Neuse River.

“The idea behind an oyster sanctuary is to essentially protect areas of oyster habitat from harvest,” Peters said.  “The intent here is to support a dense population of reproductively viable oysters, which can then in turn, seed other nearby reefs and help restore them. In North Carolina, we protect these reef sites that we build artificially so that we can use certain design features that help maximize their potential.”

Simon Rich is the North Carolina general manager for Stevens Towing. He said the process involves loading the barge with 1,500 tons of material at a time and deploying to the reef site to place it. He anticipates that taking 16 or 17 days and they’ll spend about the same number of days loading the barge, with the hope to complete this section in two months, weather permitting.

Kaitlin DeAeth, oyster sanctuary biologist at the Division of Marine Fisheries, explained that the material is placed using specifications that maximize the space and other factors. She said the length of time it takes to become a functioning oyster reef habitat depends and marine organisms such as finfish could be at the artificial reef within a day. They hope that during the spawning seasons, oyster spat will float through that area and catch on the rock material. The division will likely complete a full assessment in August.

Peters added that there’s typically two spawning seasons, the spring and fall of each year.

In addition to the oyster sanctuary program, the division also heads up the cultch-planting program. Cultch is oyster shell, limestone and other shell material that oyster larvae, or spat, colonize. Oyster sanctuary sites and cultch-planting sites are built where they can interact with one another. As part of the division’s cultch planting program, they build about 40-60 acres of reef every year that are lower in profile and open to harvest, Peters said.

While they may be spatially separated, sanctuary sites and cultch sites are connected by currents. “We try to position oyster sanctuary sites in areas where the cultch planting sites can benefit from the larvae coming off of it,” Peters explained.

Peters said the reason granite rock is being used this year is because it is more dense, and therefore less susceptible to some environmental pests that occur in the Pamlico Sound. The main pest being the marine boring sponge that can drill into and live inside calcium carbonate rocks, and are detrimental to the survival of oysters. The granite is harder and doesn’t harbor that environmental pest. Limestone marl has been used since the oyster sanctuary program began in 1996. In some cases, they have seen a fair amount of boring sponge at those reef sites.

This is the first time granite rock has been used at such a large scale, Peters added. A grand total of 25,000 tons, or 50 million pounds of granite is anticipated to be used to build the 10 acres at the reef site.

Peters said that the division expects about 10 million oysters from this year’s portion of the project, added to the 15 million oysters on the 15 acres created under the project last year.

Steve Murphey, the division director, told the group on the tour during a recap later at the N.C. State Center for Marine Sciences and Technology, or CMAST, building in Morehead City that what they saw at the port was probably one of the biggest public-private partnerships in which he’s had the opportunity to participate.

Ken Riley, a fisheries biologist with the NOAA Beaufort lab, followed by saying to expect this fall an announcement regarding the North Carolina Shellfish Initiative that will focus on restoration and aquaculture.

Miller further explained the shellfish initiative, saying there is a move afoot to designate North Carolina as a shellfish initiative state, one of a handful in the country, and there are plans to unveil parts of this initiative in early August.

Riley said later that North Carolina would join Rhode Island and Connecticut in the national program, the only states on the East Coast participating.

Erin Fleckenstein, a coastal scientist with the federation and manager of its northeast office in Wanchese, said the behind-the-scenes tour was a way to show the full picture of what is needed to build an oyster sanctuary.

She explained that it takes partnerships to restore the oyster habitat in North Carolina and there’s a great partnership taking place in the state that blends national, state and nonprofit research and marine contractors to help build the oyster population.

Murphey told Coastal Review Online in an interview that the Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary is a tremendous project. He said during the first year, the material put out would cover three Dowdy-Ficklen Stadiums, referring to the East Carolina University football facility.

“To me the exciting part of this is the public-private partnership,” he added.

“The habitat that this material provides is special. It’s a sanctuary, it’s not harvestable for oysters, but it does provide a lot of, not only oyster habitat, but finfish habitat and recreational fishing opportunities. It’s provided a lot of jobs already in the construction of it … it’s just a real win-win situation,” he said.

The Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary is funded through a grant from NOAA’s Community-based Habitat Restoration Program, and matching appropriations from the North Carolina General Assembly.

Learn More

• Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary
• Oysters

American shad are a schooling fish, and North Carolina is taking that literally. This spring, students across the state are raising and releasing American shad as part of the Shad in the Classroom program.

“Shad in the Classroom allows teachers and students to take part in the actual recovery work being done with American shad,” said Melissa Dowland, coordinator of teacher education at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. “Every fry that is raised and released by students is contributing to the recovery effort.”

Participating classrooms receive a delivery of fertilized eggs and spend a week taking care of them until they hatch into baby fish, known as fry.

“During that time, the students are responsible for maintaining their water quality,” said Danielle Pender, Shad in the Classroom program specialist at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. She explained that students monitor pH and ammonia levels every day.

“They are also watching the shad,” Pender said. “They can see them as the backbone forms, as the eyes form, as the heart starts beating, and as they emerge from the eggs, they also make sure to sort out any eggs that are not viable so that they don’t contaminate the tank.”

At the end of the week, the class takes a field trip to the river to release the fry. Standing along the riverbank, the students dip cups into the water and send the tiny fish off into the wild.

“My students have absolutely loved participating in the program,” said Kelly Riley, executive director of the Tiller School in Beaufort. “Each year they respond to our reflection at the end of the project and the fact that they feel like they are truly scientists is the most rewarding part. They continually say that they feel like they have made a difference in the world and they’ve learned so much about such an amazing organism.”

Tackling complex ecological issues requires teamwork. In addition to the Museum of Natural Sciences, the many organizations involved in Shad in the Classroom include the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, or APNEP, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, North Carolina State University, East Carolina University, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the state Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Water Resources.

“APNEP provides a substantial part of the funding that makes Shad in the Classroom possible,” said Kelsey Ellis, APNEP program associate. APNEP staff also support program logistics, such as egg deliveries and online media.

“Initiatives like Shad in the Classroom, which increase public understanding of the connections between the freshwater and saltwater parts of our watershed, are central to APNEP’s integrated approach to identifying, protecting, and restoring the region’s significant resources,” said Bill Crowell, APNEP director.

Shad in the Classroom started in 2009. As of 2017, it had reached 186 classrooms, some of which are in Tier 1 counties, those among the 40 most distressed counties as designated by the state Department of Commerce. The program is currently at capacity with 29 classes for 2018, and organizers hope to find new partnerships to reach even more students in the future.

From River to Sea

So why do the students raise American shad? “To be honest, there’s a conservation need,” said Ben Ricks, the Wildlife Resources Commission’s District 2 fisheries biologist. “While the shad are doing fairly well, they’re not at the same level they were historically, and so we’re doing everything we can to try to bolster their numbers, and stocking is one of the major tools that we (use) for that.”

American shad are a type of anadromous fish, meaning they are born in freshwater, grow up in the ocean, and return to freshwater to spawn.

In North Carolina, American shad swim up the Neuse or Roanoke rivers each spring to spawn. The fry stay in the river from six to 12 months, when they migrate to the ocean, traveling as far north as the Bay of Fundy in Canada.

After three to five years, the shad return to the same river in which they were spawned to continue the cycle. About half of the American shad in North Carolina are repeat spawners – they return to the ocean after spawning.

“Shad in the Classroom encapsulates APNEP’s ‘stream-to-sound’ approach,” Crowell said. “Students release young Shad into the region’s rivers, and the fish migrate to the sounds and ocean before returning to those same rivers to spawn as adults.”

The shad owe their impressive sense of direction to their olfactory senses. “Essentially they taste their way back home through chemical responses,” Ricks said. To ensure the fishes’ survival, Shad in the Classroom participants must release fry into the river from which they were collected.

American shad numbers have declined because of habitat degradation and physical barriers to spawning, such as dams. Stocking programs like the one at the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Edenton National Fish Hatchery are attempting to reverse the trend.

Ricks explains that the stocking process begins by placing male and female American shad in large tanks. Hatchery personnel collect the eggs once spawning begins. When the eggs hatch, fry are moved to another tank and released within a week. NCRWC stocks between 500,000 and 1 million American shad fry annually.

“The important thing to note is that Shad in the Classroom is part of the restoration project,” Ricks said. “It’s not just kind of an academic exercise. They’re working with us, they’re part of it.”

That message is especially clear on release day. Students are generally delighted to be outdoors, and for some of them, it’s their first visit to a river. Shad in the Classroom provides all funding for the field trips.

Cross-Curriculum Learning

Graduate students in the Student Fisheries Society, a subunit of the American Fisheries Society at N.C. State, also contribute their expertise to Shad in the Classroom.

Gus Engman, a postdoctoral researcher at N.C. State, leads fish dissections in classrooms.

“We do a little bit of a lecture on fish anatomy usually before the dissection, and then what I normally do is a demonstration dissection,” Engman explained.

The students work in small groups to dissect hickory shad or other fish collected as bycatch during fieldwork. Some students might be squeamish at first, but they quickly become fascinated.

“Everyone’s like, ‘Eww!’ at the beginning,” said Tiffany Penland, a fisheries manager with the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, who volunteered while completing her master’s degree at N.C. State. “But by the end, these kids – especially the ones going, ‘Eww!’ – are the ones diving in.”

Penland also led a macroinvertebrate identification lesson using critters she had collected from the streambed – “usually crayfish, maybe some damselflies or dragonflies.” Macroinvertebrates are bioindicators of stream health.

“There’s so much going on under the water, and most people have no idea all the different things that are in there, so I love exposing people, especially kids, to all that stuff,” Penland said.

Shad in the Classroom facilitates learning about much more than just fish. “Learning about shad supports curriculum at a variety of levels and covers topics including animal adaptations, water and environmental quality, genetics, food webs and ecosystems, anatomy, and more,” Dowland said.

The program even offers lesson plans that incorporate the arts. As teachers develop new lessons, they can upload them to an online repository.

“There are so many great (lesson plans) that are provided by the program through the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences,” said Riley. “The fourth-grade teacher that is doing it this year at Tiller School is using many of the lesson plans as is and has thoroughly enjoyed using those with her students.”

Inspiring the Next Generation

Shad in the Classroom instills an enthusiasm for nature through hands-on engagement.

“One of my favorite things is the reaction we get when we arrive at schools on a Monday in April with shad eggs,” Dowland said. “Teachers have prepared their students with lots of information and excitement about their ‘shad babies,’ and [they] gather outside or in the halls to cheer when the eggs arrive.”

Students develop a close bond with the shad as they care for them. Pender recalled that one classroom sang to the shad during the release. “They will talk about their hopes for what happens to the shad,” she said.

The young students aren’t the only ones who benefit. “My ultimate career goal is to become a professor,” Engman said, “so it’s always great for me to get the opportunity to practice teaching.” He has adapted the dissection for English as a Second Language classrooms.

Above all, Shad in the Classroom empowers students to become stewards of a planet beset by challenges.

“I think there’s a lot of value in the personal connection to shad that students and their teachers gain from participating in the program,” Ellis said. “My hope is that students carry their Shad in the Classroom experience with them, and the values that they derive from it help to shape how they interact with the natural world.”

“To have something that you can see and feel that you are making a difference, I think gives a lot of hope,” Pender said. “You can do something.”

The shad may only be in the classroom a short time, but they impart lessons that linger long after they swim off downstream.

BEAUFORT – Black Sheep restaurant was full of Tiller School fourth- and fifth-graders last week, buzzing with excitement to share what they learned earlier in the school year about marine debris and its hazards.

The presentations and artwork lining the walls of the downtown restaurant were part of the NSF-funded, year-long interdisciplinary Duke University Marine Lab’s marine debris program. Tiller is one of six elementary schools in Carteret County that participated in the program this year.

The fourth-graders each took a turn explaining to the roomful of parents, teachers and friends on May 8 during the DUML Community Science Marine Debris Art Exhibit how debris affects different marine animals. In addition to giving a spoken presentation, the students created posters about the marine animals they studied, which were on display in the restaurant. The fourth-graders also created two sizable pieces of work, a mural using the trash they collected as part of Track Your Trash, an activity in which the students kept track of the amount of trash they generated over a four-day period during the school day, and artwork made from trash collected during a cleanup at the Rachel Carson Reserve.

Fifth-graders participating in the program created stop-action video public service announcements warning of the hazards of marine debris that were shown to the crowd after the fourth-graders presented.

Fourth-graders Emma Robles in Allison Ketcham’s class and Skyler Bordeaux in Cristina Landis’ class were among the students who shared their research.

Robles said one thing she learned is that when dolphins sleep, half of their brain is awake, while the other half is asleep. “If you see a bottlenose dolphin sleeping, one eye would be closed and one would be open,” she said. She also learned that sometimes the plastic that breaks down can get in the tissues of the bottlenose dolphin and it can spread to the calves through the breast milk and that can cause death.

“I think people need to make sure that they don’t throw any trash in the ocean because it’s dangerous for the animals, specifically plastic,” she said.

Bordeaux enjoyed the field trip the fourth-graders made to Rachel Carson Reserve, where they collected trash and then created art with it.

She said she has learned about garbage patches, read articles about marine debris and learned about how long it takes for debris decompose.

The project has made her more aware of how much trash is produced and now she picks up trash when she sees it.

Ketcham, fourth-grade teacher at Tiller, explained in an email response that the school “partnered with Duke University Marine Lab to become experts on marine debris and make a change.”

“They learned just how long different types of trash take to break down, the effects of it on oceanic life and how it impacts overall ecosystems. Most shocking was the part about plastic, that it never truly breaks down but becomes smaller and smaller, eventually turning into microplastics,” she said.

During Track Your Trash, when the students collected the trash they generated during school hours for one week, they cleaned, sorted and counted the pieces of trash, and the results were shocking, Ketcham explained.

“The students could not believe the amount of trash generated in only one week by one class. This realization was what influenced our decision to create our marine debris mural. All materials on the mural were from trash collected from the students during the week,” she added.

Ketcham said that as part of the research on marine animals, the students had to learn specifically how humans affect their existence with marine debris. They had to research physical and behavioral adaptations of the animals, the human impact component and any additional facts they found interesting.

“We also took part in a beach cleanup at the Rachel Carson Reserve with DUML and that experience was very eye-opening for the students,” she said. “They were very proud of the hundreds of pieces of trash we removed. We found a lattice fence and brought that back to school with us. Mr. Alan (Joyner), the art teacher, incorporated that into his class and they made the beautiful sculpture that was hanging in the window at the restaurant.”

Fourth-grade teacher, Landis, explained that the fourth grade formed the partnership with Duke University Marine Lab last year as part of the school pilot program about marine debris. Landis said that she and Kelly Riley, previously a fourth-grade teacher now serving as the school’s director, attended a workshop last year led by Liz DeMattia, lead scientist for the Community Science Initiative at the marine lab, along with area teachers to share ideas and resources.

“Our goal at Tiller was to create an integrated unit that stretched across fourth and fifth grades that empowered the voices of our students to make a positive change in the community,” she said.

Landis added that when this school year began, Tiller’s fourth- and fifth-grade teachers began meeting to figure out how to make this a meaningful project that would extend over two years without becoming stale or repetitive.

“I reread one of my favorite quotes by Maya Angelou and the structure of our units came to me, ‘Do the best you can until you know better, then when you know better, do better,’” which she said inspired the project’s goals.

The fourth-grade students would be responsible for “knowing better” by becoming experts on the problem of marine debris, Landis explained, while the fifth-graders would build on this knowledge and “do better” by taking on a larger role, becoming experts and advocates for solutions to this problem.

“The most exciting part of our unit in fourth grade was the engagement and enthusiasm I saw from students. Nonfiction can be a really difficult genre to tackle, as many students are naturally drawn to stories with fantastical ideas in elementary school,” she said. “This is the first year I have seen students so passionate about our nonfiction unit, because they were truly outraged by the information they learned and inspired to take ownership of it.”

She added that it was an important lesson about the power of integrated studies as well because the students were able to go so much deeper when all their subjects — math, English language arts, social studies, science, art and technology — came together during this project.

Through this project, Landis said the students read nonfiction articles about how debris impacts the ecosystem, which includes reading skills and science content, used math skills to make predictions about how much trash they would generate after Track Your Trash, used artistic skills to create the mural out of this trash, and learned important research and writing skills when they investigated their marine animal. Students also created a display with Tiller’s art teacher out of the trash collected during the beach cleanup field trip with DeMattia. They had the chance to practice public speaking skills when presenting their research at Black Sheep.

“I’ll never forget the way this topic impacted my students,” she said. “They remember what we’ve learned during this unit more clearly than anything else we’ve done this year. I believe it’s because they feel inspired and empowered to make a change and because they saw firsthand how what we teach in school has authentic, meaningful applications in the world. … I am in awe of our students, and so grateful for our partnership with Dr. Liz and Duke Marine Lab for helping us create powerful curriculum that inspires our students to change the world.”

Fifth-grade teacher Kimberly Wade said her students have had so much fun researching marine debris, creating video scripts and art work and making stop gap animation videos with the Community Science team from Duke.

“Watching them use critical thinking skills and become more engaged through technology and innovation has been an incredible experience,” she said.

DeMattia, who has been working with Tiller School and other fourth- and fifth-grade students across Carteret County on this marine debris program, said the event at Black Sheep last week went great.

“We had so many kids expressing their thoughts on plastic pollution and marine debris and showcasing their research and art,” she added that parents were excited to see the research posters, public service videos, marine debris sculpture and poems. The students were proud to have a platform within the community to tell their story.

DUML Community Science Initiative was founded in the spring of last year with a mission to increase meaningful opportunities for area schools, the public and the marine lab to engage through public participation in research, she said. In the past year, programs on water quality and on marine debris were designed.

“The ideas for the activities and topics in the marine debris program were developed during a Vision Workshop in April 2017 and piloted with two fourth-grade classes and at the Fishing4Plastics tournament at the North Carolina Maritime Museum in Beaufort in June of 2017.

“We used feedback from these events, worked with local educators and developed a yearlong community science program that links fourth- and fifth-grade students with real world scientists and allows students to collect scientific data on marine debris and explore their findings through art, literature, technology, math and science activities,” she said.

There have been 574 students from 33 classes and six schools that have participated in the program and have removed 3,949 pounds of marine debris from the Rachel Carson Reserve and Radio Island. Along with Tiller School, nine classes at Morehead Elementary, six at White Oak Elementary, four at Beaufort Elementary and one class at St. Egbert’s Catholic School participated in the program this year with four classes at Bogue Sound Elementary participating in a modified version because of the weather. There were also four classes total at Tiller but two did a modified version because they were the pilot last year.

DeMattia said the reception to the program has been positive because teachers appreciate that the program is interdisciplinary and hands-on, while the students enjoy getting into the field and making a difference in their community.

At the event, she said, “One teacher said that every year she asks her students if they think that kids can change the world, and they always say ‘not really,’ but this year when she asked them they said ‘yes, we can’ and she attributed that to having a hands-on program where kids are involved in a local issue and have a voice.”

DeMattia is working with other schools and venues to showcase their art. Though Black Sheep was the first marine debris art exhibit, she hopes it isn’t the last.

Fourth- and fifth-grade teachers in Carteret County are encouraged to participate in the marine debris teacher training workshop June 25-26 at the Duke University Marine Lab, DeMattia said.

Learn More

• Duke’s University Marine Lab Community Science

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

BEAUFORT – Concerns about marine debris, derelict and abandoned vessels in Taylor’s Creek and having the waterway remain an attraction for transient boaters were some of the key issues the more than 70 residents voiced last week during the Beaufort Harbor management public meeting.

Held at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Beaufort Lab in partnership with the town and the North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve, which manages the Rachel Carson Reserve, the meeting is part of an effort to clean up Taylor’s Creek, the body of water separating downtown Beaufort waterfront and the reserve.

Town Mayor Rett Newton explained that the harbor management piece is very complex and part of a bigger clean water coastal community initiative for Beaufort.

In the early 2010s, while volunteering at Rachel Carson Reserve, Newton said a sailboat caught fire and sank in the middle of Taylor’s Creek, becoming a hazard to navigation. Then in February 2016, he watched from the Duke Marine Lab dock as a waterspout came in, causing about a dozen vessels to drag anchor toward Beaufort docks.

“It was very fortunate that the boats stopped short of the docks,” he said. “Just imagine what would have happened if they had gotten hung up in the docks, if they had been hung up around some of the vessels that were there as well.”

In addition to the hazards derelict and abandoned boats present, there are concerns about water quality, such as gray water, which is household wastewater from washing clothes, bathing, showering and from the kitchen, and blackwater, which is wastewater from toilets, as well as Beaufort services being used by without paying for Beaufort services, he said.

Town Manager John Day explained to the residents gathered that Beaufort has the ability to deal with abandoned and derelict vessels in the waterway but he said the town feels that it’s important to hear what citizens are concerned about, what they see as safety issues, how they want Taylor’s Creek to look. “What’s important to you.”

Day added that as staff and officials receive feedback from residents, the town board of commissioners then will be able to decide the direction they want to move. If the board wishes to move forward, there will be drafts of possible ordinances and regulations and more public meetings for feedback.

The town has had authority since 1981 to make, adopt and enforce ordinances for navigable waters within the town limits, Day explained. That authority includes regulating the operation and anchoring of boats and vessels, speed zones, no-wake zones and other types of activities, the placement and maintenance of channel aids and markers and making general rules and regulations for the safe and proper use of waters for the occupants of boats and vessels, swimmers and fishermen.

“It’s fairly broad authority,” Day added.

Last fall, he said he had the moorings in Taylor’s Creek pinpointed. Though none of these moorings were permitted, they’ve been there a long time, he said.

To receive a permit, someone either has to have riparian rights or have been given the use of those rights by the property owner. The Coastal Resources Commission, or CRC, issues permits under the purview of Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA. There are no records of any permits for moorings, which is an issue, he said.

Day continued that he found while reviewing the enabling legislation that the town has the authority to put moorings in and manage the mooring fields if it decides to do so but it also has the authority to regulate areas where anchorage is permitted, if it chooses, adding to why it is important to hear from town residents.

Paula Gillikin, who manages the Rachel Carson Reserve, explained to the crowd that the reserve partners with the town on various management issues, including waterway management issues.

The reserve performed some mapping in conjunction with the town’s effort to better understand what boats were inside the reserve boundary, they also recorded if the boats were anchored or moored, the types of vessels as well as documented registration numbers. Out of 40 moorings in the creek, 13 are within the boundaries of Rachel Carson Reserve.

She said while most of the time, boat owners will retrieve their vessels once it’s on the reserve, there are occasions that the boats are abandoned because the owners are no longer in the area or don’t have the financial resources.

“Some of the vessels become stranded on the reserve for months at a time, and then it takes us months to work through our legal layers to address those vessels,” she added that recently they’ve been able to work with the town, which has exercised its abandoned vessels ordinance, to help remove abandoned boats.

“In the past 10 years, we’ve had 15 boats that have landed on the reserve for what I’ll call a significant amount of time, and that’s more than a matter of days, it’s a matter of weeks or months,” she added.

The site is protected as a pristine coastal reserve, Gillikin explained, but it is also maintained for education and research uses as well as for the public to visit. In addition, the reserve is also a good buffer for the town, reducing its vulnerability to storms.

When vessels wash up on the reserve, they must be pulled off, causing the reserve to lose chunks of shoreline.

“Naturally, when you pull a vessel off, it’s going to slough some of that sediment and marsh off,” she continued. “That’s definitely causing some habitat damage, in some cases more extensive than others.”

One vessel abandoned on the reserve had copious amounts of drug paraphernalia on board, she said. The boat was on the reserve for a while as officials were trying to figure out how to remove it.

Gillikin said to address the issue of derelict and abandoned boats, as well as some other issues in the waterway, the town and reserve applied to the NOAA marine debris program for a grant to remove medium and large objects, primarily submerged in the creek, to improve habitat conditions.

She said the need is for about $175,000 total. That number breaks down to a $4,000 cash match, about $103,000 will be an in-kind match and they’ve applied for about $67,000 in grant funds from NOAA.

Those funds can be used to remove some of the sunken vessels in the creek and address different areas of bottom debris if it’s not currently serving as habitat for fish or shellfish.

Gillikin said that as a pilot project, the reserve worked with Towboat US to map with sonar half of the creek and found at least three sunken sailboats, which could potentially be removed using funding from the NOAA grant.

After hearing the presentations to get a better idea of the hurdles town and the reserve face with Taylor’s Creek, attendees were split into five groups to participate in a roving flip chart exercise. They were asked to answer the following five questions:

1. What do you see as the economic benefit or potential benefits of the Beaufort Harbor and Taylor’s Creek waterway?
2. Do you have concerns about how the harbor looks?
3. Do you have concerns about harbor safety?
4. Do you have concerns about harbor function and accessibility for locals, visitors and transient boaters?
5. Do you have concerns about the habitats and water quality in our harbor? Sailboats in the Harbor?

Regarding how the harbor looks, most everyone agreed that while the view is appreciated, boats that are derelict or in bad condition distract from the waterfront’s charm. Other concerns related to litter in the marsh and the remains of sunken boats.

As for harbor function, largely there was worry about the lack of organization for boaters, assistance for transient boaters and no enforcement of the no-wake zone. Additionally, there was a consensus about the need for a registration system for all boats, a harbor master, a fee and liability insurance.

With habitat and water quality concerns in the harbor, residents felt it would be important to have a baseline of what is happening now in the waterway. The primary concerns, however, focused on stormwater runoff, marine debris and sewage outflow, plus there was a mixed consensus on the effect of boat traffic on the habitat.

Safety concerns in the harbor included submerged and non-submerged hazards, the need for more signage and enforcement of the no-wake zone, vessels breaking loose or dragging from its mooring or anchor, better management of transient boaters and issues with anchoring within the federal channel.

It was agreed that the harbor is an economic benefit because it is an attraction to the area. However, some residents felt that there was lost opportunity because boaters avoid Beaufort due to lacking structure in the waterway.  Suggestions were made for affordable mooring and accessible pump out stations, as well as communicating with the cruising communities because transient boaters are vital to the businesses.

“We were really very pleased at the level of response that we had and the willingness toward a better harbor management plan,” Newton said after the meeting. “The community engagement was excellent.”

He added that the town appreciated the help of Gillikin and Whitney Jenkins, training coordinator for the coastal reserve, for putting it all together.

Newton explained that he and Day have been talking about a harbor management plan for quite some time, and now it’s building some momentum. The next step is to synthesize the information, see what the data says and take it to the board of commissioners. As the plan develops, there will be more public sessions.

“This is all part of a clean water community as well, it has components of that clean water community,” he said.

Gillikin echoed Newton.

“The meeting was well attended, with 72 members of the public enthusiastically participating in the facilitated input session,” she told Coastal Review Online after the meeting. “It’s important to make sure that the public can make meaningful contributions to launching a process that will ultimately enhance Beaufort’s harbor and waterway for visitors and locals alike. I think the meeting accomplished this well. We are receiving positive feedback from many participants who felt that their opinions were efficiently and effectively captured during the meeting.”

NAVASSA – Residents here are hoping to turn an old wood treatment plant site into one that will honor the townspeople’s heritage, bring in jobs and boost the local tax base.

After months of discussions and meetings, residents, with the guidance of federal and state officials, have drafted four redevelopment concepts for the 245-acre former Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. treatment plant.

Though each concept is slightly different, they include common themes.

“One of them is a river walk,” said Richard Elliott, the Multistate Environmental Response Trust project manager of the federally designated Superfund site. “All of them have some type of ferry access. There’s a viewing platform and a kayak launch. All of them have some element of a park-type setting with walking and biking trails.”

There’s also space for a heritage center, a rice field where visitors could see how the historically significant commodity here is grown, light industrial and commercial use.

Residents who attended a quarterly meeting hosted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, Tuesday night were urged to stay open-minded about the concepts.

EPA remedial project manager Erik Spalvins explained that market conditions may change over the time it will take to get some portions of the land ready for reuse. By that time, the community’s priorities may change, he said.

“Don’t be too fixated and think these are set in stone,” Spalvins said.

As residents have been hammering out prospective plans for the site, federal and state officials continue to investigate the extent of creosote contamination in the soil, in the marsh and in the groundwater of this Brunswick County town.

Creosote is a gummy, tar-like mix of hundreds of chemicals used as a wood preservative.

The wood treatment plant was in operation for nearly four decades, during which time the facility exchanged the hands of a number of companies. The plant operated from 1936 through 1974.

The severity of contamination on and around the site wasn’t discovered until the early 2000s when creosote was found in a swamp by a bridge construction crew.

The site was added to the National Priorities List of federal Superfund sites in 2010.

The Multistate Trust was created in 2011 as a result of the settlement to oversee the cleanup and help develop plans for future use for the property.

Results of the EPA’s remedial investigation reveal that the highest levels of contamination appear to be in the area where wood logs were coated in creosote and stored to dry and in unlined ponds.

The EPA’s proposed plan is to divide the site into pieces: 50 acres where the wood was stored; 50 acres where the chemical was process and stored in ponds; 30-40 acres of marsh; and 100 acres that is likely free of contaminants.

“This was never used for wood treating,” Spalvins said of the 100-acre area. “It’s probably clean. This area, we’re going to try to administratively cut it out so it’s not part of the Superfund site.”

Officials can then focus on the areas where there is contamination and determine they most effective way to clean and reuse each piece of the site, he said.

Samples routinely taken from dozens of monitoring wells throughout the town are helping officials track a plume of contamination in the groundwater.

“We know pretty much where it is,” Elliott said. “We’ll use that data to try to understand is this contaminated plume growing, shrinking, moving, how’s its behavior.”

So far, the plume has remained in relatively the same area.

Officials are initiating a pilot study to determine which methods will work best to handle creosote contamination in a small area – about 1 to 3 acres – of the marsh.

The revelation that the land, marsh and groundwater have some contamination has consistently raised health concerns from residents who want to know whether eating animals, such as deer, fish and squirrel, they harvest from the land and nearby waters could make them sick.

“It’s extremely low risk,” Elliott said, explaining that the chemical doesn’t bio-accumulate in animals and therefore would not transfer through human consumption.

EPA officials are proposing to dig a series of about 10 trenches within the old wood-treatment area to check for “any surprises” of creosote contamination, Elliott said.

The trenches will about 4 feet deep and anywhere from 150 feet to 300 feet long.

“We have a long way to go before this site’s fully developed,” Elliott said.

The EPA is expected to publish in January 2019 a record of decision documenting the cleanup plan and detailing how the land may be used.

Learn More

• View the presentation from the meeting

JACKSONVILLE – The long, rectangular concrete slab may not look like much today, but the foundation of Sturgeon City’s new learning center is a major step for program expansion and opportunities for the nonprofit.

“We’re very excited and looking forward to getting this new building,” said Paula Farnell, Sturgeon City’s director of development and operations.

Under construction is an 11,000-square-foot facility that will house a main hall spanning 5,400 square feet – space large enough to accommodate 450 to 500 people and events such as educational classes, conferences and weddings.

“The mission of Sturgeon City is to become the model for inspiring youth leadership, civic involvement, habitat restoration, environmental education and stewardship of the New River and coastal wetlands.”

sturgeoncity.org

The indoor meeting space alone is significantly larger than Sturgeon City’s current learning center, which spans a mere 1,500 square feet.

“We have limited capacity now,” Farnell said. “We often, like when a larger school comes to visit, they have to send their classes over different days. Now we’ll have the ability to run multiple programs on the same days.”

The $3.2 million building is a long-awaited addition to the grounds of the former wastewater treatment plant overlooking the end of Wilson Bay on the New River in downtown Jacksonville.

The new learning center will sit among the former plant’s original structures where tens of thousands of gallons of raw sewage once sifted and churned.

Sturgeon City’s visionaries determined years ago to repurpose the old concrete structures on the site, which is a teaching ground and a memorial to how one community pulled together to reverse the devastation caused by years of dumping sewage into the bay.

In one area of the 26-acre site rests a square, two-story bio tower; four large round holding tanks; and a series of drying beds tucked between the administration building to the water’s edge.

The words “Greater Jacksonville Wastewater Treatment Facility” – another reminder of the past – remain over the administration building’s double glass doors.

More than 170 truckloads of black plastic “bio balls” used to filter wastewater have been removed from the bio tower and hauled to a landfill.

“There had been some thought as to whether [the bio balls] would be reusable,” Farnell said.

But as the tedious removal began, staff discovered that the plastic balls were not meant for dry conditions and the cracked, plastic casings could not be salvaged.

The hope is to reuse the bio tower, once the highest point in Jacksonville, as exhibit space. Construction crews are in the process of securing the tower’s roof to use as an observation deck.

Sturgeon City was founded in 2000 as an environmental teaching ground and today it hosts between 60 and 80 programs. Hundreds of school-age children visit the site annually through field trips. During the summer season, a variety of environmental and science camps are held on site.

Now upwards of 8,000 to 9,000 children visit the site to participate in programs designed to enhance their knowledge about science, aquaculture, math and forensics and encourage them to volunteer.

The nonprofit even offers a monthly “parents’ night out,” where one Friday of each month children may be dropped off to enjoy hands-on educational programs for a nominal fee.

“We’ve grown quite a bit since 2005-2006, when we started a majority of our programs,” Farnell said.

Half of the land, once a landfill, is a park with picnic tables, a playground and walkways leading to the bay. Nine acres of wetlands have been restored along Sturgeon City’s banks.

Over the years, the site has also been used for research, but Farnell said staff is focusing primarily on the educational component.

Currently, the campus is housing an oyster restoration project run by the city’s storm water department. Three oyster reefs, including about eight million oysters, have been constructed in the bay, Farnell said.

Sturgeon City’s beginnings stem from efforts that began decades ago to clean the bay.

In the 1990s, the city and North Carolina State University began the Wilson Bay initiative, a project aimed at restoring aquatic life to the bay after treated sewage had been dumped into it for more than 40 years.

After closing the plant, city leaders intended to raze its structures and possibly sell the land. A scientist working on the bay initiative came up with the idea to use the plant’s large tanks to raise Atlantic sturgeon, bottom feeders that once thrived in the bay.

Raising and releasing the fish into the wild isn’t permitted.

In recent years, there has been the occasional siting of Sturgeon, but they have been few and far between.

“They’re very sensitive to water quality,” Farnell said. “Simply getting the water quality healthy isn’t going to be enough to bring them back to what they were here.”

Koi, which have been placed in two of the large tanks, are the only fish visitors will see on the grounds.

As the facility expands, the hope is that so too will the outreach and educational programs at Sturgeon City, Farnell said.

“We’re hoping as our capacity grows, it will grow more,” she said.

The new learning center is estimated to be complete by the end of the year and open for use by the spring of 2019.

Learn More

• Sturgeon City

Reprinted from the Carteret County News-Times

PINE KNOLL SHORES — Interest in aquaculture is on the rise, oyster restoration is progressing and shellfish leasing is booming, but with issues over siting and conflicting uses of public waters, there’s still room for improvement.

This was the takeaway message from presentations state Division of Marine Fisheries Director Steve Murphey gave Tuesday during a meeting of the General Assembly’s Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Agricultural, Natural and Economic Resources. The committee met at the North Carolina Aquarium in Pine Knoll Shores and heard several presentations, including two from Murphey and an update on oyster research from Ami Wilbur, director of the shellfish research hatchery at the University of North Carolina Wilmington.

Murphey explained to the committee that progress was being made in implementing the 2017 Marine Aquaculture Development Act and gave an update on the state’s oyster/shellfish rehabilitation program.

The act was signed into law in July and authorized the state Department of Environmental Quality secretary to issue permits for aquaculture. It also required the fisheries division to request federal rules to allow aquaculture in the federal waters between 3 and 200 miles offshore.

Murphey said that while interest in aquaculture has been expressed to his division, no formal application for an aquaculture lease had been submitted.

“I do foresee them coming soon,” he said. The division has also sent letters to the Mid-Atlantic Marine Fisheries Council and the South Atlantic Marine Fisheries Commission, two interstate fishery management agencies with jurisdiction in federal Atlantic waters, including those off North Carolina.

Murphey said that talks with both these agencies and the National Marine Fisheries Service, which is the federal rulemaking body that oversees all fisheries in federal waters, are ongoing.

“We’ve had good meetings with the National Marine Fisheries Service,” Murphey said.

Three Division Programs

Growing shellfish is of particular interest in North Carolina, both to those in the seafood industry and to state officials. Murphey said his division has three main sections dedicated to improving native shellfish populations, which because of excessive harvest are at a fraction of their historic levels. These sections are oyster sanctuaries, oyster reef cultch planting and shellfish aquaculture leases.

“The sanctuaries establish no-take oyster reefs to provide seed for surrounding oyster rocks and cultch sites,” Murphey said. Cultch is the material upon which oyster beds form. “We’ve reached out to the North Carolina Coastal Federation (for assistance).”

The federation is a nonprofit based in Carteret County dedicated to the protection and restoration of the coastal environment. Together with the division, they’ve acquired federal funding for their continued work establishing oyster sanctuaries.

One of the latest projects underway is building an oyster sanctuary at Swan Island near the mouth of the Neuse River. Murphey said that the partially finished sanctuary has proven successful in promoting oyster growth, so far.

“It provides a tremendous amount of substrate,” he said.

Oyster larvae prefers to attach to other oyster shells to grow, so the division has put a lot of effort into cultch planting, which spreads oyster shell and other materials – such as concrete or granite – on the water bottoms.

“We used to average 75,000 bushels (of cultch) per year,” Murphey said. For this year, he estimates the division will spread about 382,253 bushels.

The division has encountered a hang-up with its cultch planting, however. Murphey said the division had to surplus its main deployment boat used for cultch planting, a re-purposed vessel built for military use, because of structural integrity issues. He said they plan to pursue replacing it with another, albeit smaller vessel, which would cost an estimated $1.5 million.

Shellfish leases have been issued in North Carolina since the 1850s, and Murphey said that in recent years there’s been growing interest in them. He said that since about 2015, lease applications have been steadily rising.

“With the threat of conflicts and legal action, it’s tough to keep the interest going.”

Steve Murphey, Director, N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries

However, with the growing interest in growing shellfish, there’s also been a growing number of issues. Murphey said the division has noticed a lot of lease siting problems, particularly over conflicting uses of public trust waters, hazards to navigation and concerns over the effects of leases on the views from waterfront homes.

Murphey said the division was working with those in the aquaculture business to try and address the issues.

“A lot of people think it’s commercial fishermen moving into aquaculture,” Murphey said. “But a lot of time it’s entrepreneurs. They don’t have any experience (with shellfishing), so we need to refine our training requirements.”

Other concerns Murphey brought up included the problem with derelict gear and abandonment of and theft from shellfish lease sites. Murphey suggested potential solutions, including changes to siting restrictions, a study of Bogue Sound for planning purposes and training rules for lease eligibility.

The state Marine Fisheries Commission, the rulemaking body that creates the regulations the division enforces, temporarily stopped issuing shellfish leases in February until the growing concerns could be addressed. Murphey said the division was to report back to the commission with proposed solutions during its meeting May 16-17.

Murphey said the key to promoting shellfish aquaculture in North Carolina is to keep the momentum going.

“The issue is the conflict,” he said, referring to disputes over siting, water views and uses. “With the threat of conflicts and legal action, it’s tough to keep the interest going.”

State Rep. Pat McElraft, R-Carteret, committee co-chair, said that if the division could put together cost estimates for its projects that need funding, such as the new deployment vessel, the committee would bring the request to the full General Assembly during its upcoming short session.

UNCW Research

The state isn’t alone in pursuing improvements to shellfish growing. Wilbur, of UNCW’s shellfish hatchery, said the university’s researchers are focused on understanding wild oyster populations so they can help manage North Carolina’s wild oysters in more sustainable ways.

Oysters are an important species in that they filter water as they feed, helping improve water quality, protecting habitat for various species and protecting shorelines from erosion.

UNCW is home to the state’s only shellfish research hatchery. Established in 2011, the hatchery provides shellfish larvae for research projects and shellfish aquaculture.

“Our program develops selective breeding of oysters,” Wilbur said. “It was noted by North Carolina (oyster) farmers using the (oyster seed) line from Virginia that they weren’t so spectacular, so new lines were needed.”

In addition to oyster seed, the hatchery is also branching out into growing seed for clams and scallops, as well as experimenting with different types of cages for growing shellfish and developing new shellfish husbandry strategies.

Learn More

• Division of Marine Fisheries’ Shellfish Lease and Franchise Program
• UNCW Shellfish Research Hatchery

This story is provided courtesy of the Carteret County News-Times, a tri-weekly newspaper published in Morehead City. Coastal Review Online is partnering with the News-Times to provide our readers with news of the North Carolina coast.

Against a backdrop of mutual challenges in the Albemarle-Pamlico estuary from climate change and budget shortfalls, an updated partnership between Virginia and North Carolina is starting to flex its collaborative muscle with important border-blind issues: wetlands, algal blooms and fish travel.

The memorandum of understanding, or MOU, that was signed Nov. 1 by representatives of environmental agencies in both states will make it easier for sharing of information and resources in management of the second largest estuary in the continental United States.

“This provides authorization for us to work cooperatively with our governmental counterparts across state lines,” said Bill Crowell, director of the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, the federal-state program that facilitated development of the agreement. “It’s going to benefit all of us.”

The program, founded in 1987, encompasses the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico, Pasquotank, Chowan, lower Roanoke and portions of the White Oak river basins, a total of 3,000 square miles of open water. Water from 43 counties in North Carolina and 38 counties and cities in Virginia drain into the 31,500 square miles of total watershed area.

Crowell said that previous attempts to update a similar MOU from 2001 were thwarted by the states’ changing politics and agencies. But in light of new administrations in Virginia and North Carolina, he said, it was decided last spring to give an update another shot.

“One of the points of that,” he said, “is to make it consistent with governmental structures so that everybody knows their role.”

A significant difference in the current MOU is that it is more focused, and it requires staff to follow-up on progress with an annual review, said Kirk Havens, chair of the partnership’s leadership council.

“I think that’s a really important part of it,” said Havens, the assistant director of the Coastal Watersheds Program at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science. “It actually designates personnel to be part of the evaluation of the implementation.”

One of the first projects launched under the new agreement, he said, is a comprehensive combined wetlands inventory for the two states’ watersheds. Working off of existing GIS (geographic information system) maps from the National Wetlands Inventory, new maps will be created that show the totality of each wetland, irrespective of the state borders. Pertinent data on details such as submerged aquatic vegetation or invasive species could also be layered on the maps

“You look at them from the North Carolina side, and the Virginia side but we want to look at them from a watershed component combining GIS in a complement that’s shared,” Havens said.

Havens said he expects the new maps will be ready to be utilized by APNEP’s Wetlands Resource Monitoring and Assessment Team in a few months.

Considering that air and water, not to mention animals and plants, pay no attention to boundary lines, the partnership sees a lot to be gained overall in having a more holistic management option in the vast estuary.

For instance, in the Chowan River basin alone, it has been plagued in recent years by invasive hydrilla, an aquatic weed; blue catfish, a voracious non-native fish; and algal bloom, potentially toxic overgrowth of algae – all that threaten waters in both states.

The bi-state approach fostered by the new agreement is not reinventing the wheel, but instead is incorporating existing data sets and planning strategies, Crowell said. Now they can be more readily shared and coordinated. A lot of the communication will be done electronically, although there will also be meetings held in different locations throughout Virginia and North Carolina.

It won’t equal the star power of the Chesapeake Bay multi-state consortium, but it may help the Albemarle-Pamlico to gain more of the attention from the Chesapeake – the largest estuary.

Funding is not provided in the MOU, Crowell said, but the agreement can make is easier for states to co-apply for grants and share costs of a project.

Increasing impacts from sea level rise and climate change have exacerbated the ongoing stresses to the ecosystems. Still, saltwater intrusion, flooding, erosion and loss of habitat, among other related issues, have been on environmental management radar screens in the region for many years.

“That just adds to the problem rather than being a separate problem,” Crowell said of climate change.

Efforts have already been coordinated between state environmental agencies to coordinate data sharing in the Chowan and Pasquotank river basins.

On the North Carolina side of the Chowan basin, algal blooms that have persisted for several years are still not understood, and the partnership is hopeful that agreement will help both states to work to identify the cause.

“We’ve been doing cross-border things for years,” Crowell said. “Most of what we do is supportive of our partners mission.”

Other projects the partnership plans to tackle in coming months include work to address fish passage and spawning habitat issues, nutrient pollution from drainage and invasive aquatic grasses and fish. The agreement is also expected to improve communication and coordination with the Roanoke Bi-State Commission.

“I think it’s timely and we want it to be something that’s meaningful and shows consistent results,” Havens said. “A lot of this is trying to improve the quality of life and natural resources for those citizens living by those waterways.”

The agreement also expands the access to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which is Region 4 in North Carolina and Region 3 in Virginia, and expands contacts with non-governmental groups in both states.

“At the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership, we see if we’re having better relationships with our northern neighbor, then that can only help us fulfill our mission with all our partners,” Crowell said. “It’s important that we actually do something under this MOU. I think we’ve started getting the conversations going.”

Learn More

• About the partnership

COLUMBIA — For the time being, it might be best to ignore the little sign off U.S. 64 in Tyrrell County directing drivers toward the Palmetto-Peartree Preserve.  Years of neglect have left roads into the densely vegetated land nearly impassable and boardwalks subsumed by overgrown plants.

But better days may be ahead for the 10,297-acre site, which is in the process of being transferred to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.

“What we want is the promises to be fulfilled,” said David Clegg, Tyrrell County manager. “First and foremost, for infrastructure within that tract to remain open and accessible so it would fit our vision of ecotourism.”

Created in 1999 by the nonprofit organization, The Conservation Fund, as a mitigation bank for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker, the PPP, or alternately, P3 — the preserve’s informal names — fell into disrepair after its ownership was transferred in July 2015 to the state Department of Transportation, which had neither funds for nor interest in the preserve’s upkeep.

The former pine and hardwood timberland, bordered by the Albemarle Sound and the Little Alligator River, turned out to be good habitat for the woodpeckers. For that reason, NCDOT ended up managing the species at the preserve to mitigate the bird’s habitat loss at its construction sites elsewhere in the state.

The woodpeckers were listed as endangered in 1970. Considering that the birds take about nine years to excavate a cavity in a 100-year-old loblolly pine tree — or as long as 13 years in a longleaf pine — it’s a wonder the species has survived at all.

But the hard-working birds can get lucky and inherit a cavity from their relatives, which would free them up to spend their time defending the cavity from numerous interlopers. Though, climate change may end up being the woodpeckers’ doom at the preserve: rising water tables in the preserve are slowly killing the pines that the birds require for their chosen cavities.

DOT has mostly met its conservation requirements at the preserve, and has long been looking to transfer it to a willing recipient. The Conservation Fund had intended to keep the site no longer than five years, but no agency or nonprofit came forward, leaving the preserve in DOT’s hands by default.

“The mitigation need for that property is no longer necessary,” said Brent Wilson, the wildlife commission’s coastal ecoregion supervisor.

The commission approved the acquisition at its Oct. 5 meeting. The state property office, he added, is working on the deed and a memorandum of understanding that will retain some rights for the donor DOT to conduct any necessary mitigation or road work in the future. The transfer is expected to be finalized by the end of April, he said, and the boundaries posted by Sept. 1 to delineate from private lands.

“The Conservation Fund is very pleased that the property is going to be transferred,” said Bill Holman, the fund’s state director in North Carolina. “We think the Wildlife Resources Commission will do a good job managing the property and opening it up to the public.”

In 2015, there were about 32 clusters used by the birds at the preserve.  A cluster is an aggregation of cavity trees used by a family group. An environmental consultant company had managed the species for DOT since 1995.

Wilson said that acquisition of the preserve would expand the bear hunting opportunities in the region, as well as recreational activities for kayakers, hikers, bicyclists and birdwatchers. Squirrel and deer hunting also would be likely permitted.

The tract is located near the 14,178-acre Alligator River Game Lands, the 1,441-acre Texas Plantation Game Land waterfowl impoundments and the 2,100-acre J. Morgan Futch Game Land, all also managed by the wildlife commission.

Back when The Conservation Trust owned the property, it had constructed boardwalks, trails, launch areas for kayaks and canoes, birdwatching overlooks and a camping platform in Hidden Lake.  But all of that infrastructure is now in disrepair.

The preserve, which was named after shoreline land forms Palmetto Point and Peartree Point, had a portion of it leased to hunt clubs — its heavily vegetated wetland swamps and pocosin forest are thick with bear. The intention was to promote the area as an eco-tourism destination, but over time the plans fizzled out. Guides have continued to take groups out to the site during the annual Wings over Water birdwatching event, and hunters still trudge through the thickets, but the preserve is too rugged and rough going for the casual recreational visitor.

According to a commission document, the preserve has more than 23 miles of unimproved logging roads that had been maintained to conduct monitoring of the woodpeckers. But roads will not be able to support traffic from hunters without a gravel surface, the document said, and new gates would need to be installed on roads. Road upkeep is projected to be the preserve’s largest management cost.

Wilson said that the commission did not appropriate any funds specifically to upgrade the preserve’s infrastructure, but he expects that improvements will be made as much as current funding allows. But a partnering arrangement could also benefit the preserve.

Tyrrell County would “certainly” be interested in a partnership with the state, Clegg said, including looking for grant funds.

Not only do the roads need to be fixed, he said, the public accessibility overall needs to be improved with trail maintenance and drainage restoration.

“There’s remarkable opportunity for birding back there that people would love to visit,” Clegg said. With some clearing and repairing and updating, the site would be attractive to people who love being among wild, pristine nature.

The preserve is situated on the outskirts of Alligator and Fort Landing adjacent to the Goat Neck community, a rural area where people have lived for generations.

With 53 percent of its 700 square miles in public hands, Clegg said, the county needs the revenue that eco-tourism can provide. As a result, government agencies that manage the refuges, preserves and game lands should not be surprised that the county is pushing them for some help.

“You just can’t keep taking and taking and taking without being a partner who helps create the quality of life that supports existence of these natural areas,” Clegg said. “Bear hunting is very important to this county, but so are children going to school.”

Only 3,665 people live in Tyrrell County — it’s often said that it has more bears than people — and the average annual wage is $29,000, the state’s lowest. Working people may be poor, Clegg said, but they make enough to live in the county and no one is looking for a hand out.

“ ‘Oh woe is me’ — that’s not happening here,” Clegg said.

Eco-tourism is the best option for the county to bring in more money, but it will require building places for visitors to eat and to stay.

“Wildlife is ubiquitous in Tyrrell County,” he said. “We’ve just got to be able to capitalize on that and we need the refuges and preserves to help.”

Learn More

• Agenda Packet

NAVASSA — The extent of creosote contamination in the soil and groundwater on and around a former wood treatment plant is of “various levels,” according to a remedial investigation of the site.

“The most heavily impacted area is what we call the process plant and the ponds,” explained Richard Elliott, the Multistate Environmental Response Trust project manager of the federally designated Superfund site in Brunswick County’s Navassa.

Logs coated in creosote, a gummy, tar-like mix of hundreds of chemicals used as a wood preservative, were stacked and dried before being loaded onto trains.

The top 3 or 4 feet of soil in the area in which the logs were placed to dry has higher concentrations of contamination, but that soil can likely easily be removed and replaced with contaminant-free dirt.

Samples routinely taken from 69 monitoring wells drilled in and around the site reveal creosote has traveled anywhere from 10 feet below the surface to a depth of as much as 90 feet below the surface and it is affecting the groundwater, Elliott said.

“Creosote is heavier than water, so it’s going down,” he said. “It’s dense, so it’s tending to just flow down.”

The plume of contamination in the groundwater is slow moving, staying relatively in the same area since the Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. treatment plant closed more than 40 years ago.

The facility included 245 acres of upland and marsh and was in operation under various companies from 1936 through 1974.

The site was added to the National Priorities List of federal Superfund sites in 2010 because of the contamination in groundwater, soil and sediment.

The overall goal is to contain, clean up and restore the land so that it may be re-used for the benefit of the small Brunswick County town, which is bordered by Sturgeon Creek and Brunswick River.

Officials with the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, the Multistate Trust and North Carolina have been holding quarterly meetings to update Navassa residents about the ongoing investigation into how the contamination is affecting the environment and health of those who live in the community.

During the most recent quarterly meeting held Tuesday in the town’s community center, residents asked an array of questions, including whether some of the animals they eat – fish and deer, for example – are being tested for contamination.

The answer: Officials have not investigated any potential long-term health effects from eating fish and wild game taken from the area.

Dave Mattison, Superfund Section project manager with the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, or DEQ, said samples collected between 2008 and 2009 of bugs in the marsh revealed that the bugs present were not affected by contamination.

“You saw an absence of critters,” he said, meaning those that were affected were no longer in the marsh.

“Most of that marsh is in fairly good shape,” Mattison said.

Over time, Elliott explained, Mother Nature has taken control of the effect contamination has had on the marsh, which is roughly 90 acres.

Within the marsh, an area of about 1 to 3 acres may pose a risk to so-called ecological receptors, which include any living organisms other than humans, officials said.

“The next phase is what to do about it,” Elliott said. “It’s a tricky thing on how you clean up a marsh. The problem is, the more you get into it the more problems you cause.”

For that reason, officials may focus initially on 1 acre and see how remediating that acre goes before branching out to a wider area.

Elliott said that about 50 to 70 acres of the roughly 153 acres of uplands on the site could be relatively easy to clean for re-use.

Those areas include drainage swales on the property and the top few feet of contaminated soil.

“The likely answer is we’ll just excavate that stuff and put in clean dirt because it’s limited, localized and we can do it quickly,” Elliott said. “You could probably get that clean enough for some type of commercial or even residential use.”

In the areas where creosote has been found as deep as 90 feet below the surface, including where it was processed and placed in unlined ponds, clean up will be more complicated.

These areas may be reserved for industrial use with restrictions, including the depth at which someone can dig on the land, Elliott said.

He encouraged residents to use their imaginations and offer input on how the land may be re-used.

“Don’t let this stuff inhibit your creativity on how you want this site to be used,” Elliott said. “It’s our intent and our charter to do something there that the community agrees with. The community doesn’t have a say in who buys that land directly. On that part of it you’re going to have to believe that we’re going to do the right thing.”

The town does have a say in how to zone the land, which will guide future use of the property.

The site is currently zoned heavy industrial.

A community development workshop is being hosted Feb. 22-24, during which time residents will be asked to give their input on how the land should be re-used.

The EPA is expected to publish in 2019 a record of decision documenting the cleanup plan and detailing how the land may be used.

Learn More

• Multistate Environmental Response Trust Navassa

Reprinted from NC State News.

RALEIGH – An economic analysis by North Carolina State University, Oregon State University and RTI International finds that the economic benefits of biodiversity and habitat preservation significantly outweigh the costs of off-road vehicle, or ORV, restrictions at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The study sheds light on the relative economic value of efforts to balance environmental protection with human access to public lands.

“We found that the upper bound of cost estimates associated with the ORV restrictions was less than even a conservative estimate of benefits,” said Roger von Haefen, an associate professor of agricultural and resource economics at N.C. State and co-author of a paper on the analysis.

At issue are some coastal areas of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore that are nesting sites for endangered sea turtle and bird species. The same areas are also used for recreational purposes and have, historically, been accessed in large part by ORVs. When the National Park Service limited ORV access to these areas in 2012 to protect wildlife habitat, there were concerns that the restrictions would adversely affect recreational fishing, tourism and the regional economy.

To assess the extent of this impact, the researchers collected publicly available data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration regarding marine recreational fishing. Those data allowed researchers to assess how much recreational fishing took place in the affected areas of Cape Hatteras.

The researchers then used the data to develop an economic model that could predict how recreational fishing behavior may change in response to the ORV restrictions and, ultimately, how much the restrictions may cost recreational anglers.

“There are multiple affected groups here: local businesses and recreational users, including anglers,” von Haefen said. “There are costs to local businesses, but those losses are offset by gains to other businesses in neighboring coastal towns. i.e., if people don’t fish at Hatteras, they likely fish elsewhere in the region. In short, the economic impact to businesses is a wash. The tourism data since the ORV restrictions were put into place bear this out – visitor numbers haven’t dropped.

“That leaves us with addressing costs to the anglers themselves,” von Haefen said. “Specifically, what we’re looking at with our model is the difference between what people are willing to pay for recreational trips to Hatteras – with or without ORV restrictions – and what those people actually pay for those trips – with or without ORV restrictions.”

The researchers found that the cost of the ORV restrictions – the difference between what people are willing to pay and what they actually pay – ranges from $403,000 to $2.07 million per year.

The researchers then added in related costs, such as those associated with administering the ORV restrictions, increased traffic to other coastal areas and impacts on surfers and other recreational beachgoers who aren’t anglers. Altogether, the costs associated with the ORV restrictions came to between $3 million and $12 million per year.

However, peer-reviewed, conservative estimates show that the economic benefits associated with habitat protection measures – what people are willing to pay – range from $13-48 million.

“And that doesn’t include other potential benefits to recreational users, such as beachgoers who prefer to visit areas that don’t allow ORVs,” von Haefen said. “Those benefits also don’t include potential benefits from outside of North Carolina, such as residents from neighboring states who are willing to pay to protect endangered species along the coast.

“This study indicates that the ORV restrictions are actually a net benefit for North Carolina,” von Haefen said. “More generally, our work also offers insights into the value of environmental protection efforts on public lands. That’s particularly relevant given the ongoing national conversation about how to best balance environmental protection efforts and access to public lands.”

The paper, “Recreation Costs of Endangered Species Protection: Evidence from Cape Hatteras National Seashore,” is published in the journal Marine Resource Economics. Lead author of the paper is Steven Dundas, a former graduate student at N.C. State who is now on faculty at Oregon State University. The paper was co-authored by Carol Mansfield of RTI International. The work was supported, in part, by the National Park Service, which has a dual mandate to promote recreational access and environmental preservation on the lands it manages.

Learn More

• ORVs on the Cape Hatteras National Seashore

BEAUFORT – If the town is approved for a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration marine debris removal grant in the spring, they’ll have nearly $70,000 to put toward the effort of cleaning up Taylor’s Creek and adjacent waters.

At the board of commissioners work session Oct. 30 in the train depot, the board unanimously approved applying for the grant, which was presented by Paula Gillikin with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, North Carolina Coastal Reserve and North Carolina Estuarine Research Reserve. Gillikin manages the Rachel Carson Reserve, which is across Taylor’s Creek from downtown Beaufort.

Stakeholders first met in early October to discuss the details for this NOAA marine debris removal grant to clean up Taylor’s Creek. Discussion also focused on what organization has jurisdiction to remove sunken vessels and illegal moorings, which is any mooring that does not have a current Coastal Area Management Act permit, and the possibility of developing a harbor management plan. At that meeting, stakeholders were told that in Taylor’s Creek, there were 39 moorings and a range of sizable debris, included a handful of sunken vessels, more than a dozen abandoned moorings without markings and a few large sections of drainage pipe.

Throughout the years, as Gillikin explained to the board, town staff and about a dozen members of the public during the work session, there have been a number of concerns about the condition of and debris in Taylor’s Creek and the debris that lands on the habitat on Rachel Carson Reserve, which is an outdoor laboratory and classroom, and a storm barrier for the town.

“When we get a lot of debris, it can cause some habitat damage; killing marshes, causing erosion, releasing toxins, entangling wildlife and a bunch of other effects,” she said. “We’ve been working for the past 10 years, diligently, to try to address the issue, mostly through marine debris removal projects. And since that time, we’ve removed about 35,000 pounds of debris just with volunteers from the site, so we’ve demonstrated a real issue.”

The reserve has been working with the town in varying capacities over the years on different environmental management plans and the town is on the local advisory committee. Gillikin said she approached the town manager to work together on the grant proposal, with hopes of receiving the town board’s support to submit the grant application, which was due Nov. 1.

“In a nutshell, it is a marine debris removal grant for the Taylor’s Creek and Beaufort Harbor area, so waters within the Rachel Carson Reserve boundary and also outside the Rachel Carson Reserve boundary,” she said.

“This debris grant is targeted at medium and large items, that’s what NOAA wants to see removed, not just little shoreline debris but big things like sunken vessels, abandoned moorings that might tangle up animals, other large objects on the bottom that are submerged and also sitting in our marshes or anything that might wash up between now and then,” she explained. “So just estimating the amount of debris we have out there, and based on our past experience, it looks like we could probably remove about 46,000 pounds of debris from the bottom of Taylor’s Creek and our local marshes.”

Regarding funding, Gillikin said, “NOAA requires a one to one match, we’ve got a very favorable proposal here because we have a one to 1.6 match.”

“If you look at your updated budget, you’ll see that we’re asking NOAA for about $67,000 in cash and the match would be about $4,000 in cash. The rest of that match would be in-kind services, mostly provided by the town, the reserve, TowBoat US Beaufort, and also the BoatUS Foundation.”

The project would span the course of a year, Gillikin concluded.

Commissioner Ann Carter asked if a year would take care of the initial phase and would the town need a follow-up phase.

“I think one year will put a dent in it, but this is going to be an ongoing thing, NOAA encourages ongoing, sustainable projects,” Gillikin explained, adding that this will probably be a multi-year project that can be continued with funding from the town, other sources or re-apply to the NOAA marine debris project again. “I think it will put a big dent in our debris issue but I think we have to follow up with more debris removal and a plan to manage the harbor better.”

Jerry Gaskill, who was at the meeting representing Beaufort Yacht Basin, asked if the grant would help with Town Creek’s overwhelming debris issue. The yacht basin is on Town Creek.

Gillikin agreed that Town Creek is a problem area but the grant would not include cleaning up Town Creek. Gillikin continued that one reason they started in the Rachel Carson Reserve area is because it’s part of the National Estuarine Research Reserve system, called a NOAA Trust Resource, which will bolster the project’s points on the NOAA marine debris grant proposal.

If Beaufort receives the grant to clean up Taylor’s Creek and does that project well, then the town would be well positioned for future NOAA grants to clean up other Beaufort waters such as Town Creek.

Commissioner Sharon Harker asked whether Gillikin thought the town was in a strong position to receive the grant.

Gillikin answered that she believed Beaufort was in a strong position, “because not only does this involve debris removal, it involved education, community engagement and BoatUS Foundation will make a documentary about this, documenting the methodology, the problem, interviewing the children participating in debris cleanup along the shoreline that would be safe to pick up … we’re going to have a lot of education.”

She added that this information will be integrated into all of the reserve’s education programs, so if anybody comes onto the reserve to one of the programs, they will have the opportunity to learn about the grant project. “There’s going to be a lot of education and outreach.”

John Day, the town manager, said he’s pleased to have the board’s support on the grant proposal, and the larger effort to begin the process of developing a management plan for Taylor’s Creek.

“Also, I’m very grateful for the efforts of Paula Gillikin and her staff for preparing the grant proposal and being our partner,” he added.

Gillikin explained later in an interview that the next steps are for the grant proposal to be submitted, which the town mailed Nov. 1 and NOAA is expected to release its decision in spring 2018. If the grant is funded, the earliest the project would start would be around August 2018.

She went into further detail regarding the documentary films that she mentioned during the meeting.

“The BoatUS Foundation for Boating Safety and Clean Water is going to produce two (films). One is included in the cash grant funds, the other is being donated as an in-kind product,” she said. “We haven’t decided the exact content of the films, yet. But, one will showcase project operations and goals and outcomes, the problem of marine debris both locally and on a broader scale, and the importance of estuarine habitats and debris impacts on them.”

Learn More

• Project description
• Town budget summary

SWAN QUARTER — Sometimes it helps to get the attention of the big dogs in Washington to receive more than budgetary scraps, which is how it happened that powerful U.S. Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., recently ended up chatting with Hyde County officials at a remote hunting outpost near Lake Mattamuskeet.

Burr was in the midst of a whirlwind tour of the northeastern corner of the state in mid-October when he agreed to a detour to hear Hyde’s concerns about federal support for flood mitigation, hurricane recovery and the restoration of Lake Mattamuskeet’s watershed and its historic lodge.

“It seemed very advantageous to let him know what was going on with this federal property right here,” said Kris Noble, assistant county manager, referring to the lake, which is the centerpiece of Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge.

Facilitated by the nonprofit North Carolina Coastal Federation, the county has partnered with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission on the planning process. The commission and the Wildlife Service collaborate on research and projects related to the lake to support that planning process.

A series of quarterly meetings with a stakeholders team began in August to identify management solutions to water level and water quality concerns. The second meeting is scheduled for Nov. 7 in Swan Quarter.

“What we’re thinking is that our plan is going to lead to a series of recommendations that will probably include infrastructure changes,” Noble said after the meeting with Burr, “and that’s where we’ll potentially be looking for federal dollars.”

The state’s largest natural lake has been a subject of concern and controversy in recent years, with a vocal group of duck hunters and other lake users accusing the refuge of mismanaging water levels to the detriment of waterfowl populations.

At the same time, the refuge has struggled to restore water quality and vegatation that have suffered from pollution. With stakeholders now working together on the watershed plan, the hope is that a cooperative effort can resolve the issues.

After settling around a table at the Mattamuskeet Outpost, a privately owned motel and dining facility for hunters near the refuge, Burr listened intently as Noble presented a brief synopsis about the lake’s condition.

“We’ve been seeing a lot of the unhealthy data about our lake,” she said.

“Vegetation data?” Burr asked.

“Yes,” Noble responded.

“Fish and Wildlife made a decision to reduce the depth. Am I right or wrong?” the senator then asked.

“No sir, there’s no infrastructure that would allow them to maintain a lower level of the lake currently,” responded Daniel Brinn, Tar-Pamlico technician with Hyde County Soil and Water Department.

Elaborating, Burr said that some lake users contacted him several years ago to complain about the water levels. But Brinn explained that levels occur naturally, depending on tides, rain or drought.

Although Burr has voted against clean energy and dismisses human-caused climate change, he has been a strong advocate for permanent reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a program that promotes recreational use of conserved land and water resources. The fund, which operates without taxpayer funds, is due to expire in September 2018.

After showing Burr a video of the extraordinary flooding of farmland in Hyde County from last year’s Hurricane Matthew, Noble emphasized the importance of agriculture to the county’s economy.

With most of its land in the 100-year floodplain, the county has created six drainage districts to control flooding, including on farm lands. But at least two of the districts – the Fairfield and Mattamuskeet districts – were completely inundated by the Alligator River during Matthew.

“We’ve taken a huge focus on drainage,” Noble said. “As a community and as a county, we’ve been working on mitigation efforts for 100 years. We are very blessed that we have these drainage systems.”

A subject of the video, the Mattamuskeet Drainage Association, manages the system of canals and pumps that provide flood control, drainage and other services to 42 members on 66 square miles of land in the district but cannot afford to fix storm damages. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, has so far reimbursed only a small percentage of costs.

“We incurred $800,000 in expenses in a 30-day period,” said Wilson Daughtry, executive director of the Mattamuskeet Drainage Association, in a later interview. “That is almost equal to our entire operating budget for the year. We are in desperate financial shape right now and we haven’t been able to do (any repairs.)”

Daughtry said that an unprecedented amount of river water was dumped on the district land, and for several reasons, he and others ended up having to do emergency pumping and other measures themselves. But because of FEMA’s procurement rules, he explained, the association was denied coverage for all but $16,000 of the $800,000 in costs incurred.

An application has been made for reimbursement from the state’s unmet needs fund, Daughtry said. Although the association qualifies for $2.6 million in other FEMA reimbursement funds, the application is still being processed.

Daughtry said that the Mattamuskeet Drainage Association provides, “the first line of defense” from Alligator River flooding for the Hyde County Airport, the Engelhard Sanitary District, the Fairfield district and 17 residences and 17 businesses.

“What we need to look at right away is FEMA mitigation money,” Burr said.

There were also a lot of losses to farm crops, Hyde County Board of Commissioners Chairman Earl Pugh told the senator.

“The last two years we’ve lost our soybeans and cotton because of hurricanes,” he said.

Pugh, a farmer since the 1970s, said that Tyrrell and Hyde County – one as low-lying as the other – produce 25 percent of North Carolina’s corn. But in all his years farming, only one year was too dry.

County Manager Bill Rich said that going back to Hurricane Irene, it’s been difficult to collect funds from FEMA. Even with losses the agency covers, he added, the compensation is inadequate. Citing an example, he said that compensation for two ruined ambulances was for a small percentage of their value.

“That kind of hit, we can’t take,” he said.

Burr said that mitigation funds for agriculture are hard to get, and he is working on finding a way for FEMA to provide mitigation funds to the association. In general, mitigation is high on the new FEMA director’s list, he said, “Because the more mitigation they do, the less they’re going to have to do in disaster recovery.”

“We’ll work on all this,” he said. “I can’t make any promises, and I hope there’s a way to get the ambulances replaced.”

He also said he would speak to the Army Corps of Engineers about funding needs for dredging Hatteras Inlet, another huge economic driver for the county. But Burr wasn’t as encouraging about finding much support for restoration of Mattamuskeet Lodge, and suggested looking to private sponsorships with outdoor retail shops.

“Yeah, you’re talking about a heavy lift,” Burr said of getting money for the lodge.

And then the senator said his goodbyes, and hit the road again. During his break from Washington while the Senate was out of session, Burr – who lives in Winston-Salem and has a home in Nags Head – visited Elizabeth City, Manteo, Hertford and Edenton, stopping by several Rotary Clubs, the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge and talking with students at the Northeast Academy for Aerospace and Advanced Technologies and the River City YouthBuild.

“It’s been a busy week,” he posted later on Facebook, “but it’s always good to be home in North Carolina.”

Editor’s Note: The Town of Beaufort Board of Commissioners rescheduled its regular work session for Oct. 30. 

BEAUFORT – Town officials are again making an effort to manage illegal moorings and remove abandoned boats and marine debris from Taylor’s Creek, recurrent but unresolved issues for decades.

“In some cases, with the safety issues we have here, as well as water quality issues, we believe that there is an interest, certainly among residents here, to come up with a way to better manage the creek and make it safe,” Town Manager John Day said during a stakeholders meeting last week in the Boathouse at Front Street Village.

Stakeholders at the meeting included representatives from the Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, North Carolina Division of Cultural Management, North Carolina Marine Patrol, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, TowBoatUS, The Duke Marine Robotics and Remote Sensing Lab, North Carolina Coastal Reserve, The Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Underwater Archaeology Branch, area businesses, town staff and elected officials.

The discussion focused not only on the logistics of cleaning up the waterway, including who has jurisdiction to remove sunken vessels and illegal moorings, which is any mooring that does not have a current Coastal Area Management Act permit, but also on the possibility of developing a harbor management plan and sorting out details for a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration grant for marine debris removal. The grant proposal is due Nov. 1, and is to be presented to the Beaufort Board of Commissioners during its next work session set for 4 p.m. Monday, Oct. 30 in the train depot on Pollock Street.

Day explained as the meeting began that in 1981, the town received the authority from the North Carolina General Assembly to manage Taylor’s Creek, and there have been instances in the years since where the town has pursued management of Taylor’s Creek, but for various reasons did not to follow through.

Whitney Jenkins, coastal training program coordinator for the North Carolina Coastal Reserve & National Estuarine Research Reserve, served as meeting facilitator. She explained that the reserve routinely holds stakeholder meetings for organizational partners, and has been working with the town on a potential marine debris removal grant. The Rachel Carson Reserve, which is between the mouths of the Newport and North rivers and across Taylor’s Creek from downtown Beaufort, is part of the reserve.

To provide a better understanding of what lies beneath the relatively calm surface of Taylor’s Creek, Jenkins shared a map created by town staff showing the 39 moorings in the creek, illustrating the state of the waterway now. It was also explained that the commercial towing provider TowBoatUS and Duke University Marine Lab on nearby Pivers Island have been working together to create an underwater sonar map of Taylor’s Creek. That mapping process allowed them to identify a range of debris, including a handful of sunken vessels, more than a dozen abandoned moorings without markings and a few large sections of drainage pipe.

Representatives described the perimeters they could work within when it comes to removing abandoned boats in Taylor’s Creek as well as what each group was permitted to do as an organization to address marine debris and pollution.

Paula Gillikin, Rachel Carson Reserve site manager, explained that her involvement is mostly from a habitat standpoint, although there are safety concerns with some debris that washes ashore. She said that marine debris, such as dock sections, moorings, pieces of boats in all conditions, from sunken to abandoned, typically washes up on the marshes and beaches at the reserve.

“One of our primary concerns is habitat damage,” she added, and some of the boats that come ashore and damage the marsh cannot be dealt with in a timely and efficient manner, either because of the lack of funds or the inability to work with the vessel owner.

In the past, Gillikin said, the reserve has worked with stakeholders on regular marine debris removal, and has removed about 25,000 pounds.

“It’s a constant issue for us,” she said, adding that the reserve serves as an outdoor classroom, research lab and as a place for people to enjoy. The reserve also functions as a storm barrier, protecting the town, she added.

The stakeholders also discussed a possible harbor management plan for the town and weighed ideas, presented examples and noted the roles various agencies and the town would play if such a plan were to move forward.

Day said the immediate next step for the town would be to consider the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration marine debris removal grant proposal that Gillikin plans to present to the Beaufort Board of Commissioners later this month during its October work session. Day added that there’s also an interest at looking at other NOAA grants in the future for the Town Creek and Gallants Channel areas.

Day wrapped up the meeting by stressing that town commissioners have not issued any directives at this point but town staff will discuss with elected officials pursuing this issue and look at models for harbor management. Additionally, the manager said they will work to solidify the relationship with the various stakeholders to work together to achieve common goals.

“The intention is not to rush into this because there are other projects going on and we also want to include opportunities for public involvement and comment as we move through the process,” Day said. “We want to be very intentional about the way we move forward. We want to hear from all the stakeholders. If the town does take on and develop a harbor management plan, it’s going to require a number of resources, obviously a lot of time, a lot of effort and a lot of folks.”

Beaufort Planning Director Kyle Garner explained in an interview after the meeting that the town was working with the Rachel Carson Reserve staff to apply for the grant to clean up some of the marine debris adjacent to the reserve. “In doing so, we wanted to see who had control, who was responsible for jurisdictional water around Rachel Carson and, for that matter, Taylor’s Creek.”

Garner said that cleaning up Taylor’s Creek is important “Because some of the debris is having a negative environmental impact on the habitat located on the reserve, as well as creating safety concerns for navigation in Taylor’s Creek.”

But the first step is to work on the NOAA marine debris removal grant, he added.

Once the town is able to move forward with cleaning Taylor’s Creek, officials and staff will begin looking into the possibility of a harbor management plan.

Learn More

• Map of moorings in Taylor’s Creek in PDF form
• 1981 law giving Beaufort authority to regulate navigable waters

NAVASSA – Soil contaminated with a wood preservative used for decades at a defunct wood treatment plant here still appears to be confined mainly within the boundaries of the former facility.

Samples routinely collected this year from more than 50 wells on and around the former Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. site have consistently shown that some areas within the 251-acre property in Brunswick County have higher levels of creosote contamination than others, but that the chemical compound is not spreading, according to the latest results shared during the quarterly community meeting held Tuesday night.

“We haven’t really encountered anything that we didn’t expect out there so far,” said Richard Elliott, project manager with the Multistate Environmental Response Trust that now owns the property. “It probably isn’t going to be totally cleaned up. We just don’t have enough money. Some of the creosote’s going to be there, but it will be contained.”

A total of $92 million to remediate the site and $23 million to restore surrounding land and waterways was allocated from the $5.15 billion total of what became in 2015 the largest environmental settlement in U.S. history.

The wood treatment plant in Navassa was operational for nearly four decades. The plant opened in 1936 and went through multiple owners before being sold to Kerr-McGee, which closed the plant in 1974.

The site was added to the Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund program’s National Priorities List in 2010. The Multistate Trust was created in 2011 as a result of the settlement to oversee the cleanup and help develop plans for future use for the property.

As EPA and Multistate Trust officials have previously reported, the densest concentration of creosote, a gummy, tar-like substance used to treat wood, is in the area where the chemical was placed into unlined ponds.

“Here, it’s got a lot of contamination and it’s deep, 70 to 80 feet,” Elliott said as he pointed to a map of the site.

A primary theme reiterated during the quarterly meetings hosted by the EPA, Multistate Trust and North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality is that residents and business owners within the small, Brunswick County town are an integral part of deciding how the land should be used.

“Don’t assume we know what you want because we really don’t,” Elliott said.

The Multistate Trust must receive approval from the EPA and the state prior to selling any portion of the land.

“It could be sold to a third party and that’s happened at some of our other sites,” Elliott said. “We want you, the community, to participate in that.”

Navassa Mayor Eulis Willis said the town needs public access to the surrounding waterways.

“We want to get to the river,” he said. “We don’t have deep pockets where we can go and buy up all that riverfront property.”

During the meeting Tuesday, residents were asked, rather than look at the property as one, large tract, to break the site into distinct blocks.

How each segment, or what the EPA terms “operable unit,” is categorized is based on the ease or difficulty in which the contamination within it may be cleaned up or contained.

The block with the largest and deepest creosote concentrations will, in all reality, not likely be cleaned, but the contamination will be contained.

That’s an area that, for example, would not be well suited for a day care facility.

In another block, where the wood at the plant was treated and then stacked onto drying racks to drip-dry prior to shipping, contamination is relatively shallow in the soil, Elliott said.

“That looks like an area that you might just be able to literally take the dirt off the top a couple of feet,” he said.

Testing results reveal light contamination in another block, where creosote is predominately in a couple of drainage ditches.

The area referred to as the southern marsh has started to recover, Elliott said.

“There was an area there that was contaminated, but Mother Nature is doing her work,” he said. “That area is in pretty decent shape. It’s not as bad as I actually thought it might be. It’s marsh, so we have to treat it different from upland soils.”

There is no evidence creosote contamination has infiltrated drinking water sources in the town.

Residents are being urged to follow the existing statewide fish consumption advisory.

Jamie Pritchett with the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Service’s Division of Public Health said Tuesday that fish samples taken in the Cape Fear River, Sturgeon Creek and Brunswick River turned up “some concern” related to striped bass, striped mullet and blue crab.

“We don’t believe any of these are associated with the Kerr-McGee site,” he said.

Residents are advised to eat no more than three meals of striped mullet and blue crab per week. The state has a harvest moratorium on striped bass.

A workshop is set to be hosted Dec. 1-2 at the Navassa Community Center, where residents will get the opportunity to hear about possible uses for the site and share their ideas about how the land may be reused.

The remedial investigation report of the site is expected to be released later this year and presented at the next quarterly meeting Jan. 16, 2018.

WINNABOW – The first installment of structures designed to keep waves from eating away shoreline rise out of the Cape Fear River along a section of the already battered banks of the Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson State Historic Site.

Like sentries standing post, a line of structures described as wave attenuators stretches 200 feet just offshore of Dry’s Wharf, one of three wharves on the grounds of a once bustling Colonial port town that was later turned into a Civil War fort as part of the Confederate army’s river defense of Wilmington.

The “reefmakers,” created by Alabama-based Walter Marine, the largest artificial reef builder in the U.S., look simple enough. Each structure is made using a series of square, concrete discs stacked together that create large, slotted blocks. Each disc is topped with embedded rocks that jut up like eggs in an egg carton.

This design does the complex job of taking the brunt of wave energy while allowing water to flow through, protecting the shore and, at the same time, offering habitat for marine life. Each block sits about a foot off the riverbed.

“There’s already schools of bait fish coming around this thing,” said Randy Boyd, an engineer with Atlantic ReefMaker, which installed the wave attenuators.

The wall-like structure rising about 4 feet above the river is the first in a multi-phase project to protect the site’s more than 5,000 feet, nearly a mile, of shoreline.

Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson is roughly halfway between the mouth of the Cape Fear River and the North Carolina Port of Wilmington.

Large ships traveling to and from the port create wakes, or turbulent waves that crash onto shore. This high-energy wave environment paired with storm surge from hurricanes and other coastal storms has severely eroded the shoreline, damaging and destroying irreplaceable artifacts.

Researchers at the University of North Carolina Wilmington have reviewed and compared aerial photographs of the site dating back to the 1930s. Those photos show that since 2006, the historic site’s waterfront has receded upward of 70 to 120 feet.

The multi-million-dollar shoreline protection project was designed by a team of experts, including Boyd, with environmental engineering firm SEPI Engineering and Construction. It took SEPI more than a year to obtain the state Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA, major permit for the project, which combines the protection of reefmakers with the construction of a living shoreline. Living shorelines use plantings and constructed oyster reefs to stabilize and protect the actual shoreline from erosion and restore marine life habitat.

Original plans to place wave attenuators along another section of shoreline were altered after Hurricane Matthew, which hit North Carolina nearly a year ago, cut about a 14- to 15-foot gap out of Dry’s Wharf. The wharf is named after Capt. William Dry, a Colonial merchant, justice of the peace and militia captain.

“We were limited per linear foot by what we would have been able to have done per funding,” Boyd said.

The total price tag ran about $750,000.

Boyd said he hopes to eventually connect the existing structure to more wave attenuators. The next structures, Boyd said, will be octagonal and installed not side-by-side, but rather like a zipper pattern.

“We’re really looking forward to putting in the octagonals,” he said. “We think it’s going to make a hell of a difference. The beauty of this site is that I’ve got four completely different shorelines.”

While wave attenuators will front some of the more than mile-long shore, the living shoreline will be constructed along other portions.

In the meantime, researchers at UNCW are monitoring the project using sensors to track wave activity in front of and behind the structure.

“We’re going to look at these things through hurricane season,” Boyd said.

It is unclear when the next phase will get underway.

“We’re applying for various grants and hoping we’ll be able to get a significant amount,” said Jim McKee, Brunswick Town site manager.

McKee has said he prefers a living shoreline to a hardened erosion-control structure because the former is a natural method of protecting valuable resources.

McKee kept a close eye on the reefmakers as the remnants of Hurricane Irma swept north after making landfall in southern Florida.

“Where the reefmakers are, it did great,” he said.

As of Tuesday afternoon, McKee said he had not had the opportunity to check whether Irma’s driving winds and rain had damaged other areas of the shore.

As he took stock of how the shoreline had fared, McKee said he was also keeping an eye on Hurricane Jose, which was on a wobbly track well off the East Coast on Wednesday.

Learn More

• Atlantic Reefmaker

SWAN QUARTER – On the surface, Lake Mattamuskeet, the centerpiece of Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge, looks serene and resplendent. But beneath the calm appearance, there is a churn of concerning questions about the loss of submerged grasses, worsening water quality and changing lake levels.

After years of disparate efforts to improve conditions at the state’s largest natural lake, a panel of government and private stakeholders is now united in development of a plan to restore Mattamuskeet’s watershed.

“We’re very much in the informative stage right now,” North Carolina Coastal Federation coastal scientist Erin Fleckenstein told the 30 or so attendees at the group’s first meeting earlier this month in Hyde County.

A partnership between Hyde County, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan will be guided by a stakeholders group of no more than 11 members who represent different interests in the community, including farming, hospitality and duck impoundments.

Fleckenstein, who is helping to coordinate the restoration plan, explained that they will be digging deep to find solutions. Historic changes in the watershed’s boundaries going back to the 1800s are being explored. Concerns, experiences and opinions of residents surrounding the lake are being queried. Water impairment and lake levels are being measured and compared with available historic data. Stormwater runoff causes and potential reduction strategies are being calculated. Land use changes will be tracked.

“Another thing we’re doing is identifying where flooding concerns have been taking place,” she said.

The watershed management plan, to be completed by fall 2018, is to provide information, based on scientific studies and local knowledge, on the lake’s function and its current condition and health. Management options to address water quality and flooding issues will be identified.

Fleckenstein has administered another complicated watershed restoration project for the Coastal Federation at a Hyde County farm collective where polluted drainage in the 42,500-acre Mattamuskeet Drainage District has been redirected from estuarine waters and managed instead on the land to allow the nutrients to seep harmlessly into the soil.

Lake Mattamuskeet, 6 miles wide, 18 miles long and averaging just 2 feet in depth, has its own set of challenges. In recent decades, nutrients from animal waste and fertilizers have fed algae growth that may have diminished submerged aquatic vegetation, or SAV. Record levels of rainfall in recent years has also challenged functioning of gates that control water levels and prevent the briny Pamlico Sound waters from mixing with the fresh lake waters.

To add to the complexity of the current situation, the 40,000-acre lake serves as the cultural hub of mainland Hyde County’s hunting, fishing and farming lifestyle and livelihoods. Located on the Atlantic Flyway, Mattamuskeet attracts more than 200,000 ducks, swans and geese in the winter. The lake has also been known for its bass and crab fishing. But residents are worrying that the numbers of waterfowl and fish using the lake are diminishing.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has recently partnered with the state Wildlife Resources Commission to share management of the refuge.

“We realize that the majority of the problem with the disappearance of SAVs is a combination of nutrients as well as suspended solids,” said Pete Campbell, refuge manager of the 50,000-acre Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge, in a later interview. “As of last year’s survey, we had lost all but 10 percent of the vegetation in the lake … We realized we had to look at it on a watershed scale.”

The county, the wildlife commission and the refuge had collectively agreed to share the $75,000 cost of the 18-month restoration plan process and selected the Coastal Federation to oversee it, Campbell said. The goal is to develop strategies that will reverse the lake’s degradation.

According to an article published in the November/December 2016 edition of Wildlife in North Carolina, “Where Has the Grass Gone?” the submerged grass in the lake – an important habitat and food to both fish and waterfowl – began declining on the west side in the 1990s. The west side was plagued by phytoplankton, while the east side had healthy grass beds.

But data collected since 2012, according to the article, has found that there is no longer any difference in water quality between the sides, and decline of lake grasses has increased rapidly since 2013.

Campbell said there is an ongoing study to determine where the sources of nutrients, primarily nitrogen and phosphorous, are coming from. Phytoplankton feeds on the nutrients, eventually covering the lake surface and blocking light from the grasses.

“Right now, within the watershed, you have residential areas, agricultural areas, and public and private waterfowl impoundments,” he said.

For the last four years or so, two water quality monitoring stations in the refuge have been collecting data on temperature, salinity, depth, chlorophyll and phosphorus. The refuge is also looking at strategies to reduce the numbers of carp in the lake, “which is very difficult to do,” Campbell said. The fish are voracious consumers of the grass.

Campbell said that the lake levels are not as high as they were in the prior two years, when record rainfall filled the lake and saturated the surrounding land. In addition to the levels being tracked by the two monitors, the lake’s edge is measured every 16 days by satellite. Researchers are also asking people to volunteer to submit their measurements of the lake to help scientists understand how the lake responds to weather conditions and other factors.

Although there were not many people from the community in attendance at the first meeting, Campbell said that he has heard positive feedback about the restoration planning, and expects that more people will attend future meetings.

“I think we’re on the right track,” Campbell said. “We’re working together to solve a difficult problem.”

Besides the complexity of Mattamuskeet’s environmental issues, there are overlapping concerns of the stakeholders and the residents, many of whom have multiple interests that may conflict in finding solutions. For instance, farming and waterfowl both contribute nutrients to water that drains into the lake. Not only has the number of private waterfowl impoundments increased dramatically over the years, but some farmers also are involved in cultivating the corn that is grown on the impoundments.

Daniel Brinn is the Tar-Pamlico technician for the Hyde County Soil & Water Conservation District and he represents Hyde drainage on the stakeholders’ group. Brinn said it is premature to say what exactly is creating the nutrient overloads at the lake. But he said that between 1991 and 2016, farmers in Hyde County, abiding by a 1991 rule to cut nitrogen levels by 30 percent, have reduced the level of nitrogen going into the Tar-Pamlico river basin by 58 percent.

“Agriculture is doing its part in Hyde County to address the environmental concerns,” he said.

Brinn said it is a “dynamic” relationship between traditional agriculture and duck impoundments. Even on the stakeholders group, some members may represent one interest, but still have a stake in the other.

“It struck me as very complex,” he said. “There’s so many different stakeholders and so many different landowners. A functional solution is going to be difficult to come up with and put into place.”

But Brinn said the success with the Tar-Pamlico river basin, which also involved complex relationships, sets an encouraging precedent.

“There was plan a adopted that was put in place,” he said. “In that situation, the solutions were not necessarily regulatory – they were incentives.”

Joey Ben Williams, a stakeholder in the group who represents impoundments, said that it will be a while before enough data is collected to understand what is going on with Lake Mattamuskeet.

“It didn’t happen overnight, and I really don’t think we’re going to fix it overnight,” he said. “We want to make sure that whatever research money we have that we’re studying the right thing.”

Additional public meetings for the Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan are set for 7 p.m. at the Hyde County Government Complex in Swan Quarter on Nov. 7; Feb. 6, 2018; May 8, 2018; July 10, 2018; and Sept. 18, 2018.

Learn More

• Lake Mattamuskeet Watershed Restoration Plan
• Wildlife North Carolina: “Where Has the Grass Gone?”

HARKERS ISLAND – Thanks to a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Marine Debris Program, a contractor working for the North Carolina Coastal Federation will soon clean up debris left over from an abandoned aquaculture facility in the waters near Harkers Island in Carteret County.

The $129,041 project is to be paid for with $64,474 from NOAA and a $64,567 match from the federation and the contractor in the form of staff and volunteer work hours and services, respectively. NOAA and the federation announced the grant Tuesday.

Bree Tillett, a coastal specialist for the federation, said the grant also will help fund development of best management practices, or BMPs, to help make sure that existing and future aquaculture operations don’t leave behind gear that can harm marine life or litter waters, posing threats to boats or swimmers.

The concept is to develop a consensus on BMPs for shellfish aquaculture marine debris disposal and prevention, and to incorporate these practices into North Carolina Sea Grant’s shellfish growers’ required class for leaseholders, Tillett said.

Partners in the grant include Sea Grant, NOAA and the Duke University Marine Laboratory.

Tillett said the debris has been there for years in West Mouth Bay, off Guthrie Drive on the “back” side of the island, and at one point encompassed about 30 acres of water.

What remains of the abandoned operation, she said, is mostly PVC pipes and plastic mesh netting, some of which has washed ashore and into the marsh along adjacent property. Some of it is in sea grass beds, which makes removal difficult because the beds are prime habitat for naturally occurring clams and oysters.

All told, the effort is supposed to remove 250 cubic meters, or 8,829 cubic feet, of debris from public trust bottom, and remove 600 pounds of shoreline debris, which has been there since the mid-1990s.

“We are looking forward to getting it cleaned up,” Tillett said, because the gear poses at least a slight threat not only to fish and wildlife, but also to those who might use the area recreationally. Tillett stressed that the goal of the project is not to cast aspersions on the aquaculture industry, which some people increasingly see as a big part of the future of the commercial fishing industry in the state.

In fact, she said, the whole project is forward-looking; a big component includes an effort to develop those BMPs, working with the aquaculture industry and North Carolina Sea Grant.

The federation is also involving “new science,” by working with the Marine Conservation Ecology Unmanned Systems Facility, the drone program headed by David Johnston at the Duke Lab on Pivers Island in Beaufort, which will photograph the conditions before the cleanup and after.

Chuck Weirich, a marine aquaculture specialist in Sea Grant’s office in Morehead City, welcomes the whole effort.

“Sea Grant is very supportive of this project,” he said. “It’s good work, a very proactive strategy.”

Weirich said he’s convinced that almost all who are involved in the relatively young but growing aquaculture industry in North Carolina are, and want to be, good environmental stewards, but conceded that as some projects develop and then some inevitably don’t make it, marine debris could become a problem in some cases.

“Right now, the industry is really very small and developing,” he said. “We here at Sea Grant believe in aquaculture, but we also see the need to ensure that those who are involved are good stewards. It’s something to keep an eye on in the future, and it will be good to see some guidelines developed. It’s important to avoid user conflicts and any other potential negative factors that could be associated with aquaculture.”

James Morris, an ecologist at the National Center for Coastal Ocean Science’s Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research at the NOAA lab in Beaufort, also supports the project.

Although he’s best known for his research on lionfish, tiger shrimp and other invasive species in and near North Carolina waters, Morris’ work increasingly involves aquaculture, which NOAA has been pushing in recent years. Morris has publicly supported “good aquaculture” for some time, and has had a lease. In a paper way back in 2013, he reported on a study that evaluated the environmental effects of finfish aquaculture, including interactions with water quality, benthic habitats, or bottom of a body of water, and marine life across various farming practices and habitat types.

“We did this study because of concerns that putting marine finfish farms in the coastal ocean could have adverse effects on the environment,” Morris said then. “We found that, in cases where farms are appropriately sited and responsibly managed, impacts to the environment are minimal to non-existent.”

In the report, scientists, including Morris, said that “continued development of regional best-management practices and standardized protocols for environmental monitoring are key needs for aquaculture managers. As aquaculture development increases in the coastal ocean, the ability to forecast immediate or long-term environmental concerns will provide confidence to coastal managers and the public.”

Just a year or so ago, NOAA released an aquaculture plan, which its website says will guide efforts within NOAA Fisheries to support development of sustainable marine aquaculture from 2016-2020.

The plan, according to the website, “features four main goals: regulatory efficiency, science tools for sustainable management, technology development and transfer, and an informed public.” Other parts of the plan include strengthening partnerships, improving external communications, building infrastructure to support marine aquaculture and sound program management. The plan also sets a target of expanding sustainable U.S. marine aquaculture production by at least 50 percent by 2020.

NOAA contends aquaculture is needed. “The U.S. imports over 90 percent of its seafood, about half of which is farmed,” the website states. “While aquaculture globally has grown dramatically over the past 30 years, in the U.S. production has remained low.”

Kathryn Sullivan, NOAA administrator at the time the plans were developed, is quoted on the website as saying that “aquaculture presents a tremendous opportunity not only to meet this demand, but also to increase opportunities for the seafood industry and job creation. Expanding U.S. aquaculture … complements wild harvest fisheries and supports our efforts to maintain sustainable fisheries and resilient oceans.”

As such, Morris said, it’s important that seafood farmers are good stewards, but also that others around realize that they are good stewards. And most, he said, are just that, because their very survival in the business depends upon clean waters.

He and Weirich agree that there are relatively few bad actors in the growing aquaculture industry, but it’s important the industry remains that way. There is still significant opposition to some projects, and any problems can exacerbate negative views.

The BMPs, he said, can help develop a spirit of cooperation and respect among the “grower community” and those around them, and ensure that the mess left behind on Harkers Island is an isolated incident. The idea is for aquaculture in the state to grow in a sustainable way.

The cleanup itself, he said, provides a good opportunity for research, as those involved will be able to monitor the changes in habitat over time afterward.

Tillett, the federation coastal specialist, said there is also money in the grant to do some other marine debris habitat cleanup work not related to aquaculture, such as at Hoop Pole Creek in Atlantic Beach, where federation volunteers and staffers have worked many times.

Although it’s not a huge grant in terms of money, she said, a lot of good should come from it.

Steve Murphey, Habitat and Enhancement Section chief at the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, agreed it will be a good thing to see the area cleaned up. The division, he said, has now included a clause in its lease agreement to make sure that happens, should a leaseholder abandon a project or have his or her permit revoked, but that doesn’t address any existing problems.

Murphey also welcomed the idea of working BMPs into Sea Grant’s educational material, because the more gear that is used in such operations, the more opportunities there are for problems, regardless of best intentions.

Learn More

• Updates on marine debris removal

EMERALD ISLE — The cacophony of screeching least terns protecting their nests from beachgoers battled against the roar of Bogue Inlet on a cloudy, late spring day at The Point, at the westernmost tip of the island.

The warnings from the nesting birds didn’t deter a handful of volunteers from the Waterbird Stewards program, Audubon North Carolina board member Lena Gallitano and North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission staff from checking up June 14 on the three roped-off and marked “Waterbird Nesting And Foraging Areas.”

From about April to August, migratory beach-nesting birds like the least tern and Wilson’s Plovers, both of special concern in North Carolina, make their home on the stretch of beach where David Greenwald, coordinator for the Waterbird Stewards, and the 20 or so volunteers visit at least once a week to make sure the birds are thriving and protected. The site has grown from one to three nesting areas, each fairly decent in size, since the program began three seasons ago.

“Every spring around March, volunteers mark the area they think the birds are going to nest in and adjust the perimeter if they’ve nested outside of the marked area,” Greenwald, of New Bern, explained.

At each visit, volunteers fill out a form to record what they’ve observed.

“We try to count the number of birds we’re seeing in the nesting area, then the nests and, as time progresses over the summer once they’ve hatched, the number of chicks we see,” Greenwald added. “Most of what we’re seeing at The Point are least terns with the second-most frequent being the Wilson’s plover.”

Greenwald said that The Point attracts the birds because they like to be out in the open.

“They love to nest completely on the sand. They scoop out a tiny little swale, almost like a saucer cup depression, and that’s where they lay their eggs. Their eggs are so well camouflaged in the sand, it’s really hard to see. They’re also very small and that’s the problem. It’s why we set up these posts and flags,” he said.

Greenwald added that while they’re small, they’re fierce and protective of their nesting area. “They will dive bomb and have been known to whack you on the head with their beaks. You really know it when you’re getting close. There will be multiple least terns flying and screeching and trying to get you away from the nesting area.”

Gallitano added that a brochure from Audubon North Carolina being distributed at various locations in Emerald Isle explains that one of the protective mechanisms for the least terns is dive bombing.

“If the birds are dive bombing you or being very disturbed or flying up from the sand, you’re too close. That’s one of the easiest ways to know that you should start looking where you’re putting your feet, because not only are the eggs tiny and totally camouflaged, but the babies are too,” Gallitano said.

There’s a reason why you’ll find swarms of least terns on the beaches: They’re colonial nesters.

“They like to be part of a larger group. You won’t necessarily find one nest by itself somewhere,” Gallitano explained, adding that they are long-distance migrants. “They don’t hang around here in the wintertime, which makes it even more amazing that they can come back to the same place and nest again.”

The Emerald Isle Waterbird Stewards Program volunteers work under the supervision of Sarah Schweitzer, a wildlife diversity biologist with the Wildlife Resources Commission. She is responsible for coastal waterbirds from Virginia to South Carolina.

“This has been great to start this program here to get people engaged and helping with birds,” Schweitzer said.

The nesting least terns at The Point were discovered by a junior naturalist, Schweitzer explained. The middle-schooler was vacationing with her family and reported to the Wildlife Resources Commission that she thought she saw birds nesting at The Point.

The first year, the volunteers posted signs to keep beachgoers from walking in the area where the birds were nesting, she said, and they have since kept an eye on the site. The following year, they found that more birds were nesting there.

The Point wasn’t always so hospitable for nesting birds due to its diminished beachfront. In 2005, there was a sizeable engineering project with the Corps of Engineers to relocate the inlet. Schweitzer explained that as part of that project, there was a management plan put in place to protect the birds and foraging sites too, which is why Wildlife Resources Commission staff kept an eye on The Point.

There were no nesting birds there because of the disturbance caused by the dredging project. Now that time has passed and more sand has been added to the shoreline, birds have started to use it, she added.

Annika Andersson, wildlife diversity technician with the Waterbird Investigations and Management Project for Wildlife Resources Commission, in an email response said that the number of breeding least terns at the Emerald Isle colony can fluctuate over the season, as more birds may arrive and nest for perhaps a second or third try, if earlier attempts failed.

“The highest count we have had so far this season, that I’m aware of, was earlier this month: 45 nests and about 160 adults. For comparison, the first year of the stewards program, in 2015, the stewards monitored at least 145 tern nests,” Andersson said. “We never really know what to expect. A number of variables, including predation, weather and human activity/disturbance, can have an effect on the success of the birds and how many we see year-to-year.”

She responded that during the visit June 14 when the volunteers and staff were expanding the posted area so it encompassed the growing number of nests, “We were rewarded to find a single (adorable!) very new and well-camouflaged chick, still cradled next to its unhatched sibling in their nest. The first that most of us have seen this season.”

“Everyone can help NC’s beach-nesting birds survive by respecting such posted bird areas along the coast,” Andersson said.

Andersson added that there are several pairs of Wilson’s Plovers nesting at The Point that the stewards monitor as well. “These birds also lay their eggs in a simple shallow scrape in the sand, like the terns, but often line it with bits of shell or other natural debris, or nestled near some vegetation.”

Gallitano, who became involved after a visit three years ago with a stewards volunteer, returned last summer to the nesting site to check on the progress. She has been part of Audubon Raleigh since the 1980s and Audubon North Carolina for about 10 years. She is currently serving her second term on the board of directors.

“I got passionately involved, as I often do with bird projects, and tried to get Audubon North Carolina involved,” she said.

Gallitano reached out to the Audubon staff in Raleigh about re-using the Be A Good Egg program initiated in Wrightsville Beach that ended about three years ago. Audubon relaunched the website referring to the same information on coastal birds and provided bumper stickers, magnets, T-shirts and backpacks for the Waterbird Stewards volunteers in Emerald Isle.

Greenwald said that something he’s observed over the three years is the commitment of the volunteers. “Your heart goes out to the vulnerability of shorebirds and when they see the chicks, they see the eggs. … You just get attached to them and that’s what I’m observing as one of the key attracters for the stewards. I’ll certainly say that about myself.”

Their work often attracts curious bystanders, as well.

“We often have people come up to us when they see us with our binoculars or spotting scope. That’s our opportunity to explain and give them some information,” Greenwald said. “Once they understand what we’re doing and why we’re doing it, they’re very supportive.”

Next year, the volunteers plan to host walks in the summer to share information about the nesting birds, like Audubon has done in Wrightsville Beach.

This effort in Emerald Isle has been with the full backing of town administration.

“The town manager is very supportive of what they do out there,” Schweitzer said.

Emerald Isle Town Manager Frank Rush said in email that the town is pleased to assist the Waterbird Stewards Program, and supports their efforts to preserve the habitat for beach-nesting birds at The Point.

“The Town has worked hard over the years to preserve The Point – for shoreline protection, recreational use, navigation, and natural habitat preservation goals – and we’ve been able to strike an effective balance in our management plans,” Rush said in the email. “We expect to continue this management approach in the future, and look forward to continuing our relationship with the Waterbird Stewards Program.”

Learn More

• Be A Good Egg
• Audubon North Carolina

This story has been edited to reflect that killing coyotes on private lands in the recovery area requires a permit.

MANTEO – The fate of endangered red wolves could be settled by year’s end, when wildlife managers are expected to complete reconsideration of the endangered predator’s management in the wilds of northeastern North Carolina.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is seeking suggestions from people residing in the five-county red wolf recovery area – parts of Hyde, Tyrrell, Washington, Beaufort and Dare counties – to address conflicts and promote cooperation. As part of its process set out under the Endangered Species Act, the agency is reviewing management strategies and assessing alternatives in order to draft a revised management rule.

“These rules that we’re operating under were written in ’95,” Pete Benjamin, field supervisor in Fish and Wildlife’s Raleigh office, said at a scoping meeting held last week in Manteo. “A lot has changed, so that’s why they’re being rewritten.”

Most detrimental to the wolves is the change in their population: From a peak of about 150 red wolves in 2005, there are 40 or fewer wolves now roaming the 1.7 million acres in the recovery area. But other changes also have not helped the wolves. When coyotes arrived on the Albemarle Peninsula in the 1990s, the neighborhood for wolves went downhill quickly. Coyotes look similar to red wolves, making it easy to mistake one for the other. It is illegal to kill red wolves and a permit is required to kill coyotes on private lands. That’s the result of a May 2014 federal court settlement that blocks authorization of coyote hunting — including at night — in the recovery area.

Since October 2016, there have been eight known wolf deaths: five from gunshots, one from poison, one from a vehicle strike and one from natural causes.

One of the more serious and worsening issues is that wolves will mate with coyotes, creating a problem with hybridization and questions about whether wolves are even genetically wolf enough to warrant protection.

Meanwhile, conflicts have increased with private property owners and the number of wolves killed by gunshots and poison has increased. But perhaps the most challenging problem the wolves face is the lack of public support from the owners of the private property the wolves inhabit. Landowners have complained about the animals depleting the numbers of deer for hunters, killing pets and livestock and endangering and scaring people.

“We’re looking for ideas,” Benjamin told the packed meeting room at the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge headquarters.

Another meeting was also held in Swan Quarter earlier in the week.

Under the Endangered Species Act, a review of designated species is supposed to be done every five years, but the most recent review of red wolf management was in 2007. In September, the agency proposed changes that, among other things, would limit the wolves’ range to Alligator River refuge land and the Navy bombing range in Dare County.

In addition to reviewing how the wolf population is managed in northeastern North Carolina, Benjamin said, the wildlife service is also considering potential re-introduction sites. A species status assessment – a snapshot of the likelihood, or not, of species recovery – is also planned, as well as a revision of the Endangered Species Act rule that governs what the law calls “the non-essential, experimental” population of red wolves.

Either an environment assessment or a more complicated and lengthier environment impact statement will be conducted, but Benjamin said he does not know when that will be decided. When the proposed rule is completed, it will give a detailed picture of updated management options. Portions of the updated reviews also may be released prior to publication of the rule.

By any account, it’s been a conservation roller coaster for the red wolf. The species had been declared extinct in the wild at the time four pairs of captive wolves were transported in 1987 from Texas to Alligator River. Complex and innovative management strategies, including placement of captive newborn pups in dens with wild pups, led to steady increases in the wild population. Even after coyotes encroached on wolves, a “placeholder” method that involved using a sterile coyote to keep out other coyotes was used successfully to protect wolf territory.

But budget shortfalls, increased controversy and numerous other challenges have forced the wildlife service to re-think its wolf recovery program.

“The way we’re doing things is very labor intensive,” Benjamin said. “We’ve got to manage things wolf-by-wolf.”

Radio collars have been placed on 26 of the wolves, and their locations are monitored once or twice a week by airplane. Dens are also still inspected, but no longer are newborn captive pups placed in a wild litter.

The wolf recovery program costs about $1.2 million a year, Benjamin said.

Conflicting Opinions

Jett Ferebee, a Tyrrell County landowner and Greenville developer who has led the charge against the red wolf conservation program since at least 2013 – most publicly on the online forum nchuntandfish.com – attended the meeting in Manteo, but declined to be interviewed afterward.

In the past, Ferebee has accused the wildlife service of breaking the law by not permanently removing trespassing “coywolves” from private property.

Benjamin said in a recent interview that the most recent DNA analysis in 2014 has shown that red wolves have about 4 percent coyote DNA. But red wolf genetics is not settled science, and the agency is continuing to work with researchers on the issue.

From the beginning of the recovery program, there have been conflicting opinions about whether the red wolf is indeed a separate species, or just a wolf version of a mutt. As it is now, Benjamin said, it is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the wildlife service is obligated to protect it until and if the status is changed.

“It’s kind of something that overarches everything to do with the wolf populations,” he said.

Public sentiment on the wolves, he added, ranges the full spectrum in attitudes between supporter and opponent. The agency’s goal, he said, is to hear reasonable ideas from landowners, hunters, tourism folks, area residents and environmental groups on ways to make wolf conservation more effective and to help differentiate between wolves and coyotes. It is also important to better engage the public so that wolves may be judged to be a benefit in communities where they exist, he said, rather than a burden – “anything to make the program more efficient, effective and successful.”

Even as a veteran wildlife manager, Benjamin sees red wolf conservation as more difficult than most. There’s the usual antipathy toward the federal government, coupled with state versus federal control, then multiplied by private property versus public policy versus environmental conservation friction. But bringing wolves back into environments where humans live can be a tough sell.

“More so than most (issues), when you’re talking endangered predators and their re-introduction,” Benjamin said, “it is particularly complicated.”

D.J. Sharp of Kill Devil Hills worked in 2009-10 as a caretaker for the wolves in Alligator River. Sharp is rooting for the wolves, but he acknowledges that success will not come easy.

“I feel that the people involved are very conscientious and have done as good a job as can be done,” Sharp said after the meeting. “Obviously, the public needs to support this for it to work.”

But under the circumstances, Sharp said, he thinks it will be “very challenging” to restore the wolf population in the current recovery area.

“A friend of mine has talked to some of the hunters,” Sharp said. “He said they told him if they had the opportunity to shoot one (a wolf) illegally, they would do so without hesitation.”

Joe O’Grady, owner of Coastal Kayak Touring Co. of Kitty Hawk, which offers tours in Alligator River refuge, said he sees the red wolves as an asset to an area that prides itself on its rich natural resources. Still, coyotes may have ruined the wolves’ newfound chance of survival.

“Most people root for the underdog,” O’Grady said. “The coyotes moved in and it became a big human conflict.”

For O’Grady, the way to help the wolves is to “stop shooting them.”

“Educate people,” he said. “They’re not weakening the deer pack. If anything, they make the herd healthier.”

Kim Wheeler, the executive director of the nonprofit Red Wolf Coalition in Columbia in Tyrrell County, said she is concerned about the wolves’ recovery, and she wants to trust that Fish and Wildlife sees the wolf population as a value to the ecosystem.

“I think at this point in time, it’s going to take everybody’s collective voices to make this work,” she said. “I think it’s important to engage the stakeholders. I like to think we can all have a rational conversation.”

At the same time, she said she sees nothing wrong with resetting the program.

“I just know we can’t go back in time,” Wheeler said. “I guess the simple answer is we need to find a way for these animals to stay in the wild. We owe it them.”

Comment on Proposed Rule

Public comments will be accepted through July 24. So far, Benjamin said, there had been 2,100 comments filed online. Once the proposed rule is completed – expected by the end of the year – there will be another public meeting and another opportunity to comment.

To submit comments:

• Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS-R4-ES-2017-0006, which is the docket number for this action. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment Now!”
• By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2017-0006; Division of Policy, Performance, and Management Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803.

Comments will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov

The service seeks comments and suggestions specifically on the following:

• The appropriate size and scope of the non-essential, experimental population area.
• Contribution of the non-essential, experimental population to recovery goals for the red wolf.
• Tools for population management.
• Management strategies to address hybridization with coyotes.
• Appropriate provisions for “take” of red wolves.
• Protocols for red wolves that leave the non-essential, experimental population area, including, but not limited to, requests for removal of animals from private lands.

Learn More

• Red Wolf Recovery Program

MOREHEAD CITY – A new design of artificial oyster reef-maker could buck the trend on where living shorelines best work.

Researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Institute of Marine Sciences, or IMS, are introducing a type of reef that may withstand high-energy wave action areas typically deemed unsuitable for natural shoreline stabilization.

Living shoreline projects are built with various structural and organic materials such as plants, submerged aquatic vegetation, oyster shells and stone. They generally work best along sheltered coasts such as estuaries, bays, lagoons and coastal deltas, where wave energy is low to moderate.

This month, researchers will put to the test a series of reef platforms that are going to be installed as part of what is, to date, the longest state-permitted living shoreline project in North Carolina.

The Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson State Historic Site’s battered mile-long shore along the Cape Fear River will be a significant test on how well the oyster reefs hold up in a high-energy wave environment.

“One thing we have, I think, the ability to do with our new material is really get into high-energy environments and do quite well,” said Niels Lindquist, an IMS professor and researcher.

Construction will begin this month along about a 100-foot section of the historic site’s waterfront, where contractors will install about 200 feet of artificial oyster reef-makers.

The reefs are constructed of concrete smoothed into panels that are used to create different forms and shapes, the end result of which is a netted, open structure.

These platform structures will be fastened to rods anchored in the sediment, elevating the reef slightly above the riverbed.

“We tend to see sediment buildup in and behind our reefs,” Lindquist said. “We get some very high oyster densities so we get a lot of the good services from oysters. I think if we can really get into that area and grow a good oyster reef there will be a lot of benefits.”

These reefs will be placed between the shore and a series of wave attenuators, which will take the initial brunt of waves created during storms and the large cargo ships routinely sailing to and from the North Carolina Port of Wilmington.

For the better part of 10 years, officials at the historic site have been trying to figure out how to best combat shoreline erosion, which has damaged and destroyed irreplaceable artifacts.

“We’ve done a few stop-gap measures that have bought us time, but we have run out of time,” said Jim McKee, Fort Anderson’s site manager.

McKee prefers a living shoreline to a hardened erosion-control structure because the former is not only more aesthetically pleasing, he said, but also a natural method of protecting valuable resources.

“We’re revisiting the underwater cultural resources surveys and, as it stands, we have an opportunity to lessen the impact on those cultural resources and we’ll definitely lessen the impact on our environmental resources,” McKee said. “What we’re proposing is a very, very aggressive project and the scope is massive. I don’t think something on this scale has been attempted in North Carolina and I don’t know if it’s been attempted anywhere else.”

Designed by a team of experts with environmental engineering firm SEPI Engineering, which has an office in Wilmington, the massive project will be completed in various phases.

The first phase, construction of which McKee said he hopes will begin this week, concentrates on section of shoreline devastated by Hurricane Matthew, which hit North Carolina last October, causing massive flooding throughout southeastern parts of the state.

The storm cut out about a 14- to 15-foot gap, causing a bluff to collapse, sending trees sliding from where they had been rooted for years.

This section will be filled, the bluff restored and armored with riprap. Once that’s complete, the reef-makers will be installed.

“It should break up a lot of that heavy action and start allowing that section of shoreline to start renewing itself,” McKee said. “Then we’ll be able to start monitoring.”

There has been better than a 50-percent survival rate of oysters placed on a small pad researchers installed for monitoring purposes, he said.

Oysters were showing promise growing on the riprap shredded away during Hurricane Matthew, McKee said.

“If we can break down that wave action then the oysters should establish themselves,” he said.

That’s the hope, Lindquist said.

“I’m hopeful that we can get into that area and have our material grow and survive oysters,” he said. “Our goal with our material is to really stop shoreline erosion but to also regrow some of the marsh. It’s a pretty substantial plan, but I think we can handle it.”

The project has been drawing interest from the likes of everyone from environmental engineers, researchers, coastal scientists and state officials, McKee said.

If the oyster-maker platforms perform well in such a high-energy wave environment, they could help broaden the use of living shoreline projects as erosion-control methods.

In the past several years, living shorelines have been gaining national attention.

Just this year, the Army Corps of Engineers authorized its first nationwide permit for living shorelines.

The new permit is designed to help streamline the permitting process. Living shoreline advocates hope that translates into a tipping of the scales where requests for permits to build living shoreline projects outweigh hardened erosion-control methods.

At least 14 percent of the country’s shoreline is armored by hardened structures, according to the first nationwide survey of artificial coastal erosion-control methods conducted by a group of researchers in 2015.

That’s more than 14,000 miles of hardened shoreline.

One of the benefits the oyster reef platforms offer is that they’re made of biodegradable materials.

“That has some advantages because if you make a mistake and you don’t really grow oysters you’re not left with this legacy of material there that you don’t want,” Lindquist said.

Lindquist said the oyster reef-makers are gaining traction, drawing the attention of researchers in Florida and Washington.

He said researchers have applied for a patent for the name, materials and applications used to make the reef-makers. Their goal is to commercialize the technology.

They are currently looking into the possibility of adapting their design to “bio-cement,” or cement created using bacteria between grains of aggregate – a brainchild of the Raleigh-based start-up company bioMason.

“If we really can do that then our material will be entirely green,” Lindquist said. “I think manufacturing a situation where we’re sequestering CO₂ and then use that material to prevent the erosion of salt marshes and then regrow them is great for the environment.”

 Learn More

• Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson
• UNC Institute of Marine Sciences
• SEPI Engineering & Construction

EMERALD ISLE – This Bogue Banks town won’t hear until late summer whether it will get grants to purchase a nearly 30-acre tract behind the town recreation center for a nature preserve and athletic fields, but scattered opposition and a recent report by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program have some officials wondering about the future of the effort.

But when Mike Schafale of the Natural Heritage Program inspected the property in April in response to the clean water grant application from the town, he wrote that, “The town’s proposal to retain nine acres of the tract for recreational development would … be a serious threat to the natural integrity of the site, given the small size of the site.

“Though development in the wetlands would be unacceptable, and protection of them is needed to protect the creek, the most significant feature of the site is the maritime forest,” Schafale added. “At 23 acres, it is a small example, but it is one of the few last remnants of the extensive forest that once covered the interior of Emerald Isle, and is one of the better remnants in this region of the coast.”

Development of nine acres for recreation would be a “serious loss,” according to Schafale’s report, and if development were to occur in the middle of the site, “it would destroy virtually all of its ecological value.”

The report encourages the town to use the land as a natural recreation area, with trails and small parking lots, but without clearing large areas of the maritime forest or wetlands.

Town Manager Frank Rush said that if the town isn’t able to use the land for anything except passive recreation, he’s not sure it’s worth it.

“In a nutshell, it is ultimately up to our board of commissioners, but I am not sure if the town is willing to spend $400,000 to $500,000 on the land purchase if there’s no ability to use it for any purpose other than preservation and trails in the future,” the manager said in an email. “That’s a lot of money for Emerald Isle. We have many other demands for those funds, and the town already has a much nicer and larger natural area (nearly 40 acres) at Emerald Isle Woods Park, directly on Bogue Sound.”

Rush said the town views the potential purchase of the Surfside Realty Tract as an opportunity to provide athletic fields and other active recreation amenities, after a public planning process, while preserving two-thirds of the undeveloped parcel.

“Again, the ultimate decision is up to the town’s elected officials, but to me it’s not a question of preserving 30 acres versus preserving 20 acres. It’s really more a question of preserving 20 acres versus preserving zero acres. I suspect that those who have expressed concerns would prefer 20 acres rather than zero acres.”

Rush said the parcel is the only one in Emerald Isle that can accommodate any sort of athletic fields.

“There are currently nearly 500 school-age kids in Emerald Isle, in addition to many more young and active people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and beyond, who would benefit from these kinds of facilities, and we expect more in the future as technology changes and more people are able to work remotely and live in a place like Emerald Isle.”

County-maintained athletic fields are available just across the bridge at Western Park in Cape Carteret. But the town, Rush said, wants to be “a complete community that offers these kinds of traditional recreation amenities and opportunities.  It’s all part of the overall package that will help to make Emerald Isle an even better place than it already is.”

While Rush remains optimistic about the grants, two commissioners interviewed this week agreed with him about the ball field issue and the idea that conserving most of the forest is better than nothing, especially given the eventual likelihood of multifamily development.

“I don’t think there’s that much interest in doing this if there is not a good possibility of athletic fields,” said Commissioner Jim Normile. Even with grants, he said, “there’s still a very large commitment of taxpayer funds.”

If taxpayers are to make that kind of financial contribution to the purchase, he said, it’s reasonable for them to expect something other than the trails and other passive recreation opportunities that already exist in Emerald Isle Woods.

Commissioner Candace Dooley said that “People might think there aren’t many kids in Emerald Isle, but there are, and many of them are involved in sports and athletics.”

Emerald Isle, she said, “wants to maintain a family atmosphere,” and in most places, athletic fields are part of that.

“I agree that without that (reservation for ball fields), it doesn’t make much sense for the town to ask taxpayers to commit that kind of money,” she said.

Town commissioners, during their monthly meeting on April 11, voted unanimously to seek the two grants and money from the Marine Corps, augmented by the tax money, to buy the property.

The land is was platted for a subdivision way back in 1989, but it was never built.

The property is bounded by Archers Creek to the south, which separates it from the town government complex; by residential units along Live Oak Street to the west; residential units along Sound Drive to the north; and residential units along Archers Creek Court and Coral Court to the east.

Some area environmentalists have expressed concern about the plan. It’s the largest maritime forest tract in town, other than Emerald Isle Woods, and serves as habitat for painted buntings.

In addition to state grants, officials also are seeking $1.5 million from the federal government through Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point. That request, Rush said, is feasible because the property is in the flight path for aircraft that use Bogue Field, an auxiliary landing strip across Bogue Sound in the town of Bogue. The military discourages development within the flight paths of its facilities, and often partners with local governments to minimize it.

Nate Halubka, manager of grants and outreach for the state parks and recreation fund, said this week that, at least for “acquisition grants,” his office isn’t concerned about how the land is used.

“We expect that the applicant will tell us what they expect it to be used for in the next five years, but that can change, and we know that,” Halubka said. “If the town says, for example, that they are going to put in ball fields, and that changes,” that doesn’t affect whether the town should get an acquisition grant.

“Public recreational use is our concern, whether it’s passive or active,” Halubka said. “It’s up to the town’s discretion to decide how it should serve the needs of the public.”

In other words, he said, if it’s ball fields, that’s fine. If it’s trails, that’s fine, too. And if it’s a combination, that’s also fine. The office funds all kinds of land-acquisition projects.

LuAnn Bryan, the Parks and Recreation Trust Fund recreational resources service coordinator for the state’s eastern region, said she believes her office will have about $5 million available for grants this year, and Halubka agreed.

“Of course, that all depends on what the legislature does, but they’ve been good to us in the past,” he said.

Walter Clark, executive director of the Clean Water Management Trust Fund, said he hasn’t seen the property, having only moved into his new position a couple of months ago, after heading the nonprofit Blue Ridge Conservancy in Boone. But he also spent more than two decades as North Carolina Sea Grant’s coastal law, planning and policy specialist, so he knows coastal issues and concerns.

He saw Schafale’s report and called it “interesting,” and said it will play some role in the grant decision, but he’s not sure how much.

The clean water fund has 90 land-acquisition applications on its table, Clark said, and uses a “scoring” system to rank them. The final decisions are up to the fund’s nine-member board of trustees, and he said hasn’t been around long enough yet to have a “crystal ball” that would give him any indication of their leanings.

He added that the trustees will also factor public input – letters and other communications – into the decision.

In action at the April 11 meeting, the Emerald Isle board authorized Rush to execute a contract for purchase and set up a “due diligence period” that could result in a closing of the deal at the end of October.

Cherry Point officials have initiated the internal federal process to secure the money, Rush said, but it’s a process that likely will take several months.

Based on discussions with officials at Cherry Point, Rush said he expects a definitive commitment by September, but the money might not be available for a few months after that. The state grant decisions could also come by early September.

If the state grants come through, but actual cash from the military is not available by the planned Oct. 31 closing date, Rush added, the town could enter into a short-term financing arrangement with The Conservation Fund of North Carolina.

The Conservation Fund of North Carolina is part of a national organization whose mission is to assist communities in the acquisition and conservation of public land, and they are serving as the town’s partner on the acquisition. Under the military’s program, Rush said, MCAS Cherry Point can provide federal funding only to previously authorized partners, and The Conservation Fund has been involved in similar previous deals with Cherry Point.

The Conservation Fund would be the actual entity that would purchase the property from the owners. The Conservation Fund would then convey the property to the town.

In his memo to the board, Rush noted that if the town does not receive enough money for the purchase, “it will likely be possible to have The Conservation Fund proceed with the acquisition on the town’s behalf. The Conservation Fund would provide the balance of funding necessary to acquire the property, and would then hold the property for some mutually agreeable time period.”

If that were to occur, he wrote, “The town would remain eligible for grant funding, and could apply for funding from the same grant programs in 2018 or could apply for funding through other eligible grant programs.”

The other option is to simply abandon the effort, he added.

Rush said that if the town can get the land, nothing would happen fast.

“Ultimately, I would envision the board soliciting additional public input on desired park amenities in the future, and using that public input to develop a specific park plan,” he said.

Learn More

• Clean Water Management Trust Fund
• Parks and Recreation Trust Fund

EMERALD ISLE – Despite concerns expressed by some environmentalists, residents and an inspector for the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Emerald Isle Town Manager Frank Rush says the town can successfully protect water quality, preserve a significant chunk of maritime forest and eventually build athletic fields on a portion of a nearly 30-acre tract officials hope to buy.

The move would preserve the area, which is largely maritime forest, behind the town’s recreation center on Emerald Drive from residential development, but a state report based on a site inspection on April 12 calls the town’s plan for carving out the forest’s interior for ball fields, “a significant concern.”

Town commissioners, during their monthly meeting on April 11, voted unanimously to seek two grants and money from the Marine Corps, augmented by some tax money, to buy the $3 million property, the largest undeveloped tract in town. Commissioners also gave Town Manager Frank Rush the OK to apply for $545,000 from the state Clean Water Management Trust Fund, which awards grants for projects that protect or enhance water quality.

The plan is to preserve about 20 acres in its natural state, but with hiking trails and other opportunities for passive recreation, and to use nine to 10 acres for athletic fields, which have long been desired by town residents.

The land is owned by Surfside Realty Inc. and was platted for a subdivision back in 1989, but it was never built.

The property is bounded by Archers Creek to the south, which separates it from the town government complex; by residential units along Live Oak Street to the west; residential units along Sound Drive to the north; and residential units along Archers Creek Court and Coral Court to the east.

‘A Serious Loss’

Mike Schafale of the Natural Heritage Program did the inspection on April 12, in response to the town’s application for the Clean Water  grant, and noted in his report the town’s contention that, “If unprotected, it appears likely to be bought for residential development soon.” However, he also noted that, “The town’s proposal to retain nine acres of the tract for recreational development would also be a serious threat to the natural integrity of the site, given the small size of the site.

“Though development in the wetlands would be unacceptable, and protection of them is needed to protect the creek, the most significant feature of the site is the maritime forest,” Schafale added. “At 23 acres, it is a small example, but it is one of the few last remnants of the extensive forest that once covered the interior of Emerald Isle, and is one of the better remnants in this region of the coast.”

Schafale said the clearing of nine acres would be “a serious loss,” and if recreational development were to occur in the middle of the site, “it would destroy virtually all of its ecological value.” Development along the edge of the property, adjacent to neighboring houses, would be less destructive, but would still diminish the natural area’s significance.

“The town is encouraged to use the land as a natural recreation area, with trails and small parking lots, but without facilities that would require large clearings or remove any of the intact maritime forest or wetlands,” Schafale noted.

‘Balancing Act’

Rush, the town manager, said the very nature of the Clean Water grant the town seeks demonstrates intent to preserve the land and protect water quality. It’s the same funding source used for the town’s purchase of the Emerald Isle Woods land off Coast Guard Road.

In addition, the town board authorized Rush to apply for $500,000 from the state Parks and Recreation Trust Fund, and officials also are seeking $1.5 million from the federal government through Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point.

The air station request, Rush said, is feasible because the property is in the flight path for aircraft that use Bogue Field, an auxiliary landing strip across Bogue Sound in the town of Bogue. The military discourages development within the flight paths of its facilities, and often partners with local governments to minimize it.

The final piece of the funding puzzle would be $455,000 from town taxpayers, most likely through a short-term loan, either internal or external. That wouldn’t happen until fiscal 2018-19, which will begin on July 1, 2018.

That taxpayer funding, Rush said, is an important consideration in how the property eventually is used, as residents and property owners will “have an investment,” and have long indicated in land-use plans and surveys that they’d like to see some kind of athletic fields in town. The site is about the only place that can happen, and it’s also within a stone’s throw of the recreation center.

“It’s a bit of a balancing act,” the manager said, but it’s important for all involved to remember that it’s also about saving about 30 acres, minus wetlands, from potentially intense development.”

Schafale reported that mid-Atlantic maritime evergreen forest occupies all of the upland parts of the site, with a canopy dominated by loblolly pine and laurel oak, with smaller numbers of live oaks and a few large pignut hickory trees. The understory includes swamp red bay, American olive and Carolina laurel cherry. Yaupon holly and witch hazel are also present, with plenty of poison ivy, greenbriers and Virginia creeper.

“The forest is mature, though it shows the effects of intense hurricanes about 20 years ago,” he wrote. “The old canopy trees are interspersed with gaps of up to an acre or two where understory-size trees predominate.”

Much of the marsh on the site is freshwater, but salt marsh is present along the Archer Creek channel where viewed from Lee Avenue, and a small amount may be present in the tract.

“Archers Creek presumably is tidally influenced, though the vegetation along it in most of the site suggests fresh water,” Schafale added in his report. “Saltier water appears to extend beyond Lee (Avenue), but not to the middle of this tract.”

Water Quality, Habitat Loss

Larry Baldwin, the Crystal Coast Waterkeeper based in Morehead City, said he supports the purchase because the land is zoned for multifamily development and could be used for up to 237 condominium units. That’s eight units per acre allowed under town zoning rules.

Baldwin, whose group is licensed by the international Waterkeeper Alliance, said he supports what the town is doing, “for now,” because it’s important that the tract not be used for dense condominium development, which would result in streets, roofs, sidewalks and other impervious surfaces that would increase stormwater runoff, the primary cause of water pollution along the coast.

“I’m not familiar enough with what they (the town) are doing to oppose anything yet,” Baldwin added. “But I do hope that they will do the right thing, which would be to preserve the whole 30 acres. I’m going to be interested in seeing what they eventually propose to do.”

One important factor, Baldwin  noted, would be the location of the ball fields within the tract; the distance from the wetlands and the creek is crucial.

Rush said the town has always tried to be a good environmental steward. He said the roughly four acres of wetlands on the site would be protected.

“I absolutely think that we could,” Rush said, when asked if he believes the town could design a project for athletic fields that would not hurt water quality. The bulk of the property is high and sandy, he said, whatever the town eventually designs would include buffers. In fact, Rush said he expects the Clean Water Management Trust Fund will require a conservation easement on a portion of the property, primarily along the roughly 1,100-foot shoreline of Archers Creek.

Sam Bland, a town resident, former Hammocks Beach State Park superintendent and North Carolina Coastal Federation employee, said he supports the town acquiring the property, but not the concept of developing nine acres for ball fields or other active park uses.

The problem, Bland said, is that there is very little maritime forest left in Emerald Isle. The other large section is the 41-acre, town-owned Emerald Isle Woods, which is a combination natural park and storm water management facility.

“We need to preserve what’s left,” Bland said. He added that clearing and developing any of the property would likely have some negative effect on water quality in the creek, which flows into Bogue Sound.

Another issue, Bland said, is that the property is prime habitat for wildlife, including raccoons, foxes and especially the resplendent painted bunting, which, in North Carolina, is listed as a federal “special concern” species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The bird also has been designated as a watch list species by Partners in Flight, and BirdLife International has categorized the population as near-threatened. Experts say the population has been declining for years, in part because it is caught in Mexico and Cuba for the caged-bird trade, but also because its habitat is shrinking.

In his report, Schafale stated that a survey for rare animals and for rare bryophytes – liverworts, hornworts and mosses – “would be worthwhile.”

Closing the Deal

In action at the April 11 meeting, the board authorized Rush to execute a contract for purchase and also set up a “due diligence period” that could result in a closing of the deal at the end of October.

MCAS Cherry Point officials have begun the process to secure federal funds, Rush said, but that’s likely to take several months.

Rush said that based on discussions with officials at Cherry Point, he expects a definitive commitment by September, but the money might not be available for a few months after that. Decisions on the state trust fund grants could also come by early September.

If the state grants come through, but actual cash from the military is not available by the planned Oct. 31 closing date, Rush added, the town could enter into a short-term financing arrangement with The Conservation Fund of North Carolina, part of a national organization whose mission is to assist communities in the acquisition and conservation of public land. The Conservation Fund is serving as the town’s partner on the acquisition. Under the military’s program, Rush said, Cherry Point can provide federal funding only to previously authorized partners, and The Conservation Fund has been involved in similar previous deals with the air station.

The Conservation Fund would be the actual entity that would purchase the property from the owners. The Conservation Fund would then convey the property to the town.

In his memo to the board, Rush noted that if the town does not receive adequate funds for the purchase, “it will likely be possible to have The Conservation Fund proceed with the acquisition on the Town’s behalf. The Conservation Fund would provide the balance of funding necessary to acquire the property, and would then hold the property for some mutually agreeable time period.”

If that were to occur, he wrote, “The town would remain eligible for grant funding, and could apply for funding from the same grant programs in 2018 or could apply for funding through other eligible grant programs.”

The other option, absent sufficient funds by closing, is to simply abandon the effort, he added.

What Kind of Park?

Rush said he’s confident the town can get the two grants, as well as the contribution from the military, but more money would be needed to build athletic fields.

In a memo to commissioners for their meeting, Rush listed potential field uses and sizes:

• Baseball field – about 400 feet by 400 feet, or three to four acres.
• Soccer field – about 300 feet by 400 feet, or nearly three acres, which could potentially be built in the outfield of a new baseball field.
• Tennis court – about 60 feet by 120 feet each; or about one-sixth of an acre.
• Dog park – sizes vary, but likely about an acre, potentially in the natural area of the new park, among existing trees.
• Skate park – sizes vary, but likely a half-acre or less.
• Splash park – sizes vary, but likely one-fourth of acre or less.

“Additionally,” Rush wrote, “it will likely be necessary to provide some amount of additional parking for park patrons.” He said about 80 spaces, along with access to them, would take up close to an acre.

The military’s program will limit the extent of building construction on the property.

Rush noted in his memo to the board the town would likely be able to build a small bathroom building, a storage building, a concession building and “other similar features,” but larger buildings would not be allowed.

Eight or nine residents spoke during the state grant-required public hearing on April 11, and while some expressed concern, none out-and-out opposed the plan.

Ken Stone, chairman of the town’s bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee, was one who spoke at the hearing.

In an interview, Stone said that, like others, he’d prefer that the property be kept mostly natural, with the exception of hiking and bike paths and maybe a small venue for outdoor performing arts.

But, he added, “We have to get the property first. And there are a lot of people who have been interested in having ball fields.” But, he said, protecting 20 of the 30 acres of mostly forested land in a natural state is certainly preferable to 237 condos or even single-family development.

“I guess I’m kind a realist,” Stone said. “If we have a chance to get this land, using grants, and don’t do it, that would be a heck of a missed opportunity.”

Rush said that if the town is able to get the land, nothing would happen fast.

“Ultimately, I would envision the board soliciting additional public input on desired park amenities in the future, and using that public input to develop a specific park plan,” he said.

Learn More

• Read the Natural Heritage Report

BEAUFORT — Hunting has been allowed at the Rachel Carson Reserve since it was established in the 1980s, but increasing numbers of year-round recreational and educational visitors to the reserve’s five islands have prompted safety concerns and a move to put restrictions on hunting.

Officials with the North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve held a meeting March 9 at the Beaufort Train Depot to hear input from the public about the possibility of imposing a hunting permit system. At issue are the areas outside of town limits where hunting is approved: the east end of Carrot Island and Middle Marsh.  On the table is a plan to limit hunting, now allowed Monday-Saturday during the season, to only Tuesdays and Saturdays. The idea for the east end of Carrot Island is to grant permits for up to six individuals, or two parties of three persons, per day on the designated days at a cost of $5 each. On Middle Marsh, the $5 permit would be for the entire hunting season.

“When the Rachel Carson Reserve was designated in the early ’80s, there was hardly any development near the east end of the island, where you didn’t even notice there was hunting,” said Paula Gillikin, central sites manager for Rachel Carson and Permuda Island reserves.

Tourism has increased across the county almost two-fold since 1991. This surge is causing conflicts among groups engaging in different activities on Carrot Island, such as photographers, kayakers and paddlers who frequent areas traditionally used by hunters.

“A whole suite of things has changed since the site was designated. We hardly had complaints when the reserve was designated, but in the past 10 years, I have received more complaints about these particular issues,” Gillikin said.

What is the Rachel Carson Reserve?

The Rachel Carson Reserve encompasses an area between the mouths of the Newport and North rivers, across from the Beaufort waterfront. The main site includes Carrot Island, Town Marsh, Bird Shoal and Horse Island. These islands total more than 3 miles in length and are narrower than a mile wide. Middle Marsh is separated by the North River Channel and is almost 2 miles long and less than a mile wide. Acquisition of the area was finalized in 1985, with the addition of Middle Marsh in 1989.

Preservation allows this coastal ecosystem to be available as a natural outdoor laboratory where scientists, students and the public can learn about coastal processes, functions and the influences that shape and sustain the coastal area. Traditional recreational uses are allowed, if they do not disturb the environment or organisms or interfere with research and educational activities.

With that in mind, it may be easier to understand why many are surprised hunting is permitted on the reserve.

Gillikin explained that in addition to protecting representative coastal North Carolina ecosystems, enabling research to inform sound management of coastal resources and increasing understanding of their importance and the effects humans have on them, the reserve serves to accommodate compatible, traditional recreational uses.

“The last point is related to hunting. Hunting is specifically called out as a traditional use,” Gillikin said. “When the North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve was established in the early ’80s, the state had an agreement that the reserve would maintain these traditional uses, such as hiking, birdwatching, any number of activities that had been done on the site already.”

Gillikin presented during the meeting a list of complaints received regarding hunting on Carrot Island – the area where hunting is allowed is only about 500 acres. These complaints included the presence of spent shotgun shells and debris, evidence of possible baiting and reports of personal property left behind. Also expressed were concerns about visitor safety and enjoyment, hunting inside town limits where nearby residents can hear shooting from their houses and the safety of the wild horses that populate the reserve.

“To address some of the imbalance of user groups and the changes that occur, instead of completely prohibiting hunting, which would be a hard thing to do and we really are trying to preserve traditional hunting opportunities, we are going to put some restrictions on it through a permitting system to try to address some issues,” Gillikin continued. “We are going to do it through a specific timing, a limit on the number of people, and we are also talking about prohibiting lead shot on the reserve, because lead can be detrimental on the estuarine ecosystems to different marsh species and the environment in general.”

Tommy Hughes, coastal ecoregion supervisor with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, was also at the meeting to help answer questions about the proposed permit system.

“There will be two hunting units: one on the east end of Carrot Island and one on Middle Marsh,: Hughes said. “On the east end of Carrot Island, there needs to be a restriction on the number of people who are hunting.”

Primarily hunted species include dove, rail, waterfowl and rabbit.

The permit system will restrict the days hunters can be there and what species they may target. “This limits the number of people on the east end of Carrot Island,” Hughes said.

“On Middle Marsh, we’re looking at things a little different,” he continued. “Because you’re not having problems out on Middle Marsh, you can get a permit for webless migratory game birds and waterfowl. There would still be a steel-shot restriction but anybody could get that permit; there are no limits to the numbers. The only thing that will affect anyone now is that there is a $5 charge for the permit.”

The permit system gives the Wildlife Resources Commission an opportunity to create a database with addresses and information on the hunters that can be used by both the commission and the reserve personnel. This information has not been available before.

Gillikin said a wealth of information on users of the reserve had been available, but not on hunters.

Pam Valente, a volunteer at the Rachel Carson Reserve, was the only meeting attendee who chose to speak. Valente began by saying that she is glad to hear there will be more restricted hunting on the east end of Carrot Island.

“Never in my wildest imagination in the ‘70s and ‘80s did I think people would be making a living taking tourists to that island,” Valente said. “So, it’s astounding to me how many people go over there. I think hunting in that area, it’s just inherently dangerous for people. I don’t think it should be happening at all, so anything you can do to cut back on it is a good thing. Besides the people, the fact is that it’s a nature reserve, it’s a place for nature.

Hunting is simply not compatible with the changes that have happened on that island, Valente continued. “It seems to me that the very little bit of hunting that can be done there can be done somewhere else. And it would be a lot safer for people and a lot more contentious for the wildlife.”

Gillikin said after the public comment portion of the meeting that management practices must adapt to the changing uses of the reserve.

“It is our responsibility to balance and understand the extent of a multitude of traditional uses, including hunting, and that is what we are aiming to accomplish through the permit system,” she said.

Information on the hunting permit system is to be posted on Wildlife Resources Commission’s website prior to the start of the fall 2017 hunting season.

Hughes said the next step involves approval by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, or DCM.

“Once we hear back from DCM to proceed, we will incorporate this into our Permit Hunt Opportunities Program,” Hughes said. “The hunts, quota and non-quota, discussed will be created and incorporated into our online system for potential users to apply for through our agency.”

Point-of-sale permits can be purchased from a Wildlife Service agent online or by calling the service’s customer support section in Raleigh. Quota hunts will be permitted through a random drawing process, Hughes said.

Learn More

• Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve Program
• Wildlife Resources Commission

NAVASSA – As the investigation continues into how deep and widespread creosote has traveled through Navassa’s soil and groundwater, town leaders and residents must hatch plans to re-use the land where the wood-treating chemical was used and disposed of for years.

The Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, is drilling additional monitoring wells throughout the town to determine where and how much contamination is in the ground from the former Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. wood treatment facility.

During a public meeting hosted at the town’s community center Tuesday night, EPA, Multistate Environmental Response Trust and North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality officials updated residents on the latest results of soil and water tested for concentrations of the toxic sludge.

Creosote has been found as deep as 75 feet below the surface, said Richard Elliott, Multistate Trust project manager.

“Some of it is literally creosote,” Elliott said. “There are places, particularly in the production area where they were processing the ties and poles, it’s seeped down into the ground and it’s out there, no question about it.”

Creosote is sitting about 3½ feet deep at the bottom of one 65-foot-deep well, Elliott said.

That revelation drew audible “Mms” from several residents, many of whom shook their heads as they looked at pictures of a black, sludge-soaked cloth pulled from one well.

“You can see there are some places, by visual, that it’s very clean, and then you have creosote,” Elliott said. “We’re basically trying to draw a three-dimensional map of where this stuff is underground. How big is this? How deep is it? What does it look like? We’re trying to understand where that boundary is, but it’s a fairly good size, hundreds of feet in diameter, I would say.”

The Navassa site was once the location of a large plant that operated for nearly four decades treating wood with creosote, a common wood preservative made from a wide range of chemicals that, when combined, form a gummy substance applied to wood products such as railroad ties and telephone poles.

The plant opened in 1936 and was operated by numerous owners before being sold to the Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp., which closed the plant in 1974.

The 250-acre site was added to the EPA’s Superfund program’s National Priorities List in 2010.

In December 2016, officials collected water from 49 monitoring wells. Of those, seven wells contained creosote at thicknesses ranging from 0.07 feet to nearly 3½ feet.

Up until now, the EPA has been sporadically sampling groundwater for traces of contamination. Moving forward, the EPA will collect groundwater samples every quarter.

Elliott said there does not appear to be much creosote in Sturgeon Creek, which runs south of Navassa. Sediment samples from the marsh are currently being evaluated, he said.

He and other officials attempted to answer a barrage of questions from residents wanting to know whether fish and shellfish from the creek are safe to eat and what people should do if they’re concerned about being exposed to contamination.

There are also lingering questions about how or if site cleanup and land re-use planning efforts may be affected by the new administration in Washington.

The EPA may be facing deeper budget cuts, more than the 25 percent initially reported after President Donald Trump took office in January. The president unveiled his preliminary budget plan Thursday, slashing $2.6 billion, or 31 percent, of EPA’s current funding and reducing the agency’s workforce by one-fifth.

The cuts include funding for the Superfund cleanup program.

“No comment,” was the response when CRO asked Franklin Hill, director of the Superfund Division of the EPA Southeast, what effect the cuts may have on work at the Navassa site.

“I would be lying if I said I hadn’t thought about it,” Navassa Mayor Eulis Willis said of the proposed cuts. “Yes, it’s a concern of mine. I don’t know how much I’ll be able to do if it affects us.”

Willis said he had not asked EPA officials with whom he’s familiar about the potential effects.

“Their jobs seem to be somewhat secure at the moment at least,” Willis said.

The president’s proposed budget “reins in” Superfund administrative costs and “would prioritize the use of existing settlement funds to clean up hazardous waste sites and look for ways to remove some the barriers that have delayed the program’s ability to return sites to the community.” The plan would reduce funding for the Hazardous Substance Superfund Account by $330 million.

In the meantime, the process to determine how the former wood-treatment plant site should be used is moving forward.

Cindy Brooks, the Multistate Trust managing principal, proposed Tuesday night the creation of a redevelopment working group that would include residents, town representatives, business owners and the Navassa Community Economic and Environmental Re-Development Corp., or NCEERC.

“The trust is not a developer,” Brooks said. “The implementation of whatever is going to happen out there on the land is going to happen by others. At the end of this process what we hope to have is a potential way to reuse the Kerr-McGee site.”

How much and where the contamination is will help shape just how the land may be used.

The trust is seeking volunteers to join the redevelopment group, which will be chartered next month. A stakeholders’ meeting to hash out two to three design plans is scheduled to be held in September, with a final preliminary plan available for review in December.

EPA officials are urging residents to get involved in the land-use planning process.

“That local input, that local control over what is going to happen is something that’s important to us,” said Erik Spalvins, EPA remedial project manager. “This is about deciding what this piece of property is going to be used for for the next 50 years.”

The EPA’s remedial investigation report is scheduled to be issued in September. A record of decision and a detailed design phase of how the land will be used will be released sometime in 2019 with construction most likely starting in either late 2019 or early 2020, agency officials said.

Learn More

• View the meeting presentation
• Redevelopment Planning Initiative (RPI) Fact Sheet
• Cleanup Progress and Plans Fact Sheet
• Stakeholder Involvement Fact Sheet
• Roles and Responsibilities Fact Sheet
• Contact Names and Phones Fact Sheet

Editor’s note: this story has been updated to include the final count of crab pots collected by the North Carolina Coastal Federation this year. 

A small skiff cruises over the calm waters of Bogue Sound, slowing down as it approaches the Emerald Isle boat dock in Carteret County. Onboard are fisherman Marty Frost, his wife, Sue, and their 13-year-old grandson, Hunter. Surrounding them are about 20 broken and derelict crab pots Frost removed from the waters and hoisted onto his vessel.

Frost, 59, of Salter Path, is one of 72 fishermen working with the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s annual Lost Fishing Gear Recovery Project, an effort to remove marine debris from waters all along the state’s coast. This year, the program grew in size thanks to a $100,000 appropriation from the state General Assembly.

“We were really able to expand substantially this year,” said Ladd Bayliss, a coastal advocate at the federation’s northeast office in Wanchese and the manager of the federation’s project.

Through funding provided by the appropriation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Marine Debris Program to remove items that pollute and obstruct waterways, the federation was able to hire about 30 more fishermen and extend the project all along the state’s coast. The federation has also teamed up with the North Carolina Sea Grant for aspects of the project.

To kick off the annual project, the federation held coastline cleanup projects in three locations on Jan. 14: Hatteras Island in the Outer Banks, Morris Landing Clean Water Preserve in Holly Ridge along Stump Sound and Hoop Pole Creek Nature Trail in Atlantic Beach.

Between the three locations, 138 volunteers worked to pick up more than 4,500 pounds of onshore marine debris.

Commercial fishermen, like Frost, were hired by the federation to use their expertise to clean up the sounds during the fishing off-season. This year, they removed debris, mostly crab pots, for a little more than a week starting Jan. 18, during the state’s “no-potting” period.

Bayliss said that the knowledge commercial fishermen have of the water makes them suited to remove crab pots.

“What they bring to the table is a real depth and care about the sound,” she said. Tapping into their knowledge and experience, she said, is important, as removing the crab pots is not an easy task.

The pots on Frost’s boat are in various states of disrepair. A few are slightly bent, but otherwise look brand new. Some are shredded beyond recognition, likely by boat propellers, but most are covered in years of oysters and marine growth.

“You take like this one here – there’s no telling how long it’s been,” Frost said, pointing to a pot barely visible amidst the green algae covering its wires.

In the shallow waters of the Bogue Sound, which Frost said only reaches 8 feet at its lowest points, he can spot the crab pots at the bottom, in marsh grass or occasionally attached to a buoy. He then usually uses a rod and hook to fish out the pot.

Frost said he picked up 10 pots during his last trip on the water, rounding his total count out to 30 in the 5- or 6-mile radius he covered over two days.

Many of the crab pots had been swept away by storms. Tags that once bore the names of their owners are now long gone. Buoys that once marked the locations of the crab pots are now often nowhere in sight. Bayliss said some crab pots have been found as far as 10 miles from their original location.

“More pots were lost because there were significant storms in the fall and in the spring,” Bayliss said.

Crab pots are more than a nuisance in the shallow waters of the sound. They are, as Frost puts it, a hazard for both commercial and recreational fishermen. Not only do they get caught in the propellers of boats in shallow waters, but they continue to trap and kill crabs, fish and other marine life that find their way inside. Beyond that, Frost said that as a fisherman, he wants to keep the waters he depends on clean and healthy.

The program extends across three North Carolina Marine Patrol Districts all along the state’s coast. District 1 covers northeastern North Carolina, extending from the Virginia state line to Manteo and Swan Quarter. The central coastal is District 2, encompassing areas from the Pungo River to Morehead City and Emerald Isle. District 3 is to the south, starting at Cape Carteret and extending down to Wilmington and the South Carolina state line. This year, thanks to the additional funding, the project expanded for the first time beyond the District 1.

Each boat is required to have at least two crew members and receives $400 for every six-hour day the team works. Bayliss said she tries to give every boat three days on the water.

The data from the project is given to North Carolina Sea Grant.

Once the crab pots are removed from the water, they are disposed of in landfills. In the past, the federation had experimented with using the crab pots to build oyster reefs, but regulations make that difficult to do.

The federation reported the project has collected over 2,000 derelict crab pots through the program since 2014. This year, the fishermen picked up 4,270.

Frost said that before this year, he had heard about the project but couldn’t participate because of his location. When he saw in a local newspaper the opportunity to apply, he knew he had to. Now, he said, he was glad to be a part of the project and that he hopes funding for it continues in the future.

“It’s not a waste of money,” Frost said. “It’s helping clean up the environment.”

Frost said that his family fishes during the summer, but goes oystering in the winter. This project, he said, will supplement those earnings.

“Things are kind of slack this time of year,” he said, “and it give us a little bit of extra income. And, I like to see a clean and healthy resource, too.”

Bayliss wants people to know that the commercial fishermen working on the project care about the health of the ecosystems they fish from, calling them “some of the greatest advocates for a healthy sound.”

Frost said he enjoys working on the water and that he appreciates the opportunity to keep it clean. He said he’s been on the water for 50 years, since he was a boy, and that the water is his home.

“A bad day on the water,” he said, “is better than a good day on land for me.”

Learn More

• Lost Fishing Gear Recovery Project
• Video of the Hatteras Island kick off cleanup

WILMINGTON – The Army Corps of Engineers has authorized its first nationwide permit for living shorelines.

Nationwide Permit 54 specifically addresses the construction and maintenance of living shoreline projects.

The new permit solidifies on a national level the value of living shorelines as a more natural erosion control alternative to hardened structures such as bulkheads, say living shoreline advocates.

“We’re really excited about this,” said Laura Lightbody, project director of The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Flood-Prepared Communities program. “Our hope is that this nationwide permit will ease [the permitting process] for property owners, giving them more of a choice hopefully leading them down the path of the environmentally preferred option.”

Living shoreline projects are built with various structural and organic materials, such as plants, submerged aquatic vegetation, oyster shells and stone. These projects generally work best along sheltered coasts such as estuaries, bays, lagoons and coastal deltas, where wave energy is low to moderate.

The Corps has folded permitting guidelines for living shorelines into Permit 13, which governs construction of erosion-control projects.

The problem with the current permitting system, critics say, is that in areas including North Carolina, those who apply to build bulkheads and revetments have an unfair advantage because it takes generally less time and money to obtain permits for hardened structures than for living shorelines.

The Corps’ Wilmington District has regional General Permit 291 that covers shoreline projects in or affecting navigable waters. This permit was developed in conjunction with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management and was one of the first state programmatic general permits authorized in the country.

The way the system is set up now, general permit applications have to be reviewed by the state Division of Water Resources and Division of Marine Fisheries. After those state agencies have reviewed an application, the applicant must then submit it to the Corps for authorization.

Because this puts the burden on the applicant, most apply for a Coastal Area Management Act, or CAMA, major permit, which is, in essence, a one-stop shop where the state Division of Coastal Management sends an application to all of the reviewing agencies. The review time for CAMA major applications takes 45 days or longer.

General Permit 291 will continue to be available for coastal projects, including living shorelines, according to a Wilmington District public affairs officer.

“If a project involves a CAMA major permit and agency coordination is needed for historic properties, endangered or threatened species or essential fish habitat consultation, we will more than likely process living shoreline projects under GP 291,” Lisa Parker, wrote in an email responding to questions.

Permit 54 specifies a time frame in which the Corps must review a request and respond to an applicant, which will help streamline the permitting process.

With a more streamlined permitting process, Lightbody said the hope is that living shorelines will buck the trend of hardened erosion-control structures.

At least 14 percent of the country’s shoreline is armored by hardened structures, according to a group of researchers who in 2015 conducted the first nationwide survey of artificial coastal erosion control methods.

That’s more than 14,000 miles of hardened shoreline.

“We don’t want that to increase and continue down the path that it’s on,” Lightbody said.

If hardened shoreline structures remain the status quo and the coastal population continues to grow, nearly one third of the nation’s contiguous shoreline is expected to be hardened by 2100, according the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s “Guidance for Considering the Use of Living Shorelines.”

The guide, published in 2015, explains why living shorelines, when built in areas suitable for natural stabilization, are a preferable alternative to hardened structures.

Mounting research shows that living shorelines hold up better through storms than hardened structures, enhance intertidal habitat for fish and other marine resources, and better defend against sea-level rise.

Permit 54 states that living shorelines “should maintain the natural continuity of the land-water interface, and retain or enhance shoreline ecological processes.” The permit further states that living shoreline projects must have a “substantial biological component” that should include tidal or lacustrine fringe, or lakeside, wetlands, oyster or mussel reef structures.

Conditions of the new permit require an applicant to build out no more than 30 feet into the water from the mean low water line in tidal waters and no more than 500 feet in length along the bank, unless waived by a Corps district engineer.

Structural materials such as stone, native oyster shell and wood debris must be anchored so it does not move in “most” wave action.

The new permit also mandates native plants be used in living shorelines constructed in tidal or lacustrine fringe wetlands.

The Corps can place conditions applying to specific regions on nationwide permits, or NWPs.

“Regional conditions for the NWPs are still under review and at this time we do not know what the regional conditions will be for NWP 54,” Parker wrote.

The goal, she stated, is to have regional conditions in place by the time the existing nationwide permits expire later this winter.

The Corps issues nationwide permits for a whole host of activities covered by the federal Clean Water and Rivers and Harbors acts. The review of applications for such permits is streamlined because the activities will have minimal effects on the environment.

NWP 54 is one of two new nationwide permits the Corps released Jan. 6. The agency updates its national permits every five years. New and modified permits will become effective March 18.

Learn More

• Corps Revises, Renews Nationwide Permits
• NOAA: Guidance for Considering the Use of Living Shorelines
• Pew: Flood-Prepared Communities

CAPE FEAR RIVER — The only thing that American shad, striped bass, and Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon want in springtime is to get up North Carolina rivers to the fall line to spawn.

Except for something to eat, of course, and in the case of the shad, they don’t even want that – they fast during the 100-mile-plus journey from the Atlantic Ocean.

On the Cape Fear River, their destination is thought to be the ruins of an old dam and some rapids at Smiley’s Falls, near Erwin in Harnett County. There, where the rocky Piedmont meets the Coastal Plain, is where they began life, in a spot that offers protection for offspring.

“Eggs can fall down in those cavities and be protected from predation,” said Joseph Hightower, retired North Carolina State University professor and U.S. Geological Survey biologist.

Conservation-minded folk, who want to grow the state’s fish population and with it the economy, gave the river’s anadromous, or inland-spawning, ocean-living, fish a $14 million boost in 2012. That’s when Lock and Dam No. 1 near Riegelwood was turned into a manmade rapids that the fish could swim over, rather than wait for a lift in the lock by the dam-keeper.

It was a pioneering step – the first rock arch rapids on the East Coast – but two more lock and dam combinations remain between the fish and home, No. 2 at Elizabethtown and William O. Huske No. 3 below Fayetteville.

Now a move is underway to make it possible for the fish to flip themselves unaided all the way to Harnett County.

The Cape Fear River Partnership, a coalition of public and private groups including Cape Fear River Watch, has cobbled together $2.3 million, with hopes of making it $3.2 million, to design and start building similar rapids or other fish passages at the remaining dams.

Moffatt & Nichol, a global infrastructure advisory firm with a Raleigh office, has already started design work.

Numbers of the fish have declined dramatically due to overfishing and the dams that 19^th and 20^th century industry brought to the state’s rivers. There are now catch limits on shad in the Cape Fear and  a total prohibition of catching striped bass there.

There are estimated to be only 300 Atlantic and 50 shortnose sturgeon in the Cape Fear, and catching the endangered fish anywhere on the East Coast is prohibited.

“Most North Carolinians have never seen a sturgeon,” said Mike Wicker, Raleigh-based biologist for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “They’ve got no idea that back in the 1800s there were these 18-foot fish and people were harvesting them for caviar.”

Shad Take The Chance

There’s evidence that the fish are responding to the boost past Lock and Dam No. 1.  American shad – bony, silvery and fierce fighting – started swimming up the rapids even before they were completed.

Now, Cape Fear River Watch Executive Director Frank Yelverton says that 65 percent or more are making it over the top. When the Wildlife Commission collected eggs in 2016, 95 percent of them came from above the rapids.

Shad are historically renowned for their eggs, or roe, but even more important to North Carolina, said Wicker, is their role as food for the $2 billion saltwater recreational fishing industry.

“Speckled trout, flounder, puppy drum and even things like bluefish and tuna, king mackerel” – they all feast on shad, Wicker said. “Dolphins eat them too, porpoises … even whales.”

Reluctant Stripers

Striped bass, two or three times as big as shad and a fish that likes to swim in schools, haven’t fared as well at the rapids. Of their eggs, 97 percent were collected below the rapids, which are a carefully arranged collection of large boulders sloping up to the 11-foot-high top of the dam.

With new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration guidelines for rock rapids in hand, the partnership wants to make the existing rapids more attractive to the bass, which are tasty and an angler’s dream.

Under the new guidelines, boulders would be arranged so that their slope is more gradual, and instead of 18 inches between them, the space would be more like 8 feet.

Under The Radar

As for the sturgeon, the “now you see them, now you don’t” phantoms of the river, there’s evidence that some of the few remaining may also be heaving their mammoth bodies past the rapids.

The prehistoric-looking fish have changed little since dinosaur days, with long rows of bony protuberances, called scutes, down their bodies. They’ve been known to reach 800 pounds and live 60 years, though some caught in the Cape Fear estuary several years ago were closer to 80 pounds.

One researcher who caught them said that when they take one of their unexplained and prodigious leaps, “It sounds like a tree fell in the water.”

Dawn York of Wilmington environmental consulting firm Dial Cordy and Associates, which coordinates the fish-passage project for the partnership, hesitates to say that the sturgeon are definitely making it over. No tagged ones have been found past the rapids, she said.

But distinctive as they are, one veteran fisherman is sure he saw one in 2014. And last September, a researcher for an environmental consulting firm found a 4-foot juvenile tangled in his gill net at Elwell Ferry, 8 miles above the rapids.

“We let him go and he swam away in good condition,” said Mark Westendorff, senior environmental scientist for Wilmington-based consulting firm CZR Inc. “I thought it was great. “

York thought it was great, too. Though there’s a slight chance the upstream fish got a lift through the lock during infrequent maintenance, she likes to view them as evidence that the rapids work.

“The fact we’re finding them further upstream than they’re typically found means that they’re migrating and they’re looking for spawning habitat,” she said. “It demonstrates we need to continue our effort.”

Learn More

• Fish can now get around old obstacle

OREGON INLET — If fishing reefs are the underwater version of condominiums, then the waters here will soon be the trendy new neighborhood for marine life.

Construction of a living shoreline reef is underway, to be followed in a few years by restoration of four existing reefs with demolished bridge material. And an entirely new reef is also being planned nearby in state waters, thanks to a grant funded by fishing license fees.

Technically a habitat enhancement site for submerged aquatic vegetation, or SAV, the living shoreline reef is a wave-break structure that will create a 50-acre “wave shadow,” said Kathy Herring, environmental program supervisor at the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s Natural Environment Section.

The reef, with an inverted V-shape design, reduces the energy in the shadow, allowing submerged aquatic vegetation acreage to increase, she said.  In turn, the ecosystem benefits from improved water quality, more aquatic habitat and reduced sediment travel.

“Seagrass don’t like a lot of wave action,” Herring said. “The concept is it will create a calmer environment on the lee side to promote SAV growth. It will double as a living shoreline.”

Aquatic plant growth, she said, is influenced by water depth, light penetration, nutrient loading, salinity, exposure to waves and currents, and is vulnerable to extreme storm events

Located about a mile west of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, the 4-foot-high, 500-foot-long reef is part of the bridge-replacement project that Herring said is expected to be completed in 2019. It is the first time the state has set out to build a living reef to promote submerged aquatic vegetation growth instead of standard mitigation practices. The five-year, $2.2 million project is intended to offset 1.3 acres of aquatic plants affected by the bridge work.

“As well as being a permanent ‘living’ structure, providing bio-habitat for a diverse array of organisms,” Herring elaborated in an email, “this project is part of an effort to determine the best strategy for SAV conservation in NC.”

An important part of the SAV Habitat Enhancement Project, Herring said, is the requirement for five years of post-construction monitoring and reporting. Yearly surveys will be conducted to measure submerged aquatic vegetation growth and to determine the type and number of organisms using the structure.

The structure – built 4 feet off the sea floor – is made of layered units of stacked concrete with natural rock embedded in it, Herring said. Each unit has a hole in it. The selected area has good water depth and light attenuation, she said. Depth at low tide is about 2 to 3 feet. There will be no fishing or access restrictions on the reef, which will be visible above the water and properly marked.

Contractor CSA Ocean Sciences of Stuart, Florida, began construction last month, and is expected to complete the project in about three weeks, weather permitting.

“Man, it looks like great fish structure to me,” said Mac Gibbs, retired county extension director for Hyde County Center of the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service and a North Carolina Coastal Federation board member, after watching the contractor work one recent afternoon. “The way it’s designed, fish can hide right in it.”

Although the project is not related in any way to the state Division of Marine Fisheries’ artificial reef program, Gibbs, a lifelong fisherman, said he expects the reef to attract a multitude of finfish, as well as oysters. Oyster spat would likely land nearby on Crab Slough in the inlet, he said. The reef would be readily accessible to boaters transiting “the Crack” channel between the Oregon Inlet Fishing Center and Old House Channel.

“It’s going to be great for the recreational fishing community,” he said. “It’s going to have a great benefit on the environment.”

New Life for Old Reefs

Anglers can also look forward to much improved fishing in the near future on four deteriorating reefs, ranging from 2.5 miles to about 4 miles off the beach.  Debris from the demolished Bonner Bridge will be used to build up the old structures as the structure is torn down, work targeted to begin by late 2018 and continue for about 10 months.

Jason Peters, artificial reef coordinator for the state Division of Marine Fisheries, said that NCDOT estimates a total of 80,000 tons of suitable material will be available to distribute among the reefs.

Marked on the artificial reef map, reef No. 160, located south of the inlet and the only one in state waters, will receive 55 percent of the material. Each of the remaining three, Nos. 130,140 and 145 – all northeast of the inlet – will  each receive 15 percent.

“That’s a benefit to both – it saves DOT a ton of money,” Herring said. “And it enhances Marine Fisheries’ artificial reef program.”

Peters said that because of the remoteness of the Outer Banks and its harsh coastal conditions, maintenance of the reefs over the years has been lacking.

Currently, there are just the four artificial reefs in waters north of Cape Hatteras, not including the living shoreline.

“Historically, those reef sites have been somewhat underserved,” he said.

There are also seven artificial reefs between Hatteras and Cape Lookout.

As the old bridge roadway is cut into sections, the debris will be placed on a barge to transport to the reef.

Research has shown that marine life wastes no time moving into its new home, Peters said. It might be hours, maybe even minutes.

“It’s like the oasis in the desert,” he said. “A lot of the fish there are reef-oriented. So when that material shows up, they go right to it.”

Soon, there will be the “base communities” – algae, corals, barnacles, mollusks – that create nice hiding spots for the little creatures which move in next. Then come the larger animals, which see the little creatures as dinner. And so it goes.

“The actual establishment of an ecosystem takes several months,” Peters said.

Meanwhile, an additional reef is being planned about 2 miles south of reef No. 160, or 8 miles south of Oregon Inlet buoy, about a ¾-mile distance from the shoreline.

When the Outer Banks Anglers Club learned from Peters that grant money would be available to build an artificial reef in state waters near the inlet, the nonprofit group, which promotes “safety, good fellowship and true sportsmanship among all anglers,” didn’t hesitate to apply, said club president L. Pace Mimms.

“There’s a clear danger (that National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) will make it a protected marine habitat,” Mimms said, elaborating on part of the club’s motivation.

The Anglers Club expects to hear any day whether the $1.2 million grant, which is funded by state recreational fishing license fees, has been approved, he said. An additional $50,000 is being raised to put toward related costs for the project.

If the go-ahead is given, the plan is to sink two retired vessels – one a 100-foot and the other a 200-foot ship – to anchor each end of the reef. They would be sunk by opening the seacock, a valve in the vessels’ hulls. Once sunk, they’ll be anchored. In the middle, the builders will sink 200 tons of used concrete pipe. The following year, another 800 tons of concrete pipe will be sunk on top of that. The reef will rise 25-30 feet above the ocean floor in about 70-foot-deep water, with varying heights to attract different kinds of marine animals. The proposed structure would have a 1,500-foot circumference and lay within 162 acres. It will be easy to reach for skiffs, kayaks and other smaller-sized vessels.

“What we’re planning is a state-of-the art artificial reef,” Mimms said. “It’s going to be a great place for fish, and a great place for divers. I think it will have tremendous impact.”

Once the funds are secured, the vessels – one is likely to be an old tug – will be purchased, cleaned and inspected, Mimms said. Vessels will be towed and sunk professionally, with Coast Guard supervision.

Boats will be oriented northeast to southwest, or vice-versa.

“So, when you fish on top of the these old wrecks, that’s the way the current is going to flow,” Mimms said. That way, the whole length of the boat can be fished.

But anglers will need to be patient.

“It may take some time,” Mimms said. “It’s going to take a couple of years for this thing to grow.”

Learn More

• Division of Marine Fisheries’ Artificial Reefs Program
• Department of Transportation’s Bonner Bridge replacement project

CAPE CARTERET — By all accounts, the North Carolina Coastal Federation’s years-in-the-making project to transform two ponds here into a tidal wetlands stormwater-management system this past summer was a big success.

Of the 18,000 or so wetland plants placed by hand in the basins of the former ponds this past spring, Lexia Weaver, the federation scientist who managed the project, estimates only 5 percent were lost, and the rest have met or even exceeded growth expectations.

Better still, the constructed wetlands have adequately handled the runoff from several significant rainstorms this fall, including the deluge of several inches over a 48-hour period when Hurricane Matthew moved through the area in October.

“Everything has worked as planned,” Weaver said recently. “We couldn’t be happier.”

In addition, there are already plenty of small baitfish in the system, which is just off N.C. 24 in front of Cape Carteret Baptist Church and Cape Carteret Presbyterian Church. And since the fish are in there, so are birds, including pelicans and egrets.

It’s been a long time coming. Longstanding problems with the ponds were exacerbated in November 2012 when a water control structure failed and the water drained into Deer Creek, which is a tributary of Bogue Sound. Cape Carteret officials contacted the federation to see what could be done, and the organization suggested that the ponds, which were choked by non-native water hyacinths, be turned into wetlands.

The state Division of Water Quality had surveyed the larger pond but said it would not take responsibility to help restore it. The state Department of Transportation also declined to help, despite having four pipes that bring water into the pond from N.C. 24. The Army Corps of Engineers said that the pond pre-dated its permitting process, but if the Corps became involved in fixing the pond, a permit would be needed before any work is done.

Then the federation closed on the sale of an easement at its massive North River Farms wetlands project east of Beaufort, and collected $3 million. Because the farm project was funded with a state Clean Water Management Trust Fund grant, the proceeds from the sale must be used for similar restoration projects. Federation executive director Todd Miller thought cleaning up the ponds would be a neighborly – and environmentally significant – thing to do with a portion of proceeds.

Eventually, the federation started working in earnest with the town and with the churches, and agreements were reached and all the necessary state and federal permits were obtained. The town’s planning board and board of commissioners signed off on the project early this year, and work to drain the ponds began last winter. Once that was done, Andy and Carson Wood of Habitat Environmental Services of Hampstead, hired by federation, came in and set traps and removed countless fish and many turtles and frogs that had called the ponds home, relocating them to nearby suitable habitat.

That’s when the real work began; with the ponds drained, workers using heavy equipment began “mucking” out the basins, removing mud, vegetation and debris in preparation for planting, operating under a plan designed by Kris Bass of Kris Bass Engineering of Raleigh.

When the mucking was complete, workers began putting in the plants during the last full week of May. The organization worked with an expert, Wes Newell of Backwater and Lumber River Nursery Plants, who has also worked with the federation on the North River Farms property.

Finally, workers removed a filter that had been keeping silt from the project from flowing into Deer Creek and countless fish swam into the newly created wetlands, as did crabs.

Since then, the system has been the beneficiary of daily tidal flows from the creek, and the carefully selected plants have thrived.

Bass, who planned and executed the federation’s 6,000-acre farm-to-wetlands conversion at North River Farms, has called the project “unique” for the state.

The stormwater enters the smaller, upper (farthest from Deer Creek) of the two basins, on the Baptist property, which was rebuilt to have sand and rock layers below the planted vegetation and serves as a bio-retention area, filtering as much of the pollutants as possible from the collected stormwater. The water that remains flows, as a creek, to the larger basin on the Presbyterian property. And the real innovation is that this part of the system is a tidal salt marsh, flooded regularly by water from the creek, which connects to Bogue Sound. The goal, eventually, is to improve the water quality in Deer Creek and to preserve the nearly pristine quality of that section of Bogue Sound.

Weaver said the state Shellfish Sanitation office, which is responsible for monitoring pollution and open and closing shellfish harvest waters, has already been taking samples of the water coming into and leaving the system. Although the data is not yet available, she’s confident the results will show improving water quality.

“Already,” she said, it’s obvious that the “water (in the system) is not coming out as fast as it did,” which means pollutants have more time to settle out and are taken up by the wetlands vegetation.

The next step, Weaver said, will come next year, when the federation and its cadre of volunteers plant oyster shells in the system, in the hope that oyster larvae will attach and grow. Oysters would further clean the water, as they are filter feeders and remove pollutants as they eat.

Bass said he has visited the site in recent weeks and is more than pleased with the results after the first growing season.

“What we are seeing is typical of estuarine creeks, but the growth of the vegetation has actually exceeded our expectations,” he said. “It’s done very well, and we’re looking forward to it (the vegetation) filling in more over the next year or two.”

Bass said the project benefited from a summer and fall growing season that was long, but not overwhelmingly hot for long periods of time, or terribly dry or wet. The tidal flow has been strong, bringing in the saltwater and nutrients that plants need to grow.

Like Weaver, Bass said he’s been pleased by the ability of the system to handle the tremendous amount of stormwater runoff from N.C. 24 and the big commercial parking lots on both sides of the road. But he and Weaver also noted that there have been a couple of erosion problems, one at each basin. Work to fix them has started, as more dirt and rocks are being added to stabilize the banks.

“With a project of this size – it was a pretty major reconstruction – it’s not at all unusual to have a few issues of this type,” Bass said. “The key thing is to watch for them and take care of them before they cause real problems, and that’s what we’re doing.”

The Rev. Ben Burroughs, pastor of the Presbyterian church, said he, too, is pleased, and added that the response from his congregation has been overwhelmingly positive.

“It looks great and of course it seems to be doing what it was supposed to do, which his give us cleaner waters,” he said. “That was what we were primarily after. And we’re looking forward to seeing the vegetation fill in even more over the next year or two.”

Members of the church community, Burroughs said, enjoy the herons and egrets and other wildlife that visit the wetlands, and like seeing the little “winding creek” that runs through the system.

“The federation has been a great partner, and we’re thrilled with the results,” he said. “I’m also pleased that they are paying attention to the little erosion problem and are taking care of it.”

Cape Carteret Mayor Dave Fowler said it was fun to watch the project take shape, and added that he’s heard positive comments from the town’s residents and the board of commissioners.

“I’d say it’s been very successful,” he said. “It looks nice and it will eventually look even better. And most importantly, it’s working the way it was supposed to work.”

The town, he said, is very concerned about water quality, as well as drainage, and officials and residents are very grateful to the federation for taking on a project that didn’t cost taxpayers or the churches any money. He also thinks the project can serve to educate people about ecosystems, another benefit.

“It took a while, but there were a lot of details involved, but it was much more important to get it right than it was to get it done fast,” Fowler said. “We all really appreciate what the federation did.”

When the project was conceived, the cost estimate was around $200,000, but it ended up approaching $500,000.

Learn More

• Work begins on stormwater ponds
• Pond project progresses
• From eyesore to functioning wetlands

NAVASSA – Don’t hold back.

Unlike the long, tedious process ahead in the cleanup and restoration of the Superfund site in Navassa, the message to residents here during an Environmental Protection Agency-sponsored community meeting was simple.

“I don’t want you guys to limit your imagination,” EPA Remedial Project Manager Erik Spalvins said to the crowd. “What is it going to do in the next 50 years? I would open that imagination up and articulate that. It’s our job to come up with different ways to make that happen.”

Residents of the Brunswick County town just south of Wilmington have the opportunity to take an integral part in shaping future use of a former wood treatment plant site.

Portions of the 251-acre site have been contaminated by creosote, a preservative used to treat wood at a plant that was in operation for nearly 40 years before Kerr-McKee Chemical Corp. dismantled it in 1980.

So far, EPA sampling on the property show that a majority of soil with the highest concentrations of creosote contamination is limited to the former process and pond areas.

“We’re getting a good understanding of what’s out there,” said Multistate Trust Project Manager Richard Elliott. “There are some lower concentrations in the former wood-treating storage area and then we want to check the northern end and make sure it’s as clean as we think it is.”

The Multistate Trust, which owns and manages more than 400 former Kerr-McGee contaminated sites in 31 states, is responsible for remediation at each site and helping affected communities redevelop those areas for safe, long-term use.

The EPA in 2010 listed the Navassa site on the agency’s National Priorities List of hazardous waste sites.

Environmental officials know creosote has moved to sediments in the tidal marsh area that borders the property. EPA officials say that the contaminated sediments appear to be confined to the tidal marsh.

They’ve confirmed that a plume of creosote and fuel contamination is in groundwater under the former process area. That plume is migrating toward Sturgeon Creek.

What the EPA has yet to determine is just how much contamination is in the marsh, whether the contamination is moving and, if so, at what pace.

Spalvins explained during the Dec. 7 meeting in a spacious room of the Navassa Community Center that officials do not yet know at what level the contamination in the marsh is affecting wildlife.

One silver lining, he said, is that the marsh appears to be acting as a filter, keeping creosote contaminants from getting into the waterways. But additional sampling of groundwater must be done to delineate the area of contamination.

“There are some things in the soil we want to understand better,” Elliot said.

From now through May of next year, officials will continue to take samples and monitor existing groundwater wells near the plume.

At the same time, the Multistate Trust in January will kick off a redevelopment planning initiative, where officials and residents will begin to discuss future use of the property.

The process is like trying to solve a puzzle.

Residents, guided by the Multistate Trust, will come up with feasible uses for the property. Some uses may not be suitable on certain areas of the land because of potential health concerns related to contamination exposure. That is something the EPA will have to help determine because how the land is used in the future will be integrated into how the site is cleaned up.

“It has to be technically feasible,” said Cindy Brooks, Multistate Trust managing principal. “It has to be economically viable. However, that’s going to happen, it has to be able to sustain itself financially.”

To get to that point, the Multistate Trust will hold what is referred to as a redevelopment plan initiative charrette, which, simply put, is a planning session. This will involve town representatives, local churches, residents, businesses, the Navassa Community Economic Environmental Development Corp. and advisers from the EPA, North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and various trustee councils.

That session will be followed by market studies and at least one open house before a final potential use or uses are selected.

Clear as mud?

Perhaps, said Navassa’s Mayor Eulis Willis, but he’s got a plan to bring together this community of about 1,900 residents to get the job done.

Forming. Storming. Norming. Performing. Willis said those are the four fundamentals of group dynamics, explaining that a group first forms, then argues before normalizing relationships and, ultimately, performs a task.

“A lot of my folks don’t understand the impact of the opportunity to get involved and what it means for the town,” he said. “I know that it’s going to be three to four months of hit and miss.”

Of a crowd of roughly 100 people at the Dec. 7 meeting, only about 30 or so were town residents, he said.

One of the reasons local turnout was low may have been because the meeting was held on a Wednesday night, the night churches hold mid-week services.

“Every Wednesday,” shouted an unidentified resident who asked EPA officials to move future meetings to another day of the week. “We’re in the South.”

The meeting also drew people representing various organizations, including the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, which is aiding in the process, the Southern Environmental Law Center, as well as Rep. David Rouzer, R-N.C., of Benson.

Christian Preziosi, an environmental scientist and vice president of environmental consulting firm Land Management Group Inc., said his firm submitted proposals to the Natural Resource Trustee Council in October.

“This is strictly for natural resource preservation enhancement,” he said. “It’s intended to replace or offset whatever natural resource effects occurred on-site.”

The firm is eyeing three different areas, one off Mill Creek, another near Indian Creek and one that stretches more than 400 acres near the Cape Fear River.

The EPA will hold quarterly meetings to update the community. A date has not been set for the next meeting, which will be held in the spring.

Learn More

• View a slideshow presented during the meeting
• Multistate Environmental Response Trust
• NOAA’s Damage Assessment, Remediation and Restoration Program

COLUMBIA – Pocosin land is supposed to be boggy. Nature designed it to be spongy and moist, creating a bulwark against wildfires and a haven for wild animals and plants. It is also a great carbon sink, one of its newly appreciated attributes.

When Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge was established in the 1991, the peat bogs had been drained and were dried out like crusty soil in a neglected potted plant. Instead of a firewall, it was fire fuel. Instead of holding carbon harmlessly in its swampy depths, it released it into the air.

But lately, the boggiest thing at the refuge seems to be a squabble over whether the refuge’s pocosin re-wetting project or Mother Nature is responsible for persistent flooding of surrounding farmland, with politicians in the farmers’ corner.

In recent years, the decades-long effort to restore wetlands at Pocosin Lakes has coincided with biblical rainfall. Farmlands adjacent to the refuge have been inundated, leaving crops rotting in drowned fields.  Landowners blame the refuge for mismanagement of stormwater. Refuge officials say the runoff would have happened, restoration or no restoration, because of a series of deluges this year from hurricanes Julia, Hermine and Matthew.

Pocosin Lakes refuge encompasses parts of Hyde, Tyrrell and Washington counties, a total of 110,000 acres of some of the wildest land in North Carolina’s coastal plain. These are also among the state’s poorest and least populated counties, with wildlife far outnumbering humans. Agriculture and timber remain important industries.

During a post-Hermine visit to Washington and Tyrrell counties in September, Gov. Pat McCrory and Agriculture Commissioner Steven Troxler publicly blamed federal regulations for the flooding.

“It appears that artificial manipulation of the water table at Pocosin Lakes NWR has again resulted in flooding of neighboring agricultural lands (which) are of great agricultural significance to North Carolina and the nation,” Troxler said later in a letter dated Oct. 4 to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe.

But refuge manager Howard Phillips said most of the runoff is related to excess rainfall that naturally drains downhill.

“Whenever anybody comes to us and they think this is causing anything, we go out and evaluate it,” he said. “Most of the time, it’s the amount of rainfall, or some other natural factor out there that we can’t control.”

For example, beavers have blocked a culvert in a canal that is shared with a private farm, Phillips said. The refuge has been working to re-direct the water.

As is often the case in clashes involving public natural resources, private property and people’s livelihoods, the situation is complicated, long-standing and potentially far-reaching. Floods and fires are health and safety hazards, and climate change is threatening to make both conditions more of a threat in an area vulnerable to both.

“We’re trying to mimic the natural hydrology as much as we can,” Phillips said. “Our mission is to restore pocosin wetlands. But one of the main reasons we’re doing this is because of the catastrophic wildfires.”

Another major benefit is the land’s value in carbon sequestration.

Pocosin, which means “swamp on a hill” – is shrubby peat wetland. Composed of organic material that decayed very slowly under the wet conditions, the peat has built up over centuries to a barely discernable dome.

As climate change has become a critical environmental issue, peat soil, composed of 50 percent carbon, has become much more interesting to scientists. Although peatland is only 3 percent of the Earth’s surface, it stores more than twice the carbon of all forests combined. Logic would have it that restored pocosin lands would hold more carbon. Conversely, if the peat burns, massive amounts of carbon are released into the environment. Dried-out peat, even when not burning, is believed to release some carbon.

“Some people have described this peat as pre-charcoal,” Phillips said.

There were two major fires in Pocosin Lakes in recent memory: the 1985 Allen Road fire , which burned 100,000 acres of land in Washington, Hyde and Tyrrell counties, and the 2008 Evans Road fire, on the tail end of a severe drought, burned for longer than six months on 50,000 acres in Alligator River and Pocosin Lakes refuges. The Evans Road fire alone cost $19 million to fight, with federal funds covering 60 percent of the expense.

Another major fire, the Pains Bay fire near Alligator River refuge in Dare County, burned 45,000 acres in May 2011. Smoke from the smoldering peat restricted training missions for weeks at the bombing range in Dare County used by Navy and Air Force jet pilots.

“We’re trying to reduce the severity and intensity of the fires that occur in these peatland areas,” Phillips said.

Three areas with the most ditching, totaling 35,000 acres, are being restored, the refuge manager said. About 20,000 acres – restoration area No. 1– is restored as much as it can be, Phillips said.  In area No. 2, he said, quite a bit needs to be done. But it turns out that area No. 3 will not need to be restored because the Alligator River has gotten higher, making the area wetter.

But local farmers, whose lands have been flooded, are not buying the explanations. They say the problem is mismanagement of the drainage system at the refuge.

“They’re holding that water artificially high in the refuge,” said Guy Davenport, with 5,000-acre Newland Family Farm in Creswell, which borders the refuge.

Davenport said a group of about 150 farmers from Washington, Tyrrell, Hyde and Beaufort counties met during the summer with state and federal officials, including McCrory and Troxler, to discuss the issue. They met again last month in Nash County.

Some farmers have lost all or part of their crops in the floods, he said.

“I have lived here long before it was a refuge,” Davenport said in a recent telephone interview. “I have never seen anything the likes of the water there in my lifetime. They’re right about excessive rain. But a lot of this problem could have been avoided.”

Water was coming across the road, flowing “full bore” out of Lake Phelps, and indirectly coming off the refuge into the lake, Davenport said.

“They need to lower the water table,” he said. “They need to have that water table down in hurricane season. It’s a tremendous amount of acreage. You can’t just drain it overnight.”

Davenport said that it is “fallacy” that re-wetting pocosin provides fire protection.

“That thing has always burned,” he said. “When you get dry enough, you’re going to have fires … that’s a fact.”

Before the land was acquired for the refuge, there had been a partnership called Peat Methanol Associates that had proposed to mine peat from 15,000 acres to synthetically produce 60 million gallons of methanol fuel per year over 30 years. The developer eventually withdrew its permit application.

Much of the land in Pocosin Lakes was ditched in the 1950s and ’60s. Massive canals had been cut through the peat domes, as well as thousands of acres in surrounding swamplands in northeastern North Carolina. The channels were cut north-south and east-west, creating 320-acre blocks of land, crisscrossed by smaller channels.

Water drained into the lateral ditches, then to collector canals then to main canals then to outlet canals, then to the Pungo River.

In a partnership with the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the refuge implemented a hydrology restoration plan in the early 1990s. Water levels, which are allowed to fluctuate naturally, are determined by water control structures, rainfall and evapotranspiration. Currently, there is rewetting technology on about 18 percent of the refuge, and work on the plan will continue as funds allow.

Ditching and draining of swampland has been done since the founding of the nation. In fact, the oldest such canal – still in use in the Dismal Swamp – was ordered by none other than George Washington.

Typical swamplands are usually lower than surrounding lands, Phillips said, so water naturally drains to them. In contrast, the peatlands at Pocosin Lakes are domed, with an elevation of about 17 feet in restoration areas. The only water supply is rainfall, so once the restoration infrastructure was in place, it was a matter of waiting for rainfall to bring levels back up.

But in the last three years, rainfall has been extraordinarily high, by double digits, Phillips said. Normally, there had been about 51 inches a year, with all but 20 inches of that taken up by evaporation and plants. Last year there was about 71 inches. In 2016, the three storms dumped epic amounts of rain, leaving no recovery time in between.

In normal rain conditions, a healthy Pocosin welcomes water. “The peat would soak up the water like a sponge and release it very slowly,” Phillips said. “If it’s completely dried out, it becomes hydrophobic.”

Parched peat can burn for months and the fire can penetrate deep into the earth. What is burning up is decayed plants and animals.

“It gets really hot,” Phillips said. “It puts out tons of carbon.”

The payoff for re-wetting pocosin became evident when a wildfire in the refuge quit burning at the restored area, he said. But its value as a carbon sink, absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, has become increasingly important as a way to offset the production of greenhouse gases blamed for climate change.

Back in the late ’80s, the refuge land was donated to the Nature Conservancy, a nonprofit environmental group, which then transferred it to Fish and Wildlife. But the group has remained involved in conservation efforts in northeastern North Carolina, including the restoration of Pocosin and building of oyster reefs, said Debbie Crane, North Carolina chapter communications director.

The conservancy is currently conducting tests in two small blocks of land in the refuge to measure carbon output, Crane said. One area is restored and the other is not restored; the experiment is expected to continue for the next two to three years.  If it is proven that dry peat releases significantly more carbon than wet peat, it could open the door for landowners to innovative new carbon markets in California, which compensate participants for keeping carbon emissions out of the environment.

“Once we show this,” Crane said, “private landowners could potentially sell carbon credits and make some money if they restore their property.”

Learn More

• Hydrology restoration at Pocosin Lakes
• Questions and answers regarding the hydrology program

Whether they regard oysters as delicious delicacies or repulsive lumps of slime, North Carolinians should rightfully rejoice at the construction planned this winter of a new oyster sanctuary at the mouth of the Neuse River. Down-home oyster roasts and upscale oysters-on-a-half shell dinners are hotter than ever in the local food movement, but more oysters also mean cleaner water and a more resilient ecosystem.

As part of public-private partnership, the North Carolina Coastal Federation and the state Division of Marine Fisheries is readying construction of the Swan Island Oyster Sanctuary on 40 acres of a 60-acre site in Pamlico Sound, the first of a multi-year effort to significantly expand the state’s oyster industry.

“I think it’s huge, said Steve Murphey, the division’s habitat enhancement section chief. “It really puts us on a new level. These are above the levels we were planting in the ‘90s.”

The reef will be constructed in long mounded ridges of mostly recycled oyster shells and fossil rocks about 3,500 feet long, he said, with areas between the 40 acres of reefs left open to allow for habitat for other marine life. The work will be done 20 acres at a time. Once it’s done, it will resemble a wide ladder, with “rungs” between the ridges spaced 70 to 90 feet apart.

In addition to construction of the reef, the state also plans to build a place where baby oysters can settle in and hire two staff for the program that leases water bottom for oyster farming. All are funded by a $1.3 million grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and matching state funds.

Murphey said that the Swan Island project represents an important step toward the state’s long-term goal of having 500 oyster reefs that will substantially increase oyster population, and by extension, the commercial harvest. North Carolina is far behind its neighbors Virginia and Maryland, which can boast of a booming oyster industry.

“The hard thing to understand about oyster habitat is that oysters are their habitat,” Murphey said. “So if you only put out 100-200 bushels of oysters for cultch every year, you never gain any ground. If the goal is to really increase production of oysters, then you really have to ramp up oyster habitat.”

“Cultch” mean any material, usually oysters shells, that laid down on oyster grounds to furnish points of attachment for the spat, or baby oysters.

Hand in Glove

Native oyster larvae will settle naturally on such constructed reefs and when left alone, will grow and spawn millions of eggs that float on currents, ideally landing on a cultch planting. Fish also find the reefs to be attractive habitat.

The location of the cultch site has yet to be determined, said Erin Fleckenstein, a federation biologist. The Division of Marine Fisheries will hold public meetings in the fall to help site the cultch plantings.

The Swan Island sanctuary bears a critical inter-relationship to the cultch site, she said.

Larva travels in the water column from the sanctuary.  When they settle they become spat.

“Its purpose is to create the babies that land on the cultch areas,” she said. “They feed each other and they work hand-in-glove.”

Although the sanctuary will not be open to harvest of oysters, it will be open to hook and line fishing. The federation will hire a contractor to deploy the material and build the reef.

The sanctuary was selected, Fleckenstein said, by a stakeholder working group that determined an appropriate area with no environmental and commercial fishing conflicts that did not overlap with existing shellfish areas. Construction is expected to begin in February and be completed within six months.

A similar process will select other areas for sanctuaries and cultch plantings in 2017 and 2018, when an additional $1.5 million a year is anticipated from the NOAA grant. Although a state match is technically not required to secure the money, Fleckenstein said, a minimum equal match of non-federal dollars is recommended to maintain a high ranking for the application.

Building an Industry

Ultimately, the long-term vision of the partnership is building sustainable wild oyster reefs, Fleckenstein said, and a robust oyster aquaculture industry, a winning combination of economic opportunity and environmental benefits.

Each adult oyster can filter about 50 gallons a day, removing nutrients and cleaning the water. The reefs can also serve as natural breakwaters and help stabilize shorelines.

“It all comes back to this overall blueprint we have for oysters,” she said. “It’s a comprehensive plan that looks at all things oyster.”

That is good news for North Carolinians who fish, farm or eat oysters.

“It’s great that we’re finally getting attention from Raleigh,” said Jay Styron, president of the North Carolina Shellfish Growers’ Association.

Harvest of wild oysters is currently about 15 percent of what it was at its height in the early 1900s, Styron said, when 1.8 million bushels were harvested. Pollution, disease, over fishing and habitat loss conspired to decimate the shellfish, and by the mid-1990s, less than 35,000 bushels were harvested.

“When you look at it from a historic perspective, it’s still a drop in the bucket,” Styron said about current harvest.

Construction of reefs and cultch plantings will go a long way toward restoring the oyster industry in the state, he said. “In due time, it should increase it,” he said. “I don’t know if we’ll ever have a wild harvest that will fulfill the market.”

Farming Oysters

That’s where oyster mariculture – aquaculture in saltwater –  comes in. There are two markets in the state, Styron explained: shucking oysters that are wild-caught, and oysters-on-a-half shell that are grown on farms. Styron owns an oyster growing operation on Cedar Island, Carolina Mariculture Co.

The half-shell market is new and growing nationwide, he said. “People are discovering oysters again,” Styron said.

Not only are they nutritious, he said, they’ve become popular in the food market, pairing upscale oyster meals with select wine or beer. The farmed oysters have the same sized and shaped shells, making portions easy to control. They’re the same species as the wild oysters, but they grow faster and their shells are not as, well, wild.

“So we give them a more consistent product,” Styron said. “The wild-caught oyster is like getting a big bag of potato chips. Ours is like a container of Pringles.”

Styron leases 6.5 acres of sound bottom, producing about 200,000 to 250,000 oysters a year. It takes about a year or less for seed oysters to reach market size, with peak production at 18 months; wild oysters need about three years. Also, he can harvest all year long; the commercial season for wild oysters is October to March.

But there’s room enough for farmed oysters and shucking oysters.

“Our product is so different,” he said. “We don’t compete with the wild oyster customers. The market we’re going for is white-tablecloth restaurants.”

Robbie Mercer, owner of I & M Oyster Co. in Lowland said that he thinks that North Carolina should do “spat on shell” as Virginia and Maryland have done in their very successful oyster restoration program. The method cultures spat in tanks to set on oyster shells, where they grow into a dozen or so tiny oysters that are not as vulnerable as when larvae floats to a cultch to grow.

Military veteran Jared Mayhew, who farms oysters on the May River in South Carolina for his J&W Oyster Company. This is sweet video about a man making a living for himself while respecting the ecosystem and promoting local food ways.

Playing Catch Up

But North Carolina has a way to go to catch up to Eastern Shore oystermen, who can catch their limit within hours.

“We had seven or eight guys we were buying oysters from last year,” Mercer said, “and I can probably count on two hands when they reached their limit for the day.”

He said he probably bought and sold a couple of thousand bushels of wild oysters last winter. He said he pays the fishermen the same price the Maryland Eastern Shore waterman are paid, over some local griping.  “I told them it was the same as us stealing,” he said, “so I drove the price up for the commercial guys.”

His profit margin is about $5 bushel, so the more he moves off his dock, the better for everyone.  “I would love to have 400-500 bushels a day,” he said.

Mercer is in his second season of growing oysters, and estimates he has sold 400,000 oysters so far for the year.  He has two 5-acre leases.

He said that the two new staff members the state will hire for the shell bottom leasing program can only improve service. Until now, all the leasing has been handled by the shellfish map section, Murphey said, which admittedly was not able to adequately provide the service.

“The primary need we have right now is it takes a lot of time to do site evaluation,” he said. “It’s a lot of field work, a lot of boat time.”

When the two staff are hired, one person will divide time between field work and sampling for GIS mapping. The other staff person will focus on data analysis and communication with the lease applicant.

The shellfish lease program, Murphey said, has been operated with a bare-bones budget of $5,000, barely enough to pay for fuel. “So we’re real excited to actually get a budget,” he said.

The state grants 10-year leases of public sound and river bottom. Leases are renewable, but they must meet certain levels of production. There are currently about 290 shellfish leases and franchises approved in the state.

Buying Oyster Shells

Murphey said that the state buys oyster shells from every shucker in the state, but the state’s recycling program has proven to be costly and inefficient. At its peak, the state was handling 25,000 bushels a year, he said. Now it’s 5,000 bushels.

“You’ve got to have a storage area, and then you’ve got to go get them,” Murphey said.

Between the need for dump trucks and trailers, and staff time, he said, it is cheaper to buy oyster shells in volume from commercial dealers. The state is currently evaluating dealing with only the larger contributors.

Where Murphey is upbeat about realizing big advances in management of oysters, some veteran watermen will point-blank disparage the program; others say they’re skeptical about putting more reefs in fishing waters.

“Anything like that is good for the commercial guys as long as they allow harvesting,” Mercer said. “Anytime the word ‘sanctuary’ is put out there, to fishermen it’s a total closure.”

Dale Newman with Newman’s Seafood in Swan Quarter, comes from a long line of oystermen. “My dad is 72 years old,” he said. “His daddy worked on sailboats oystering. I reckon my great-grandfather on my mother’s side shucked oysters.”

In his experience, oysters naturally come and go. Back when he was younger, he said, management meant harvesting them when they were there, and leaving them alone for a while when they weren’t.

Newman said there has been a lot of criticism of oyster management, but he believes that under Murphey’s leadership, Marine Fisheries is working in a promising direction.

“I think we need to give them a little bit of time,” he said. “We have had a very hard time communicating with each other. We really don’t truly understand each other. We’ve got to get together and manage the oyster resource better than it’s been managed. We need to start talking with each other and listening to each other a little bit.

“I’m hoping they’re going to start doing things a little bit differently,” he said. “I’d much rather be on the same page.”

To Learn More

• Oyster Restoration Plan
• Oysters and the “blue economy”
• Brief History of a Bivalve
• North Carolina Shellfish Growers’ Association
• Carolina Mariculture Co.
• I&M Oyster Co.