47-13 Aubudon North Carolina

Permit Class
— NEW
Permit Number
47-13
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources Commission
for
X Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 113A-118
X Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Issued to Audubon North Carolina, 7741 Market Street, Unit D, Wilmington, NC 28411
Authorizing development in Hyde County adi. to the Pamlico Sound, at Beacon Island,
Southwest of Ocracoke Village as requested in the permittee's application dated 1/16/13 including the
. �.. attached
both dated 1/16/13
This permit, issued on April 16, 2013 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms may
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
Shoreline Stabilization/ Oyster Shell Sills
1) The alignment the offshore oyster shell sill shall be staked by the permittee and approved by a
representative of the Division of Coastal Management prior to the start of any construction.
2) All oyster shell material shall be free from loose dirt or any pollutant. It shall be of a size sufficient to
prevent its movement from the approved alignment by wave or current action.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or
continuance as the case may be.
This permit shall be accessible on -site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered
hereunder requires further Division approval.
All work shall cease when the permit expires on
December 31, 2016
hi issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina' Coastal
Management Program.
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
-
C ob-
Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
Signature of Permittee

Audubon North Carolina Permit ## 47-13
Page 2 of 3
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
3) The authorized offshore oyster shell sills shall adhere to the alignment depicted on the attached
workplan drawings, including the location and design of the openings designed to allow for movement
of aquatic organism
4) The boundary of each offshore oyster shell sills shall be marked at 50-foot intervals with yellow
reflectors extending at least three feet above normal high water level.
5) This permit does not authorize the placement of any backfill material behind the authorized structures.
6) The permittee shall maintain the authorized work in good condition and in conformance with the terms
and conditions of this permit. The permittee is not relieved of this requirement if he abandons the
permitted activity without having it transferred to a third party.
Easement
7) The permittee may be required to apply for a submerged land lease from the Department of
Administration's State Property Office. Contact the Department of Administration's State Property
Office directly at [phone] for this determination. Should it be determined that an Easement is
required, the permittee shall supply a copy of the easement to the Division within 30 days of issuance of
the Easement.
General
8) No open water areas shall be filled outside the alignment depicted on the attached workplan drawings.
9) This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
10) The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States requires the
removal, relocation, or other alteration of the structure or work authorized by this permit, or if in the
opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause
unreasonable obstruction to free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon
due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate or alter the structural work or obstructions
caused thereby, without expense to the United States or the state of North Carolina. No claim shall be
made against the United States or the state of North Carolina on account of any such removal or
alteration.
11) This permit shall not be assigned, transferred, sold, or otherwise disposed of to a third party without the
writien;approvdl,of the Division of Coastal Management.

Audubon. North Carolina Permit # 47-13
Page 3 of 3
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
NOTE: This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional state, federal or local permits,
approvals or authorizations that may be required.
NOTE: Future development of the permittee's property may require a modification of this permit.
Contact a representative of the Division at [phone] prior to the commencement of any
such activity for this determination. The permittee is further advised that many non -water
dependent activities are not authorized within 30 feet of the normal high water level.
NOTE: The N.C. Division of Water Quality has authorized the proposed project under General Water
Quality Certification No. 3900 (DWQ Project No. 13-0089), which was issued on 3/12/13.
NOTE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has assigned the proposed project COE Action Id. No. SAW-
2013-00285.

0CM MP-1
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Audubon North Carolina
Project Name (if applicable)
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Applicant 1: First Name
Walker
MI
Last Name
Golder
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
if additional applicants, please attach an additional pages) with names listed.
Mailing Address
7741 Market Street, Unit D
PO Box
City
Wilmington
State
NC
ZIP
28411
Country
USA
Phone No.
910.688-7527 ext.
FAX No.
910-686-7587
Street Address (if different from above)
city
Stale
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
North Carolina Coastal Federation
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Lexia
M
Weaver
Agentl Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Todd
Miller
PO Box
City
State
Mailing Address
NC
3609 Hwy 24 (Ocean)
Newport
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
ZIP
252-393-8185 ext.
252-646-2408 ext.
28570
FAX No.
Contractor#
252 393 7508
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
,........ ia_.......,1n,mrntTnrrnant.oro
RFCFiVFn
<Form continues on back> JAN 3 0 2013
I
WCITY
252.808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagem rr --
n

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Hyde
off Hwy 12, Beacon Island, +/- 3 miles NW of Ocracoke Inlet
Hwy 12
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
NIA
Ocracoke
NC
27960-
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (6 many, attach additional page with list)
- - ext.
I I I,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Tar -Pamlico
Pamlico Sound
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
SNatural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
Pamlico Sound
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
❑Yes SW
work falls within.
State waters.
4.
Site Description
a.
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
2,264
332,000 (7.6 acres)
c.
Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
n/a, I
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
2 ft. ❑NHW or SNWL
e.
Vegetation on tract
Tidal marsh and herbaceous upland/grassland
f.
Man-made features and uses now on tract
A duck blind is present on the northwest section of the island that is only sometimes used by Audubon North Carolina to
perform their bird surveys. Several section of oyster shell bag marsh toe revetments totalling 393.5 linear ft. were
constructed along the western shoreline of the island in 2012 (CAMA General Permit No.60088-attached to the project
narrative).
g.
Identify and describe the existing land uses adiacent to the proposed project site.
The surrounding waters are public trust waters and are used for multiple recreational and commercial use, i.e. fishing and
boat transportation. Adjacent to Shell Castle and North Rock.
h.
How does local government zone the tract?
I. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
N/A, land use is designated "wildlife and nature
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
conservation and research"
[]Yes []No SNA
I.
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes SNo
k.
Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes SW ❑NA
If yes, by whom?
I.
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes SNo (wrD
National Register listed or eligible property?
J�N 3 0 2013
<Form continues on next ll
252-808-2808 .. 1.888-411COAST .. www,nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (I) Are there wetlands on the site? ®Yes ❑No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? SYes []No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes SNo
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
None
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
None
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
None
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial SPublic/Government
❑Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
This project will create up to 9 patch oyster reefs using recycled oyster shells just offshore of the western side of Beacon
Island (see Project Narrative and Essential Fish Habitat Assesment). The patch oyster reefs will be constructed within a 2.4
acre area (106,000 sq. ft.) but will cumulatively only disturb/cover 0.41 acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of sand/mud estuarine bottom
that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. This habitat restoration activity will help to prevent and reduce erosion
along the shoreline of Beacon Island and will also provide valuable habitat for wildlife, finfish and shellfish. The recycled
oyster shells will provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in these traditionally productive waters, thereby
increasing oyster biomass and broodstock (increased larvae production). The established oysters will then help to filter the
water, thereby improving the water quality and clarity of Pamlico Sound. Once constructed, the patch oyster reefs will be
designated as a shellfish management area or research sanctuary by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries for four years to
allow the oyster reefs to establish and to allow grant required monitoring of the reefs. Half of the patch reefs will then be open
to harvest after the four years, the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management area/research
sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
The patch oyster reeefs will be built by a private contractor. Recycled oyster shells will be placed on a barge and deployed
using an excavator (also loaded on the barge). Each patch o' lyster reef will be constructed to be approximately 100 ft. long,
20 ft. wide and will not exceed 1.5 ft. in height. The reefs will be placed approximately 50 ft. apart from one another on
bare/sand bottom that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. The barge and excavator will be stored offsite on the
mainland at a stockpile location. See Project Narrative and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment.
d. List all development activities you propose.
-Creation of up to 9 patch oyster reeefs using recycled oyster shells on the western side of Beacon Island.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? New work.
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 0.41 ❑Sq.Ft or SAcres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area SYes []No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state. RECEIVED
N/A
Kl� 3 0 2013
252.808-2808 :. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

,Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
wastewater or stomiwater be discharged into a
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water?
Dyes ❑No OKA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
ec..P. rnntinuns nn hack>
6. Additional information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (f) are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please. give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is suffidently detailed to guide agency pe sonnet unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that sJin
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name: N/A _ Phone No.
Address
Phone No.
Name NIA
Address
Phone No.
Name N/A
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, pernittee, and issuing dates.
CAMA/Dredge & Fill General Permit No. 60088
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, If applicable.
i. Welland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Ad (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
to Enter on
I 'Understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
1 certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge. RECEIVED
Date _January 16, 2013 Print Name _Lexia Weaver
JAN 3 0 2013
Signature
252-808-2808 .. 1.888.4RCOAST .. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Farm DCM MP-1 (Page 5 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
❑DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
ODCM MP-3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP-4 Structures Information
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DI-M-MgII) CITY
OAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RC

Form DCM MP-2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
Access
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
Breakwater
(excluding
shoreline
(NLW or
stabilization
NWL)
Length
900 ft.
Width
20.0 ft.
Avg. Existing
NA
NA
3 ft.
Depth
Final Project
NA
NA
1.5 ft.
Depth
1 EXCAVATION ®This section not applicable
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NFIW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL ❑None
(if) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area.
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes []No ❑NA
(if) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW) submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW _, ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL _ ❑None
(if) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
d. High -ground excavation In cubic yards.
®This section not applicable
b. Dimensions of disposal area.
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes [:]No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, where?
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(if) If yes, how much water area is affected?
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
252-808-2808 :: i-888-4RCOAST :: wvvvv necoastalmanaaemenl.ne4
revised: 12/2&06

Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 3)
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ❑This section not applicable
(If development is a wood groin, use MP-4 — Structures)
a. Type of snoreune staonrzaoon:
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑Breakwater/Sill 00ther: patch
oyster reefs
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: Reefs will be
constructed offshore of Beacon Island, beginning 30 ft. from NWL.
e. Type of stabilization material:
recyled oyster shells
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill _ Riprap _
Breakwater/Sill _ Other 18 000
I. Source of fill material.
recycled oyster shells from shucking houses.
Width: 20.0'ft.
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 200 ft.
f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(if) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
Ranging from 1 to 5 ft. due to wind and waves from natural
forces. (Personal observation, NC Coastal Federation)
h. Type of fill material.
recycled oyster shells
4. OTHER FILL ACT/VITIES ®This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ❑Yes ❑No DNA b. (i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW),
If yes, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shelf bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL). If any boxes are checked, provide the
(if) Amount of material to be placed in the water _ number of square feet affected.
fill) Dimensions of fill area ❑CW _ ❑SAV _ ❑SB
IN) Purpose of fill OWL _ ❑None
(if) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
Material will be placed on estuarine bottom and will shift slightly
after construction. Once it settles, it will remain on site.
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
excavator mounted on barge
c. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project? d.
®Yes ❑No DNA
(if) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Each of the four comers of the 2.4 acre area will be posted with
PVC pipes containing reflective tape.
(1) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? ❑Yes ®No DNA
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
N/A
January, 16, 2013
Project Name RECRECEIVED—
Date
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
I`
Lexia Weaver (authorized agent for Walker Golder) " 1
Applicant Name
252-808-2808 :: '1-888.4RCOAST :: www.necoastalmonagement.net revised:

Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 3 of 3)
)
Applicant Signature
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
revised: 12/26106
252-808.2808 :: 1-888.4RCOA5T :: www nccoastalmanaaement.net

14'
:_.18 3,�fle'
`IPA
�'...
nI
z -Iz, a• aoro.
38 I
t} O l o rim
1
7rr L fl
1 2 2 ":
a
22
P,8 rl
1J, +••`��`I
s : y,y
'3
a».b,.,..:
C
ns 1 t3! 2 h/
Ell 1� 4 v'�(S
i

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Cross Section View of Proposed Patch Oyster Reefs
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
Authorized Agent: North Carolina Coastal Federation
Date: January 16, 2013
Approximate width of the
base of the proposed oyster
reefs = 10-30' (depending
upon site conditions).
Approximate height of the
proposed oyster reefs = 12-
18" (depending upon site
conditions).
NWL

Project Narrative
Title: Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
Authorized Agent: North Carolina Coastal Federation
Date: January 16, 2012
Summary
Federal funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization (NOAA) through the
Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries was awarded
to the North Carolina Coastal Federation to construct patch oyster reefs in partnership with
Audubon North Carolina at Beacon Island located in Hyde County in Pamlico Sound,
approximately 3.5 miles southwest of Ocracoke Island, NC (350 5' 53.01"N, 760 2' 49.99" W,
Figure 1).
Figure I. Location of Beacon Island.
Background
The remote 7.6-acre Beacon Island hosts a sanctuary that is one of only nine nesting sites for
brown pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) in the state (Figure 2). In 2011, the island supported 423
nesting pairs of pelicans or 9% of the North Carolina population. The birds, whose available
habitat has been rapidly disappearing in recent years, depend on the island's shore. But that
shoreline is also diminishing annually due to erosion and the loss of salt marsh habitat from the
increased frequency of tropical storms and hurricanes and boat wake activity (Figure 2). The
waters adjacent to the island were also historically rich in oysters, however, over time, harvest
pressure, disease and declines in water quality have reduced this important substrate that allows
new oyster colonies to form.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-MHDC'7, Y

Figure 2. Left. A newborn pelican at Beacon Island. Right. The eroding Beacon Island shoreline.
To address these issues and help restore the eroding salt marsh habitat as well as to create oyster
and fish habitat just offshore of the island, the North Carolina Coastal Federation and the
landowner, Audubon North Carolina, received funding from TogetherGreen, an Audubon/Toyota
Alliance, NOAA/Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership and NOAA/Restore America's
Estuaries. Through these grants, the federation and its partners are using inventive coastal
restoration techniques to create a series of living shorelines around the island that will create
valuable habitat and slow erosion.
On July 20, 2012, a CAMA General Permit was received to create eight oyster shell bag marsh
toe revetments totaling up to 411 linear ft. along the western shoreline of the island to prevent
further erosion and create habitat (Figure 3). The CAMA General Permit is attached to this
narrative. Construction of these revetments began in late August 2012 and a total of 393.5 linear
ft. of oyster shell bag marsh toe revetment were constructed by November 12 (Figure 4). The
bags have remained in place, despite several storms that have affected the area, including
Hurricane Sandy.
Figure 3. Locations
of permitted oyster
shell bag marsh toe
revetments at Beacon
Island.
RECEPMED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-MAD CTTP

Figure 4. Several of the constructed oyster shell bag marsh toe revetments at Beacon Island at low tide.
Project Description
In order to create additional oyster reef habitat in the waters surrounding Beacon Island, a total
of nine patch oyster reefs (0.41 acres) are proposed to be constructed within a 2.4 acre area to the
west of the island using recycled oyster shells (Figure 5). The coordinates of the four corners
outlining the 2.4 acre project area are:
RECEIVED
• Northwest comer: 35° 5.902N, 760 2.910'W
• Northeast corner: 35° 5.913N, 76° 2.871'W Ydll 3 0 2013
• Southwest corner: 35' 5.824N, 760 2.863'W
• Southeast corner: 350 5.842N, 760 2.828'W.
Figure 5. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island within the 2.4 acre project area (red pins).

These locations were selected following a thorough assessment of the waters surrounding
Beacon Island on September 25, 2012 to determine the presence of seagrass and to characterize
bottom type. The project area is characterized by subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in depth
from 0 to 4 ft. Implementation of this project is not expected to cause any significant adverse
impacts to any species.
The patch oyster reefs will provide habitat for finfish and shellfish. The recycled oyster shells
will also provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in these traditionally productive
waters. Once established, the oysters will help to filter nutrients and pollutants, and thereby
improve the water quality of Pamlico Sound.
Restoration Methods and Techniques:
The patch oyster reefs will be similar to those that the federation has constructed at Jones Island
in the White Oak River in Onslow County, NC (Figure 6). Recycled oyster shells will be loaded
onto privately contracted barges and deployed using an excavator that will also be loaded on the
barge (Figure 7).
Figure 6. Example of patch oyster reefs at low tide at Jones Island in the White Oak River.
Vig TExample of an excavator deploying oyster shells from a barge to create patch oyster reefs.

Each of the proposed patch oyster reefs will be approximately 100 ft. long, 20 ft. wide and will
not exceed 18 inches in height (Figure 8). The reefs will be placed approximately 50 ft. apart
from one another on bare sand/mud bottom that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. The
nine proposed patch oyster reefs will cumulatively only disturb 0.41 acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of
sand/mud bottom and will be located over an area of 2.4 acres (106,000 sq. ft.).
Approximate. width
of the base of the
created oyster reef =
10-30'(depending
upon site conditions)
Approx. height of the
created oyster reef =
12-18"(depending
upon site conditions)
Figure 8. Conceptual diagram of the proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island.
Previously constructed patch oyster reefs at Jones Island have successfully recruited numerous
juvenile and adult oysters and are providing valuable habitat to a variety of commercially and
recreationally important finfish and shellfish (Figure 9). Because of the natural presence of
oysters at Beacon Island (Figure 10), these same results are expected there.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
D^C1-'v`-1!D CiTy
Figure 9. New oysters growing on one of the previously constructed patch oyster reefs at Jones Island. Photo
was taken only 15 months after deployment.

Figure 10. A natural oyster reef near Beacon Island at low tide.
Once constructed, the patch oyster reefs will be designated as a shellfish management area or
research sanctuary ,by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries for four years to allow the oyster
reefs to establish and to allow annual grant required monitoring of the reefs for oyster
recruitment and habitat utilization. Half of the patch reefs will then be open to harvest after the
four years, the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management
area/research sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C.
Division of Marine Fisheries.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-N.M CITY

/ t
DCM Coordinator: -7-) .
MAILING DISTRIBUTION SHEET
DCM Field Offices
Permit #: G — p
F��
Elizabeth City (with revised work plan drawings)
Morehead City
Washington
Wilmington
US ACOE Offices:
Washington: Raleigh Bland J
Tracey Wheeler
William Westcott (NC DOT)
Bill Biddlecome (NC DOT)
Wilmington: Dave Timpy
Cultural Resources: Renee Gledhill -Early./
Public Water Supply: Debra Benoy (WIRO)
Joey White (WARD)
Marine Fisheries: Anne Deaton
Jeannie Hardy
NC DOT: Ken Pace
Shellfish Sanitation: Patti Fowler ✓
State Property: Tim Walton
Water Quality: Karen Higgins (Raleigh)
John Hennessy (NC DOT)
Washington: Anthony Scarbraugh-401
Scott Vinson-Stormwater
Wilmington: Joanne Steenhuis — 401
Chad Coburn - 401
Linda Lewis - Stormwater
Wildlife Resources: Maria Dunn (WARD)
Vacant (WIRO)
LPO:
Fax Distribution:
Permitee #:
Agent #:_

���a r
MCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory
Governor
Audubon North Carolina
7741 Market Street, Unit D
Wilmington, N.C. 28411
Dear Sir or Madam:
Braxton C. Davis
Director
April 16, 2013
Natural Resources
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
The enclosed permit constitutes authorization under the Coastal Area Management Act, and where applicable, the
State Dredge and Fill Law, for you to proceed with your project proposal. The original (buff -colored form) is retained by
you and it must be available on site when the project is inspected for compliance. Please sign both the original and the
copy and return the copy to this office in the enclosed envelope. Signing the permit and proceeding means you have
waived your right of appeal described below.
If you object to the permit or any of the conditions, you may request a hearing pursuant to NCGS 113A-121.1 or
113-229. Your petition for a hearing must be filed in accordance with NCGS Chapter 150B with the Office of
Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27611-6714, [phone] within twenty (20) days
of this decision on your permit. You should also be aware that if another qualified party submits a valid objection to the
issuance of this permit within twenty (20) days, the matter must be resolved prior to work initiation. The Coastal
Resources Commission makes the final decision on any appeal.
The project plan is subject to those conditions appearing on the permit form. Otherwise, all work must be carried
out in accordance with your application. Modifications, time extensions, and future maintenance requires additional
approval. Please read your permit carefully prior to starting work and review all project plans, as approved. If you are
having the work done by a contractor, it would be to your benefit to be sure that he fully understands all permit
requirements.
From time to time, Department personnel will visit the project site. To facilitate this review, we request that you
complete and mail the enclosed Notice Card just prior to work initiation. However, if questions arise concerning permit
conditions, environmental safeguards, or problem areas, you may contact Department personnel at any time for assistance.
By working, in accordance with the permit, you will be helping to protect our vitally important coastal resources.
Sincerely,
pi
Douglas V. Huggett
Major Permits and Consistency Manager,
Enclosure
400 Commerce Ave., Morehead City, NC 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: wvvw,nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal OpportunitylAtrrmative Action Employer

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Audubon North Carolina
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5
miles northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
Photo Index - 2006: N/A 2000: N/A 1995: N/A
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,882,000 Y: 504,000
Portsmouth Quad. (upper right corner)
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/Dredge and Fill
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 18 July 2012
Was Applicant Present - Yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 18 January 2013
Office - Washington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Hyde County
Land Classification - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: EW, PTA
(D) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Private
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - None
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - 400' oyster bag marsh toe revetment and nonconforming enclosed.
structure on pilings.
Planned - 9 - Oyster shell patch reef/sills.
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 3' average (applicant reported).
HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Non -Vegetated Wetlands
18,000 ftz(Oyster
patch reef/sill)
(Pamlico Sound Bottom)
(c) Other
Uplands
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 18,000 ftz (0.41 acres)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SA HQW RECEIVED
Open: Yes
JAN 0 2��3.
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct 9 — 20' x 100' offshore oyste3 r she sills to
reduce erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
DCM-M111) CITY

Audubon North Carolina
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Pamlico Sound
Hyde County
Project Setting
The 2.4 acre project site is the nearshore area adjacent the western shore of Beacon
Island, a 7.6 acre marsh island located in the eastern Pamlico Sound 2.5 miles northwest of
Ocracoke Inlet between Blair and Wallace channels near Ocracoke Village in Hyde County,
North Carolina. The entire Island is a Coastal Wetland marsh vegetated with marsh grass species
mainly SnarHna. including Snartina Alterni ora and patens. The marsh is growing
on a peat substrate 1' to 1.5' above the normal water level (NWL). The vertical erosion
escarpment around the perimeter has experienced varying amounts of overwash which has
deposited sand forming an overwash berm of varying heights. The island is an important nesting
site for brown pelicans, one of nine sites in North Carolina. In 2011 the site supported 423
nesting pairs representing 9% of the total nesting pairs in North Carolina. There is a
nonconforming pile supported enclosed structure with windows and a door on the northwest tip
of the island.
The NC Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) Bottom Mapping Program investigated the
nearshore area on the western side of Beacon Island from 11/29/12 through 12/3/12(See 6
December 2012 Beacon Island Bottom Survey Report). The purpose of this investigation was to
map and quantify bottom habitat type boundaries and assess the densities of shellfish and
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). DMF agreed to conduct the survey during a pre -
application scoping meeting held on 8 November 2012 in the Washington Regional Office. The
nearshore area (within 400' of NWL) along the western shoreline of Beacon Island is
characterized by the Division of Marine Fisheries Bottom Mapping Program, as, subtidal hard
sand substrate. Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), mainly eel grass Zostera marina was
characterized as very sparse. The bottom substrate within 100' of the NWL was characterized as
a hard vegetated shell consisting of sand and shell with some eel grass rhizomes. The sparseness
of SAV may have been due to the fact that the survey was conducted in late November. The site
is also subject to strong tidal currents due to its proximity to Ocracoke Inlet. Shellfish densities
were greatest within 50' of the NWL and consisted mainly of sublegal oysters with an average
density of 67.9/m2. Clam densities in this area were low with the highest sample containing 3
/mz. Shellfish were sparse or non-existent in the subtidal hard sandy substrate from beyond 50'
offshore the NWL.
The Pamlico Sound adjacent to the project area is designated as Coastal Waters by the
Marine Fisheries Commission, SA HQW by the Environmental Commission, and is open to
shellfish harvest. RECEIVED
Project Description JAN 3 0 2013
The North Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF) has formed a partnership with the owner
of Beacon Island, Audubon North Carolina, to construct a series of patch oyster reefs in the
nearshore area adjacent the western shore of Beacon Island for the purpose of abating erosion
occurring along the western shore of the island as well as to provide the associated fishery
habitat and water quality benefits. The NCCF has received federal funding for the project from
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) through the Southeast Aquatic
Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries. As a part of the erosion control

Audubon North Carolina
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Pamlico Sound
Hyde County
Page Two
measures, the NCCF constructed 400' of marsh toe revetment out of oyster bags during the fall
of 2012. The Division of Coastal Management issued CAMA/Dredge and Fill General Permit
no. 60088-B on 20 July 2012 authorizing the construction of the marsh toe revetment. The
project was completed on 11 November 2012. NCCF proposes to construct a series of 9 — ±20'
wide x 100' long oyster reefs constructed out or recycled oyster shell. The patch reefs will be
constructed in the 2.4 acre area mapped by DMF in water depths that range from P to 4' deep.
The reefs will be constructed with a profile not to exceed 1.5' in vertical height above the sand
substrate. The reef construction will start 30' offshore of the NWL in three rows of three reefs
spaced 50' apart with a maximum distance of 200' offshore the NWL. The recycled oyster shell
will be deployed from a shallow draft barge by an excavator. PVC pipe with reflective tape will
be placed at each corner of the 2.4 acre site.
Once constructed the oyster patch reefs will be designated as a shellfish management area
or sanctuary by DMF for four years for the establishment of the oyster reefs and to allow annual
grant required monitoring of the reefs for oyster recruitment and habitat utilization. The
monitoring will be undertaken by NCCF volunteers. After four years, half of the patch reefs will
remain a shellfish management area pending annual approval by DMF to satisfy a NOAA grant
requirement.
Anticipated Impacts
The construction of the patch oyster reef system will result in the filling of 0.41 acres
(18,000 ftz) of Pamlico Sound bottom. Based on the bottom survey conducted by the DMF the
filling impacts will not affect significant areas of SAV or shellfish. There will be some localized
short-term turbidity during placement of the recycled oyster shell.
Steve Trowell — Washington Regional Office — 24 January 2013
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-MHD Ci fY

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
APPLICATION TRANSMITTAL AND PROCESSING RECORD
1) APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina County: Hyde
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles northwest of
Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the Pamlico Sound, Hyde
County, North Carolina.
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED COMPLETE BY FIELD: 18 January 2414 Zb t 3
FIELD RECOMMENDATION: Attached: YES To Be Forwarded: NO
CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION: Attached: NO To Be Forwarded: YES
FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Steve Trowell
11DISTRICT OFFICE: Washington
DISTRICT MANAGER REVIEW:
B) DATE RECEIVED BY MAJOR PERMITS UNIT: FEE REC : S 400.00 (60/40)
PUBLIC NOTICE RECD: END OF NOTICE DATE:
ADJ. RIP. PROP NOTICES RECD:
DEED RECD:
APPLICATION AS CrO: C� O L'CW7 ON:
C) 75 DAY DEADL3: �{ T50 DAY DEADLINE:
MAIL OUT DATE:
FEDERAL DUE DATE:
STATE DUE DATE:
FED COMMENTS RECD:
PERMIT FINAL ACTION: ISSUE DENY DRAFT ON
AGENCY
DATE
COMMENTS
RETURNED
OBJECTION
S:
YES NO
NOTES
Coastal Management - Regional Representative
Coastal Management - LUP Consistency
(� D
Division of Community Assistance
-�
Land Quality Section
-t
Division of Water Quality
Storm Water Management (DWQ)
State Property Office
Z-
Division of Archives & History
Division of Environmental Health
Z-
✓
Division of Highways
% - `�
Wildlife Resources Commission
t�
Local Permit Office
Division of Marine Fisheries
�i
11
Corps of Engineers

Project Name
Assigned to " vo n f _
Assigned on _�/ L3 _
ACTIONS
Prepare for signature following review by other Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Date draft permit given to other Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Date reviewed by other Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Prepare draft for review by Major Permits Coordinator
Date draft permit given to Major Permits Coordinator
Date reviewed by other Major Permits Coordinator
Other
Written approval from DW s/is not required for this project.

Pat McCrory
Governor
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
w �.
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Braxton C. Davis
Director
MEMORANDUM
Ms. June W. Machaux
Director
State Property Office
Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
28 January 2013
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
�"10ao�3
PRE
gTA1��8
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
rs
rn
s
Respond to Doug Huggett
Morehead City Office
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
1.ZThis office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Signed Date
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Alfirmabw Adon Employer

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: Audubon North Carolina
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5
miles northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
Photo Index - 2006: N/A 2000: N/A 1995: N/A
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,882,000 Y: 504,000
Portsmouth Quad. (upper right comer)
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/Dredge and Fill
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 18 July 2012
Was Applicant Present - Yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 18 January 2013
Office - Washington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Hyde County RECEIVED
Land Classification - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: EW, PTA
(D) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Private
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - None'' -
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - 400' oyster bag marsh toe revetment and nonconforming enclosed.
structure on pilings.
Planned - 9 - Oyster shell patch reef/sills.
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 3' average (applicant reported).
HABITAT DESCRIPTION: (AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Non -Vegetated Wetlands
18,000 ft2(Oyster
patch reef/sill)
(Pamlico Sound Bottom)
(c) Other
Uplands
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 18,000 ft' (0.41 acres)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SA HQW
Open: Yes
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct 9 — 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to
reduce erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.

Audubon North Carolina
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project RECEIVED
Pamlico Sound
Hyde County T! 1 ' ':�j?3
Project Setting
The 2.4 acre project site is the nearshore area adjacent the western shore of Beacon
Island, a 7.6 acre marsh island located in the eastern Pamlico Sound 2.5 miles northwest of
Ocracoke Inlet between Blair and Wallace channels near Ocracoke Village in Hyde County,
North Carolina. The entire Island is a Coastal Wetland marsh vegetated with marsh grass species
mainly Spartina W. including S artina Alterni ora and Spartina pate ns. The marsh is growing
on a peat substrate 1' to 1.5' above the normal water level (NWL). The vertical erosion
escarpment around the perimeter has experienced varying amounts of overwash which has
deposited sand forming an overwash berm of varying heights. The island is an important nesting
site for brown pelicans, one of nine sites in North Carolina In 2011 the site supported 423
nesting pairs representing 9% of the total nesting pairs in North Carolina There is a
nonconforming pile supported enclosed structure with windows and a door on the northwest tip
of the island.
The NC Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) Bottom Mapping Program investigated the
nearshore area on the western side of Beacon Island from 11/29/12 through 12/3/12(See 6
December 2012 Beacon Island Bottom Survey Report). The purpose of this investigation was to
map and quantify bottom habitat type boundaries and assess the densities of shellfish and
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). DMF agreed to conduct the survey during a pre -
application scoping meeting held on 8 November 2012 in the Washington Regional Office. The
nearshore area (within 400' of NWL) along the western shoreline of Beacon Island is
characterized by the Division of Marine Fisheries Bottom Mapping Program, as, subtidal hard
sand substrate. Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), mainly eel grass Zostera marina was
characterized as very sparse. The bottom substrate within 100' of the NWL was characterized as
a hard vegetated shell consisting of sand and shell with some eel grass rhizomes. The sparseness
of SAV may have been due to the fact that the survey was conducted in late November. The site
is also subject to strong tidal currents due to its proximity to Ocracoke Inlet. Shellfish densities
were greatest within 50' of the NWL and consisted mainly of sublegal oysters with an average
density of 67.9/m'. Clam densities in this area were low with the highest sample containing 3
/m2. Shellfish were sparse or non-existent in the subtidal hard sandy substrate from beyond 50'
offshore the NWL.
The Pamlico Sound adjacent to the project area is designated as Coastal Waters by the
Marine Fisheries Commission, SA HQW by the Environmental Commission, and is open to
shellfish harvest.
Project Description
The North Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF) has formed a partnership with the owner
of Beacon Island, Audubon North Carolina, to construct a series of patch oyster reefs in the
nearshore area adjacent the western shore of Beacon Island for the purpose of abating erosion
occurring along the western shore of the island as well as to provide the associated fishery
habitat and water quality benefits. The NCCF has received federal funding for the project from
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) through the Southeast Aquatic
Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries. As a part of the erosion control

Audubon North Carolina
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Pamlico Sound
Hyde County
Page Two
measures, the NCCF constructed 400' of marsh toe revetment out of oyster bags during the fall
of 2012. The Division of Coastal Management issued CAMA/Dredge and Fill General Permit
no. 60088-B on 20 July 2012 authorizing the construction of the marsh toe revetment. The
project was completed on 11 November 2012. NCCF proposes to construct a series of 9 —±20'
wide x 100' long oyster reefs constructed out or recycled oyster shell. The patch reefs will be
constructed in the 2.4 acre area mapped by DMF in water depths that range from l' to 4' deep.
The reefs will be constructed with a profile not to exceed 1.5' in vertical height above the sand
substrate. The reef construction will start 30' offshore of the NWL in three rows of three reefs
spaced 50' apart with a maximum distance of 200' offshore the NWL. The recycled oyster shell
will be deployed from a shallow draft barge by an excavator. PVC pipe with reflective tape will
be placed at each corner of the 2.4 acre site.
Once constructed the oyster patch reefs will be designated as a shellfish management area
or sanctuary by DMF for four years for the establishment of the oyster reefs and to allow annual
grant required monitoring of the reefs for oyster recruitment and habitat utilization. The
monitoring will be undertaken by NCCF volunteers. After four years, half of the patch reefs will
remain a shellfish management area pending annual approval by DMF to satisfy a NOAA grant
requirement.
Anticipated Impacts
The construction of the patch oyster reef system will result in the filling of 0.41 acres
(18,000 ft=) of Pamlico Sound bottom. Based on the bottom survey conducted by the DMF the
filling impacts will not affect significant areas of SAV or shellfish_ There will be some localized
short-term turbidity during placement of the recycled oyster shell.
Steve Trowell — Washington Regional Office — 24 January 2013
RECZIVED
F, 1 1 2013
,.,,, 17Y

APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Audubon North Carolina
Project Name (if applicable)
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Applicant 1: First Name
Walker
MI
Last Name
Golder
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
if additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
7741 Market Street, Unit D
PO Box
City
Wilmington
State
NC
ZIP
28411
Country ==J',�hone
USA
No.
1No. 7527 ext.
FAX No.
FAXNo.6-7587
Street Address (d different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
REG::;vED
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
1
F E 1 n=
North Carolina Coastal Federation
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Lexia
M
Weaver
DAM-`.:^-HDCITY
Agentl Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Todd
Miller
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
3609 Hwy 24 (Ocean)
I
Newport
NC
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
252.393 - 8185 ext.
252 - 646 - 2408 ext.
28570
FAX No.
Contractor#
252 393 7508
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail], [e-mail]
<Form continues on back>
252-808-2808 :: 1-888.4RCOAST :: www.nccoastal management. net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Hyde
off Hwy 12, Beacon Island, +/- 3 miles NW of Ocracoke Inlet
Hwy 12
Subdivision Name
city
State
Zip
N/A
Ocracoke
NC
27960-
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
ext.
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Tar -Pamlico
Pamlico Sound
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
Pamlico Sound
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
❑Yes ®No
work falls within.
State waters.
4.
Site Description
a.
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (scift)
2,264
332.000 (7.6 acres)
c.
Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
n/a
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
2 ft. ❑NHW or ®NWL RECZ1 ED
e.
Vegetation on tract
Tidal marsh and herbaceous upland/grassland r r
f.
Man-made features and uses now on tract
A duck blind is present on the northwest section of the island that is only sometimes used by Audubon North Carolina to
perform their bird surveys. Several section of oyster shell bag marsh toe revetments totalling 393.5 linear ft. were
constructed along the western shoreline of the island in 2012 (CAMA General Permit No.60088-attached to the project
narrative).
g.
Identify and describe the existing land uses ad acent to the proposed project site.
The surrounding waters are public trust waters and are used for multiple recreational and commercial use, i.e. fishing and
boat transportation. Adjacent to Shell Castle and North Rock.
h.
How does local government zone the tract?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
N/A, land use is designated "wildlife and nature
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
conservation and research"
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j.
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k.
Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, by whom?
I.
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page>
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ®Yes ❑No
(it) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ®Yes ❑No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes ®No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
None
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
None
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
None
5 Activitios,and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial ®PubliclGovemment
❑Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
This project will create up to 9 patch oyster reefs using recycled oyster shells just offshore of the western side of Beacon
Island (see Project Narrative and Essential Fish Habitat Assesment). The patch oyster reefs will be constructed within a 2.4
acre area (106,000 sq. ft.) but will cumulatively only disturb/cover 0.41 acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of sand/mud estuarine bottom
that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. This habitat restoration activity will help to prevent and reduce erosion
along the shoreline of Beacon Island and will also provide valuable habitat for wildlife, finfish and shellfish. The recycled
oyster shells will provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in these traditionally productive waters, thereby
increasing oyster biomass and broodstock (increased larvae production). The established oysters will then help to filter the
water, thereby improving the water quality and clarity of Pamlico Sound. Once constructed, the patch oyster reefs will be
designated as a shellfish management area or research sanctuary by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries for four years to
allow the oyster reefs to establish and to allow grant required monitoring of the reefs. Half of the patch reefs will then be open
to harvest after the four years, the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management area/research
sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
The patch oyster reeefs will be built by a private contractor. Recycled oyster shells will be placed on a barge and deployed
using an excavator (also loaded on the barge). Each patch o' lyster reef will be constructed to be approximately 100 ft. long,
20 ft. wide and will not exceed 1.5 ft. in height. The reefs will be placed approximately 50 ft. apart from one another on
bare/sand bottom that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. The barge and excavator will be stored offsite on the
mainland at a stockpile location. See Project Narrative and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment.
d. List all development activities you propose.
-Creation of up to 9 patch oyster reeefs using recycled oyster shells on the western side of Beacon Island.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? New work.
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 0.41 ❑Sq.Ft or ®Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ®Yes []No ❑NA
that the public has established use of? '_CEiVED
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
N/A
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
i. Will wastewater or slornwaler be discharged into a wetland?
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water?
Oyes ❑No SNA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed?
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
.o...... - n1:n.ma nn herb
6. Additionallnformatian
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in orderfor the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (0 are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to propedy prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please. give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? if previously authorized work, clearly Indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
r
copy of the deed(with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
st of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
ners have received a copy of the application and plats by certfied mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
ich to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name N/A
Phone No.
Address
Phone No.
Name NIA
Address
Phone No.
Name N/A
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permHs issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
CAMA/Dredge 8 Fill General Permit No. 60088
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, ff applicable.
i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by properly owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Ad (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), it necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Ad.
399MUM
tlon and Permission to Later on 4anathat any permit issued in response to this application will allowill be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in theI am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to repraforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date _January 16, 2013 Print Name _Lexia Weaver
Signature
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement. net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 5 of 5)
AFFLIUAI IVn "'
Major Development Permit
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP-3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP-4 structures Information
252.808.2808 :•
1-888-4RCOAST :. www.neeoastalm anag ement. net

Form DCM MP-2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
Access
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
Breakwater
(excluding
shoreline
(NLW or
NWL
stabilization
Length
900 ft.
Width
20.0 ft.
Avg. Existing
NA
NA
3 ft.
Depth
Final Project
NA
NA
1.5 ft.
Depth
--
VAT", ®This section not applicable I
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlandsimarsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑cw ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL _ ❑None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
d. High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ®This section not applicable
a.
area.
c. (1) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes ❑No DNA
(it) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW _ ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL _ ❑None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
b. Dimensions of disposal area.
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes ❑No DNA
(i) If yes, where?
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
❑Yes ❑No DNA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
252-808.2808 :: 1-888.4RCOAST :: wwrw nccoastalmanaeement.net. revised: 12/26106

Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 3)
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ❑This section not applicable
(if development is a wood groin, use MP-4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization: b. Length: 900 ft.
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑Breakwater/Sill ®Other: patch
oyster reefs
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: Reefs will be
constructed offshore of Beacon Island, beginning 30 ft. from NWL.
e. Type of stabilization material:
recyled oyster shells
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill _ Riprap _
Breakwater/Sill _ Other 18 000
I. Source of fill material.
recycled oyster shells from shucking houses.
Width: 20.0'ft,
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 200 ft.
I. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
Ranging from 1 to 5 ft. due to wind and waves from natural
forces. (Personal observation, NC Coastal Federation)
h. Type of fill material.
recycled oyster shells
4. OTHER FILL ACTMTIES i@This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ❑Yes ❑No DNA b. (1) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW).
If yes,
(ip Amount of material to be placed in the water _
(III) Dimensions of fill area _
(iv) Purpose of fill
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
Material will be placed on estuarine bottom and will shift slightly
after construction. Once it settles, it will remain on site.
c. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project? d.
RYes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Each of the four corners of the 2.4 acre area will be posted with
PVC pipes containing reflective tape.
5uomw9eu ayuauu veyewuvn tone/, s,ea umwu, p00/, m
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB _
OWL ❑None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
excavator mounted on barge
(i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? ❑Yes RNo ❑NA
(if) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
WA
January, 16, 2013 Project Name
Date
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Lexia Weaver (authorized agent for Walker Golder)
Applicant Name
252-B08-2808:: 1-8B8-4RCOA8T :: www.necoastaimanagernent.net revised: 12/26/06

'Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 3 of 3)
Applicant Signature
revised: 12126106
252.808-2808 :: 1.888-4RCOAST :: www noCoastalman WkMent.net

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Cross Section View of Proposed Patch Oyster Reefs
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
Authorized Agent: North Carolina Coastal Federation
Date: January 16, 2013
Approxi mate width of the
base of the proposed oyster
reefs = 10-30' (depending
upon site conditions).
Approximate height of the
proposed oyster reefs = 12-
Ir (depending upon site
conditions).
NV%e L

Project Narrative
Title: Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
Authorized Agent: North Carolina Coastal Federation
Date: January 16, 2012
Summary
Federal funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization (NOAA) through the
Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries was awarded
to the North Carolina Coastal Federation to construct patch oyster reefs in partnership with
Audubon North Carolina at Beacon Island located in Hyde County in Pamlico Sound,
approximately 3.5 miles southwest of Ocracoke Island, NC (350 5' 53.01" N, 760 2' 49.99" W,
Figure 1).
s
Figure 1. Location of Beacon Island.
Background
The remote 7.6-acre Beacon Island hosts a sanctuary that is one of only nine nesting sites for
brown pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) in the state (Figure 2). In 2011, the island supported 423
nesting pairs of pelicans or 9% of the North Carolina population. The birds, whose available
habitat has been rapidly disappearing in recent years, depend on the island's shore. But that
shoreline is also diminishing annually due to erosion and the loss of salt marsh habitat from the
increased frequency of tropical storms and hurricanes and boat wake activity (Figure 2). The
waters adjacent to the island were also historically rich in oysters, however, over time, harvest
pressure, disease and declines in water quality have reduced this important substrate that allows
new oyster colonies to form.
RECEIVED

Figure 2. Left. A newborn pelican at Beacon Island. Right. The eroding Beacon Island shoreline.
To address these issues and help restore the eroding salt marsh habitat as well as to create oyster
and fish habitat just offshore of the island, the North Carolina Coastal Federation and the
landowner, Audubon North Carolina, received funding from TogetherGreen, an Audubon/Toyota
Alliance, NOAA/Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership and NOAA/Restore America's
Estuaries. Through these grants, the federation and its partners are using inventive coastal
restoration techniques to create a series of living shorelines around the island that will create
/valuable habitat and slow erosion.
On July 20, 2012, a CAMA General Permit was received to create eight oyster shell bag marsh
toe revatrnents totaling up to 411 linear ft. along the western shoreline of the island to prevent
further erosion and create habitat (Figure 3). The CAMA General Permit is attached to this
narrative. Construction of these revetments began in late August 2012 and a total of 393.5 linear
ft. of oyster shell bag marsh toe revetment were constructed by November 12 (Figure 4). The
bags have remained in place, despite several storms that have affected the area, including
Hurricane Sandy.
Figure 3. Locations
of permitted oyster
shell bag marsh toe
revetments at Beacon
Island.

Figure 4. Several of the constructed oyster shell bag marsh toe revetments at Beacon Island at low tide.
Project Description
In order to create additional oyster reef habitat in the waters surrounding Beacon Island, a total
of nine patch oyster reefs (0.41 acres) are proposed to be constructed within a 2.4 acre area to the
west of the island using recycled oyster shells (Figure 5). The coordinates of the four corners
outlining the 2.4 acre project area are: Iter rr:n
• Northwest corner: 35' 5.902N, 76° 2.910'W
• Northeast corner: 35° 5.913N, 76° 2.871'W
• Southwest corner: 35° 5.824N, 76° 2.863'W
• Southeast corner: 35° 5.842N, 76° 2.828'W
Figure 5. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island within the 2.4 acre project area (red pins).

These locations were selected following a thorough assessment of the waters surrounding
Beacon Island on September 25, 2012 to determine the presence of seagrass and to characterize
bottom type. The project area is characterized by subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in depth
from 0 to 4 ft. Implementation of this project is not expected to cause any significant adverse
impacts to any species.
The patch oyster reefs will provide habitat for fmfish and shellfish. The recycled oyster shells
will also provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in these traditionally productive
waters. Once established, the oysters will help to filter nutrients and pollutants, and thereby
improve the water quality of Pamlico Sound.
Restoration Methods and Techniques:
The patch oyster reefs will be similar to those that the federation has constructed at Jones Island
in the White Oak River in Onslow County, NC (Figure 6). Recycled oyster shells will be loaded
onto privately contracted barges and deployed using an excavator that will also be loaded on the
barge (Figure 7).
Figure 6. Example of patch oyster reefs at low tide at Jones Island in the White Oak River.
Figure 7. Example of an excavator deploying oyster shells from a barge to create patch oyster reefs.

Each of the proposed patch oyster reefs will be approximately 100 ft. long, 20 ft. wide and will
not exceed 18 inches in height (Figure 8). The reefs will be placed approximately 50 ft. apart
from one another on bare sand/mud bottom that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. The
nine proposed patch oyster reefs will cumulatively only disturb 0.41 acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of
sand/mud bottom and will be located over an area of 2.4 acres (106,000 sq. ft.).
MEW
Approximate. width
of the base of the
created oyster reef =
10-30'(depending
upon site conditions)
Approx. height of the
created oyster reef =
12-18" (depending
upon site conditions)
Figure 8. Conceptual diagram of the proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island.
Previously constructed patch oyster reefs at Jones Island have successfully recruited numerous
juvenile and adult oysters and are providing valuable habitat to a variety of commercially and
recreationally important finfish and shellfish (Figure 9). Because of the natural presence of
oysters at Beacon Island (Figure 10), these same results are expected there.
RFCL15'b
F I 11'13 4
Figure 9. New oysters growing on one of the previously constructed patch oyster reefs at Jones Island. Photo
was taken only 15 months after deployment.

Figure 10. A natural oyster reef near Beacon Island at low tide.
Once constructed, the patch oyster reefs will be designated as a shellfish management area or
research sanctuary by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries for four years to allow the oyster
reefs to establish and to allow annual grant required monitoring of the reefs for oyster
recruitment and habitat utilization. Half of the patch reefs will then be open to harvest after the
four years, the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management
area/research sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C.
Division of Marine Fisheries.
t ='

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Proposed Proiect
The proposed project continues efforts made by the North Carolina Coastal Federation to restore
the eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) in coastal North Carolina. Federal funding from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization (NOAA) through the Southeast Aquatic
Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries was awarded to the Federation
to construct patch oyster reefs in partnership with Audubon North Carolina at Beacon Island (350
5' 53.01" N, 760 2' 49.99" W) located in Hyde County in Pamlico Sound, approximately 3.5
miles southwest of Ocracoke Island, NC (Figure 1). Audubon North Carolina is the landowner
and the federation is their authorized agent.
REC2rYTD
14 2013
F"%v -34IID GTY
Figure 1. Location of Beacon Island.
The remote 7.6-acre Beacon Island hosts a sanctuary that is one of only nine nesting sites for
brown pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) in the state. In 2011, the island supported 423 nesting
pairs of pelicans or 9% of the North Carolina population. The birds, whose available habitat has
been rapidly disappearing in recent years, depend on the island's shore. But that shoreline is also
diminishing annually due to erosion and the loss of salt marsh habitat from the increased
frequency of tropical storms and hurricanes and boat wake activity. The waters adjacent to the
island were also historically rich in oysters, however, over time, harvest pressure, disease and
declines in water quality have reduced this important substrate that allows new oyster colonies to
form.
The purpose of the patch oyster reefs is to provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in
these traditionally productive waters. Once established, the oysters will help to filter nutrients
and pollutants, and thereby improve the water quality of Pamlico Sound. The patch oyster reefs

will also provide habitat for fmfish and shellfish and help to reduce erosion of the island's
shoreline.
A total of nine shallow patch oyster reefs, covering 0.41 acres are proposed to be constructed
within a 2.4 acre project area to the west of Beacon Island using recycled oyster shells (Figure
2). The coordinates of the four corners outlining the 2.4 acre project area are: RECZ V'ED
• Northwest corner: 35' 5.902N, 76° 2.910V 1 14 2013
• Northeast corner: 35' 5.913N, 76° 2.871V
• Southwest comer: 35' 5.824N, 76° 2.863V
• Southeast corner: 35' 5.842N, 76' 2.828V ncrvr-, 1D GTY
Figure 2. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island within the 2.4 acre project area (red pins).
The project area was selected following a qualitative assessment of water depths, bottom type
and presence of seagrass around the island that was performed by the federation in summer 2012.
The western side of the island was chosen for the construction of the patch oyster reefs as it is
much shallower than the eastern side and experiences lower wind and wave energy. It is
characterized by intertidal and subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in depth from 0 to 4 feet. A
few small patches of seagrass exist within the project area and will be avoided during patch
oyster reef construction. Other shellfish (i.e., clams) were not observed within the project area. A
recent shellfish survey was performed by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries within the
project area and will be used to guide the exact placement of the patch oyster reefs so as not to
cover any existing shellfish resources. This survey is included with the permit application.

Methodolo¢v
The waters surrounding Beacon Island have adequate levels of oyster larval recruitment and
settlement as well as nekton and epifauna utilization. The patch oyster reefs are designed to
further enhance larvae recruitment and settlement, water flow and transport of oxygen and food
for the oysters, habitat provision and other ecosystem services. The design will also allow for
protection of the island's shoreline.
Prior to reef construction, the federation will mark the boundary of the 2.4 acre project area as
well as the patch oyster reef locations with PVC posts according to the project design. Oyster
shells will be purchased from shucking houses and transported by truck to a stockpile location on
Ocracoke Island. Project contractors will load the reef material onto small, shallow draft barges.
The barges will travel to the project site where the contractors will spread the shells into the reef
locations with the use of an excavator.
Each of the proposed patch oyster reefs will be constructed to be approximately 100 ft. long, 20
ft. wide and will not exceed 18 inches in height (Figure 3). The reefs will be placed
approximately 50 ft. apart from one another on bare sand/mud bottom that does not contain
seagrass or shellfish. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs will cumulatively only disturb 0.41
acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of sand/mud bottom and will be located over an area of 2.4 acres (106,000
sq. ft.).
01
Approximate. width
of the base of the
created oyster reef =
10-30' (depending
upon site conditions)
Approx. height of the
created oyster reef =
12-18" (depending
upon site conditions)
Figure 3. Conceptual diagram of the proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island.
Using its flat bottom boats, the federation will monitor reef construction activities to ensure that
project design specifications are met. Upon the satisfactory completion of the reef material
deployment, the federation will place signage on the project area indicating their designation by
the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries as either a shellfish research sanctuary or a shellfish
management area for four years to allow the oyster reefs to establish and grant required
monitoring of the reefs. Half of the patch reefs will then be open to harvest after the four years,
the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management area/research
sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C. Division of
3

Marine Fisheries. Post project monitoring will then begin according to the monitoring schedule
(see Appendix A).
Previous monitoring of federation restored oyster reefs in North Carolina indicates that they
provide oyster habitat during the first spatfall season and that recruitment may be heavy
depending upon larval availability and seasonal fluctuations. Oysters generally reach maturity in
two to three years and the reefs will provide oyster habitat for as long as they exist, since new
oysters will continue to attach onto previous oyster shell layers. Lifecycle estimates of the
individual oysters are highly variable, and are not impacted by the project, but by natural
predation, oyster diseases and pollution. Monitoring of previously created federation reefs also
showed that they provide habitat and are used by a variety of finfish during the first year. Again,
the reefs will provide habitat for finfish for as long as the reefs exist. Since the reefs are formed
from oyster shells, there is no known limit to the structure lifetime.
Proiect Background
Oyster reefs are one of the most threatened habitats in the world (Beck et al. 2009). As the
primary intertidal and subtidal reef -building species along the east coast of the United States, the
eastern oyster has declined more than 90 percent from historic levels. Worldwide, functional
extinction (greater than 99 percent loss) of oyster reefs in estuaries is common (Beck et al. 2009)
and habitat losses exceed levels reported for more well-known coral reef, mangrove and seagrass
habitats. Both human activities and natural phenomena including over -harvest, disease, coastal
development and habitat disturbance have affected oyster distribution and abundance, as well as
contributed to oyster habitat losses (Lenihan and Peterson 1998, Coen and Luckenbach 2000,
Luckenbach et al. 1999, Breitburg et al. 2000).
In 2007, NOAA's Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team conducted a status review (EOBRT
2007). The review determined that oyster harvest along the east coast of the United States is only
2 percent of the peak historical harvest and that oyster restoration and enhancement efforts are
"necessary to sustain populations" in about half of the estuaries in the middle and south Atlantic
Ocean coast. The historical oyster harvest in North Carolina is showing significant decline
(Street et al. 2005), and they are currently listed as a species of concern. Estimates of historical
acreage of oyster reefs compared to current levels determined through N.C. Division of Marine
Fisheries Substrate Mapping Program, suggest a 50 percent decline in oyster reef habitat in
North Carolina.
Once valued primarily as a food resource, oysters are now recognized as ecosystem engineers
(Jones et al. 1994). Oyster reefs are regarded as one of the key structural elements within
southeast estuaries. Reefs create complex habitats which are used by fish, crustaceans and
bivalves that include commercial and recreational species as well as other invertebrates, birds
and mammals (Zimmerman et al. 1989; Wenner et al. 1996; Coen et al. 1999; Coen and
Luckenbach 2000, Meyer and Townsend 2000). Oyster reefs also offer critical habitat for oyster
populations, providing preferred substrate (oyster shell) for larval settlement (Marshall 1995;
Kennedy et al. 1996; DMF 2008). Oysters can improve water quality and clarity by filtering
large quantities of water. One mature oyster can filter approximately 200 liters of water per day
(Nelson et al. 2004; Newell 2004; Grizzle et al. 2008). Therefore, observed declines in oyster
populations not only affect the resource but are also closely associated with adverse effects to
4

RLC:-1V-M
.,3
reef -associated species and reduced water quality, ultimately leading to shifts away from natural
ecosystem functioning. P^gin-:E'D G T Y
The structural relief of oyster reefs has another important role in the estuarine system. High relief
oyster reefs alter currents and water flows, and physically trap and stabilize large quantities of
suspended solids, reducing turbidity (Dame et al. 1989; Coen et al. 1999; Lenihan et al. 1999;
Grabowski et al. 2000). In addition, intertidal oyster reefs protect shoreline habitats from waves
and currents, which aids in creek bank stabilization and reduction of salt marsh erosion (Bahr
and Lanier 1981; Dame and Patten 1981; Marshall 1995; Breitburg et al. 2000; Henderson and
O'Neil 2003; Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). By decreasing erosive forces, intertidal oyster
reefs reduce vegetative losses and, in some instances, promote marsh accretion (Meyer and
Townsend 2000; Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). In North Carolina, Meyer et al. (1997) found
that placement of oyster cultch along the lower intertidal fringe of Spartina marshes resulted in
net sediment accretion, while noncultched shorelines eroded. Additional studies in the Gulf of
Mexico and along the Atlantic coast have also suggested the value of shell bottom for shoreline
protection and erosion control, indicating lower erosion rates at shorelines protected by intertidal
oyster reefs as compared to unprotected locations (Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007).
In southeastern states, including North Carolina, intertidal oyster reefs are critical to maintaining
the integrity of fringing marshes along the complex tidal creek networks commonly found within
the barrier island and lagoonal estuaries of the region; such networks form a protective
breakwater that reduces shoreline erosion (Coen and Fischer 2002; Grizzle et al. 2002; Coen and
Bolton-Warberg 2003). Fringing marshes throughout the southeastern United States are vitally
important as fisheries habitat (Bell 1997, Kneib 2000). Once oyster reefs are lost or damaged,
marshes can rapidly erode. The ability of viable oyster reefs to prevent shoreline erosion will
also be critical to ameliorate the future challenge of sea level rise, attributable to global warming.
Oyster reefs have also been widely recognized as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for oysters and
other reef -forming mollusks (Coen et al. 1999; ASMFC 2007). The functional value of shell
bottom for oysters includes aggregation of spawning stock, chemical cues for successful spat
settlement and refuge from predators and siltation (Coen et al. 1999). As a reef matures, a
complex habitat with greater reef height and more interstitial spaces for recruiting oysters to
settle is created. This has led numerous authors to describe oysters as ecosystem engineers in
recognition of the importance of the biogenic reef structure to estuarine biodiversity, fishery
production, water quality and hydrodynamic processes (Lenihan and Peterson 1998; Gutierrez et
al. 2003; Dame 2005; Brumbaugh et al. 2006).
In addition to the role as essential habitat for oysters, reefs also provide critical fisheries habitat
for ecologically and economically important finfish, mollusks and crustaceans which use the
shell bottom as spawning, nursery, foraging and/or refuge areas. In the 1990s, state and federal
fisheries management agencies formally began to recognize oyster reef habitat as critical to
fisheries production. Although fully functional reefs may require three to five years to develop,
data suggest that oyster shell alone attracts many more fish than adjacent bare mud.flats (Coen et
al. 1999; Lehnert and Allen 2002;. Garwood et al. submitted). In North Carolina, well over 40
species of fish and decapod crustaceans have been documented using natural and restored oyster
reefs including American eel, Atlantic croaker, Atlantic menhaden, black sea bass, sheepshead,

spotted seatrout, red drum and southern flounder (Coen et al. 1999; Lenihan et al. 2001; Peterson
et al. 2003; Grabowski et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). These documented species include twelve
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission managed species land seven South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council managed species, suggesting the importance of this habitat for recreational
and commercial fisheries. In consideration of the economic importance of shellfish producing
areas, the N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission classified oyster reefs as critical habitat areas
under 15A NCAC 3I.0101. The South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council also recognizes
oyster reefs as Essential Fish Habitat for estuarine and near shore coastal ecosystems (Coen et al.
1999).
The most abundant species on oyster reefs, however, are generally small forage fishes and
crustaceans, such as pinfish, gobies, grass shrimp and mud crabs (Coen et al. 1999; Minello
1999; Posey et al. 1999; Plunket and La Peyre 2005; ASMFC 2007). These small fish and
crustaceans are important prey items in the diet of the larger recreationally and commercially
important invertebrates and fish that make foraging excursions to this habitat, reflecting the
aforementioned importance of shell bottom to fisheries production.
Management strategies, including restoration efforts designed to conserve or even improve reef
conditions, are recommended to reverse the negative consequences of reef losses (Brumbaugh et
al. 2006, Beck et al. 2009). Unlike many other global regions, oyster reefs in the southeastern
United States are characterized as good -to -poor (Beck et al. 2009), in part because of historical
under -exploitation and, until the 1990s, delayed coastal development. Although far from ideal,
the good -to -poor condition of southeastern oyster habitats represents an opportunity to be
proactive environmentally and attempt to reverse the losses before oyster reefs become
functionally extinct in the region.
This project will help to restore oyster reef habitat in Pamlico Sound by providing adequate reef
and settlement substrate that will significantly enhance the oyster population and oyster reef
habitat in Pamlico Sound. These reefs will also protect existing oyster and salt marsh habitat and
provide valuable habitat for commercial and recreational species. This project will implement
estuarine habitat creation and restoration objectives described in the N.C. Oyster Protection and
Restoration Action Plan, the N.C. Oyster Fishery Management Plan and the N.C. Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan, the Onslow Bight Conservation Forum and the Cape Fear Arch Conservation
Council plan.
The 1996 Congressional amendments to the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSFCMA) (PL 94-265) set forth new requirements for the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), regional fishery management councils (FMC), and other federal
agencies to identify and protect important marine and anadromous fish habitat. These amendments
established procedures for the identification of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) and a requirement for
interagency coordination to fii Cher the conservation of federally managed fisheries. Table I shows
the categories of EFH and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for managed species
which were identified in the Fishery Management Plan Amendments of the South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council and which may occur in southeastern states. Table 2 lists, by life
stages, 77 fish species which may occur in the vicinity of the project area and which are managed

REC%IVED t'
1. 2013
Table 1. Categories of Essential Fish Habitat and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in
Southeast United States t'i (N/A = Not Applicable; NS = Not Significant).
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT
Present within or adjacent to
project area
Impacts from filling for patch
oyster reefs
Estuarine Areas
1. Aquatic Beds
YES
NO
2. Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
YES
NO
3. Estuarine Scrub/shrub Mangroves
NO
N/A
4. Estuarine Water Column
YES
NO
5. Intertidal Flats
YES
NO
6.Oyster Reefs & Shell Banks
YES
NO
7. Palustrine Emergent & Forested
Wetlands
NO
N/A
8. Sea ass
YES
NO
Marine Areas
9. Artificial/Manmade Reefs
NO
N/A
10. Coral & Coral Reefs
NO
N/A
11. Live/Hard Bottoms
NO
N/A
12. Sar assum
NO
N/A
13. Water Column
NO
N/A
GEOGRAPHICALLY DEFINED HABITAT AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN
Area -Wide
14. Council -designated Artificial Reef
Special Management Zones
NO
N/A
15. Hermatypic (reef -forming) Coral
Habitat
& Reefs
NO
N/A
16. Hard Bottoms
NO
N/A
17. Hoyt Hills
NO
N/A
18. Sar assum Habitat
NO
N/A
19. State -designated Areas Important
for Managed Species
YES
NO
20. Submerged Aquatic
Ve etation SAV
YES
NO
North Carolina
21. Bi Rock
NO
N/A
22. Bogue Sound
NO
N/A
23. Cape Fear, Lookout & Hatteras
(sandy sboals
NO
N/A
24. New River
NO
N/A
25. The Ten Fathom Ledge
NO
NIA
26. The Point
NO
N/A
'Areas shown are identified in Yishery Management rim nmmamcros a. ULU owuU � UMI.. V ..a..w ... —"sw--_--- ---------- ---
are included in Essential Fish Habitat New Marine Fish Habitat Mandate for Federal Agencies. February 1999. (Tables 6 and 7).
7

Table 2. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Species of Pamlico, Pamlico Sound and its tributaries,
North Carolina.
Source: NMFS, Beaufort, North Carolina, October 1999.
E=Eggs; L=Larval; J=Juvenile; A=Adult; N/A=Not Found
EFH FISH SPECIES
Waterbody
EFH FISH SPECIES
Waterbody
Pamlico
Sound
Pamlico
Sound
Bluefish
E L J A
Gray tri erfish
N/A
Summer flounder
L J A
Yellow jack
N/A
grouper
J
Blue runner
N/A
-Gag
snapper
J
Crevalle'ack
N/A
-Gray
N/A
Bar'ack
N/A
-Dolphin
Cobia
E L J A
Greater ambejack
N/A
King mackerel
J A
Almaco jack
N/A
Spanish mackerel
J A
Bended rudderfish
N/A
Black sea bass
L J A
Spade fish
N/A
dogfish
E L J A
White grunt
N/A
-Spiny
Brown shrimp
E L J A
Hogfish
N/A
Pink shrimp
E L J A
Puddin ife
N/A
White shrimp
E L J A
Blackfm snapper
N/A
Atlantic bi e e tuna
N/A
Red snapper
N/A
Adantic.bluefin tuna
N/A
Cubera snapper
N/A
Ski jack tuna
N/A
Silk snapper
N/A
Lon bills earfish
N/A
Blueline tilefish
N/A
Shortfin mako shark
N/A
Sand tilefish
N/A.
Blue shark
N/A
Bank sea bass
N/A
shark
N/A
Rock sea bass
N/A
-Spinner
Swordfish
N/A
Grasby
N/A
Yellowfm tuna
N/A
Speckled bird
N/A
Blue ri -ra in
N/A
Yellowedge grouper
N/A
White ri -ra in
N/A
Cone
N/A
Sailfish
N/A
Red bud
N/A
Calico scallop
N/A
Jewfish
N/A
hammerhead shark
N/A
Red grouper
N/A
-Scalloped
nose shark
N/A
Misty grouper
N/A
-Big
Black tip shark
N/A
Warsaw grouper
N/A
Dusky shark
N/A
Snowy grouper
N/A
shark
N/A
Yellowmouth grouper
N/A
-Night
Sandbar shark
J A
Scam
N/A
shark
N/A
Shee shead
J A
-Silky
shark
N/A
Red porgy
N/A
-Tiger
Atlantic sharpnose shark
N/A
Longspine porgy
N/A
Lon fm mako shark
N/A
Scup
N/A
Whiteti shark
N/A
Little turn
N/A
Thresher shark
N/A
N/A
RLC-1i1."cD
F' l ._ .,,,�3

under MSFCMA. These fish species and habitats require special consideration to promote their
viability and sustainability. The potential impacts of the proposed project on these fish and
habitats can be seen in Table 1 and are discussed below.
Aquatic Beds, Seagrass and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
A few small patches of seagrass exist within the project area. Algal beds may also be observed in
the project area in spring. The project protocol and coordination with the N.C. Division of
Marine Fisheries prohibits deployment of cultch material in any areas contacting seagrass. The
project strives to enhance estuarine habitat and covering existing seagrass would not be
consistent with program goals. Impacts to any seagrasses that might be present in waters adjacent
to the project area are expected to be turbidly from deployment operations and would be.
negligible or minimal and short-lived. The proposed patch oyster reefs will not be constructed
where seagrass or other submerged vegetation exists and will therefore not have an adverse
impact on aquatic beds and seagrass.
Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Spartina marsh surrounds the entire shoreline of Beacon Island. The 2.4 acre project area,
however, does not contain any estuarine emergent wetlands and therefore, will not be impacted
by the construction of the patch oyster reefs.
Estuarine Scrub/Shrub Mangroves
This type of habitat is not located anywhere near the project area. The construction of the patch
oyster reefs will therefore not have an adverse impact on mangrove habitat.
Estuarine Water Column
The estuarine water column is defined as a medium of transport for nutrients, larvae and
migrating organisms between river systems and the open ocean. The patch oyster reefs will be
constructed to be no more than 1.5 ft. in elevation, utilizing very minimal space within the water
column. As a result, they are not expected to alter currents and velocity in the immediate
vicinity. This project will also not impede the flow of waters to or from wetland areas nor the
ocean waters. This project intends on adding hard substrate on which multiple organisms,
especially oysters, may attach and produce an abundance of larvae. The reef formation will
interact with the estuarine water column enabling a variety of organisms to inhabit the water
column and enable water currents to swirl and eddy, promoting the deposition of fine materials
and the settlement of oyster larvae. The additional abundance of larvae will help restore the
oyster population in North Carolina. Project construction may result in a temporary increase in
localized turbidity as the recycled oyster shells are being placed into the water. The impacts on
the estuarine water column are expected to be none to minimal.
Intertidal Flats
The project area is primarily subtidal with only a very narrow (<30 ft. wide) portion along the
eastern boundary of the project area containing intertidal flats that surround the western side of
Beacon Island. The eastern sides of proposed reefs 1 through 3 (Figure 2) will be constructed
within this intertidal flat area, restoring shell bottom habitat that has been found to have
significant positive impacts on population dynamics and community ecology. In addition to the
well -studied benefits of oyster areas for fisheries, research indicates that oysters provide
zeCavLn
' 1;13

additional values such as water quality improvements, benthic pelagic coupling, nutrient
dynamics and sediment stabilization. Researchers have begun to connect the role of oyster
habitat in maintaining the integrity of fringing marshes, forming a protective breakwater that
retards shoreline erosion. The project will have a beneficial impact on the intertidal flats along
the western side of Beacon Island.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Numerous natural oyster reefs are found adjacent to but not within the project area (North Rock,
Shell Castle). The project protocol and coordination with the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries
prohibits deployment of cultch material on existing shellfish resources. This project intends on
adding hard substrate on which multiple organisms, especially oysters, may attach and produce
an abundance of larvae. By design, the construction of the patch oyster reefs will not have an
adverse impact on oyster reefs and shell banks.
Palustrine Emergent & Forested Wetlands
This type of habitat is not located in or near the project area. The construction of the patch oyster
reefs will therefore not have an adverse impact on palustrine emergent and forested wetlands.
State —Designated Areas Important for Managed Species
Primary and Secondary Nursery Areas are designated by the NC Marine Fisheries Commission
and are defined as tidal salt waters that provide essential habitat for the early development of
commercially important fish and shellfish. This project provides fishery nursery habitats that are
consistent with the existing habitats within primary and secondary nursery areas.
Unconsolidated Soft Bottom
Surficial sediments on a soft bottom can act as habitat for a variety of microscopic plants and
benthic epifauna/infauna species. These organisms may serve as food sources for many other
organisms. These other organisms in turn can feed larger, economically important, fishery
species such as red drum, summer flounder, spot, Atlantic croaker, weakfish and striped bass to
name a few.
The 2.4-acre project area consists of intertidal and shallow subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in
depth from 0 to 4 feet of which 0.41 acres of soft bottom will be covered with recycled oyster
shells, altering the estuarine substrate. However, areas of soft bottom will remain between the
reef patches as well as expansive areas of soft bottom habitat surrounding the reefs. In addition,
the reefs will slow down water flow and allow sediment to settle out. This will result in the
maintenance and addition of unconsolidated soft bottom.
The activities proposed have been demonstrated to have minimal affects overall on this EFH
type, but it is important to consider post -larval development that may occur in these areas. This
habitat serves as feeding and resting grounds for juvenile and adult species. Thus, these
organisms may be indirectly affected by filling of the substrate. But, given the mobility of the
organisms resting or feeding and the extensive areas of remaining soft bottom, the area of
disturbance is likely to have no significant adverse effects.
RECEIVED
H I)' 14 2013
10

Additional Project Area Concerns
In addition to the EFH species in Table 2, prey species such as spot, croaker and pinfish may also
occupy the estuarine waters of Pamlico Sound during varying life stages. The proposed project
will not adversely affect prey species populations.
Impact Summary for Essential Fish Habitat
The objectives of this project are to enhance/restore and protect intertidal and shallow subtidal
patch oyster reef habitat to the west of Beacon Island in Pamlico Sound by providing suitable
substrate for oyster spat settlement. The project is also designed to reduce shoreline erosion of
the island caused by storm activity, boat wakes and rising sea levels. The targeted project area
has environmental conditions that will allow oyster recruitment and provide for their subsequent
survival and growth.
Created oyster reefs are constructed to change habitats from a soft substrate to a mixture of hard
and soft substrates by adding cultch material in a low profile (< 0.5 m.) deployment scheme.
These reefs are generally deployed to provide fisheries habitat in a desired location that provides
some measurable benefit to several different species as well as humans. When manmade reefs
are constructed, they provide new hard substrate similar in function to newly exposed hard
bottom (Goren, 1985). Aside from the differences in the physical characteristics and nature of the
materials involved in creating a manmade reef, the ecological succession and processes involved
in the establishment of the epibenthic assemblages (i.e. oysters) occur in a similar fashion on
natural hard substrates and man -placed hard substrates (Wendt et al., 1989). Finfish use natural
and manmade hard substrates in very similar ways and often interchangeably (Sedberry, 1988).
The changes in species composition and local abundance of important species in a specific area
are often seen as the primary benefits of artificial reef deployment activities.
Additional benefits of created oyster reefs placed on soft bottoms are the increase of diversity
and edges. The increase of biotic diversity is accomplished by adding hard substrate where none
existed. This in turn will attract organisms that settle on hard bottom but cannot settle on a
shifting bottom and then attract predators that feed on these sessile organisms. Edges can be
described as areas of transition between habitat types. Edges can also create areas of high
diversity, more so than over continuous areas of one habitat type. This has come to be known as
the edge effect principle. The edge created by deploying cultch material onto a soft bottom
habitat may also create a habitat of its own. The edge habitat is a culmination of the two habitats
(i.e. soft and hard substrates) because it is inhabited by a characteristic set of species. By adding
hard substrate to a soft bottom habitat the possible effect is that a third habitat is created. This
has been observed on oyster sanctuary mounds where reef fishes congregate near the center of
the substrate to graze on algae and are afforded the sense of security. Sheepshead, on the other
hand, patrol the edge of the substrate foraging out into the soft bottom habitat but continuously
return to hard substrate.
Oysters have often been described as the "keystone" species in an estuary (Bahr and Lanier
1981) and provide significant surface area as habitat. Sometimes compared to submerged aquatic
vegetation in the mid -Atlantic states, the oyster community has been identified as critical to a
healthy estuarine ecosystem. Direct and indirect ecosystem services (filtering capacity, benthic-
pelagic coupling, nutrient dynamics, sediment stabilization, provision of habitat, etc.) de?Vee`D
11 1 1 " 7013
D(W.-MIM CJY

from the oyster reef have been largely underestimated (Coen and Lukenbach 1998). Oyster reefs
can remove, via filter feeding, large amounts of particulate material from the water column, and
release large quantities of inorganic and organic nutrients that will benefit other co -inhabitants of
the reef (Haven and Morales -Alamo 1970; Dame and Dankers 1988; Dame et al. 1989).
The ecological role of the oyster reef as structure, providing food and protection, contribute to its
value as a critical fisheries habitat. The three-dimensional oyster reef provides more area for
attachment of oysters and other sessile organisms and creates more habitat niches than occur on
the surrounding flat or soft bottom habitat. Clams, mussels, anemones, polychaetes, amphipods,
sponges and many species of crabs are part of the oyster reef community. The invertebrates
recycle nutrients and organic matter and are prey for many finfish. Red and black drum, striped
bass, sheepshead, weakfish, spotted seatrout, summer and southern flounder, oystertoads, and
other fish frequent the oyster reef.
Created oyster reefs are known to promote extensive invertebrate communities and enhance
habitat for reef fish and other fish species, including cryptic, tropical, and gamefish species, as
well as many of commercial or recreational significance. The success of a reef and its
contributions to stock enhancement varies geographically and is determined by a wide range of
complex parameters, including existing habitat, physical limitations, material design, reef
configuration, reef management and the health of the targeted species complex, which in turn is
reliant on effective fisheries management locally, regionally and nationally. This potential is
further enhanced since domestic reef programs today possess better information and improved
technology and are more focused in using this tool towards specific stock enhancement and
fishery management needs.
For species which may be to some degree habitat -limited, the establishment of additional suitable
habitat targeted to specific life -history stages may improve survival. Additional manmade habitat
designed specifically to promote survival of targeted species in "protected" areas could
potentially enhance existing ecosystems or create new ones to fill in gaps where essential fish
habitat had been damaged, lost or severely over -fished. Man-made structures also may provide
essential habitat while simultaneously acting as a deterrent to illegal fishing practices in specially
managed areas (e.g. oyster sanctuaries).
Free swimming organisms will be able to avoid the area directly affected by project activities
and move to other soft bottom habitat and thus impacts to these organisms shall be minimal.
Some impacts to EFH will be permanent since the deployment of cultch onto soft bottom will
change the availability of the bottom under the reef material.
In contrast to the permanent impacts to the existing EFH, the ecological functions of oyster reefs,
be it manmade or natural, are numerous and an essential component of the estuarine system.
While a few EFH types will be subject to temporary impacts and other EFH categories will have
permanent impacts, these disturbances are trade-offs that will increase biomass (broodstock) of
oysters to help restore the oyster population, creating habitat in a hard substrate limited system,
that supports high diversity and multiple ecological functions. Implementation of this project is
not expected to cause any significant adverse impacts to any managed species and in fact will
RECZ1 V E.n
1�. t 13
12
C �r� `9flD CITY

hopefully facilitate the recovery of the oyster population and its beneficiaries, add essential fish
habitat, create additional salt marsh habitat for fishery utilization and benefit estuarine systems.
RECIENSD
13

References
ASMFC (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission). 2007. The importance of habitat created
by molluscan shellfish to managed species along the Atlantic coast of the United States..
Habitat Management Series 8, 108p.
Bahr, L.N. and W.P. Lanier. 1981. The ecology of intertidal oyster reefs of the South Atlantic
coast: a community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Reports,
FWS/OBS-81/15, 105p.
Beck, M.W., R.D. Brumbaugh, L. Airoldi, A. Carranza, L.D. Coen, C. Crawford, O. Defeo, G.J.
Edgar, B. Hancock, M. Kay, H. Lenihan, M.W. Luckenbach, C.L. Toropova and G.
Zhang. 2009. Shellfish reefs at risk: a global analysis of problems and solutions. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 52 p.
Bell, F.W. 1997. The economic valuation of saltwater marsh supporting marine recreational
fishing in the southeastern United States. Ecological Economics 21: 243-254.
Breitburg, D.L., L.D. Coen, M.W. Luckenbach, R. Mann, M. Posey and J.A. Wesson. 2000.
Oyster reef restoration: convergence of harvest and conservation strategies. Journal of
Shellfish Research 19(l): 371-377.
Brumbaugh, R.D., M.W. Beck, L.D. Coen, L. Craig and P. Hicks. 2006. A practitioners' guide to
the design and monitoring of shellfish restoration projects: an ecosystem approach. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 28p.
Coen, L. D. and M.W. Luckenbach. 1998. Developing success criteria and goals for evaluating
shellfish habitat restoration: ecological function or resource exploitation? Goal Setting
and Success Criteria for Habitat Restoration Conference, January 13-15.
Coen, L.D., M.W. Luckenbach and D.L. Breitburg. 1999. The role of oyster reefs as essential
fish habitat: a review'of current knowledge and some new perspectives. p. 438-454 In:
L.R. Benaka (ed.). Fish habitat: essential fish habitat and rehabilitation. American
Fisheries Society, Bethesda, NO, Symposium 22, 459 p.
Coen, L.D. and M.W. Luckenbach. 2000. Developing success criteria and goals for evaluating
oyster reef restoration: ecological function or resource exploitation? Ecological
Engineering 15:323-343.
Coen, L.D. and A. Fischer. 2002. Managing the future if South Carolina's oysters: an
experimental approach to evaluating current harvesting practices and boat wake impacts.
Journal of Shellfish Research 21:894.
Coen, L.D. and M. Bolton-Warberg. 2003. Evaluating the impacts of harvesting practices, boat
wakes and associated shoreline erosion on intertidal creek habitats in the southeastern
U.S.: managers and restoration programs take note. Journal of Shellfish Research 22:325.
RECD ED
14

DMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2008. North Carolina oyster fishery
management plan amendment II. NC Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC,
282p.
Dame, R. F. and N. Dankers. 1988. Uptake and release of materials by a Wadden Sea mussel
bed. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 118:207-216.
Dame, R.F. and B.C. Patten. 1981. Analysis of energy flows in an intertidal oyster reef. Marine
Ecology Progress Series 5:115-124.
Dame, R.F., J.D. Spurrier and T.G. Wolaver. 1989. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus processing
by an oyster reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series 54:249-256.
Dame, R. 2005. Oyster reefs as complex ecological systems. p. 331-343 In: R. Dame and S.
Olenin (eds.). The comparative roles of suspension -feeders in ecosystems. Springer, The
Netherlands.
Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team. 2007. Status review of the eastern oyster (Crassostrea
virginica). Report to the National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional Office.
February 16, 2007. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/SPO-88, 105 p.
Garwood, TA., D.C. Abel and K. Walters. Submitted. The effect of vertical structure on inshore
artificial reef fish and macroinvertebrate communities. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology.
Grabowski, J.H., D. Pettipas, M.A. Dolan, A.R. Hughes and D.L. Kimbro. 2000. The economic
and biological value of restored oyster reef habitat to the nursery function. of the estuary.
NC Sea Grant, Morehead City, NC, FRG # 97-EP-6, 29p.
Grabowski, J.H., A.R. Hughes, D.L. Kimbro and M.A. Dolan. 2005. How habitat setting
influences restored oyster reef communities. Ecology 86(7):19264935.
Goren, M. 1985. Succession of benthic community on artificial substratum at Elat (Red Sea).
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 38: 19-40.
Grizzle, R.E., J.R. Adams and & L.J. Walters. 2002. Historical changes in intertidal oyster
(Crassostrea virginica) reefs in a Florida lagoon potentially related to boating activities.
Journal of Shellfsh Research 21: 749-756.
Grizzle, R.E., J.K. Green and L.D. Coen. 2008. Seston removal by natural and constructed
intertidal eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) reefs: a comparison with previous
laboratory studies, and the value of in situ methods. Estuaries & Coasts 31:1208-1220.
Gutierrez, J.L., C.G. Jones, D.L. Strayer and O.O. Iribame. 2003. Mollusks as ecosystem
engineers: the role of shell production in aquatic habitats. Oikos 101(1):79-90.
Haven, D. and R. Morales -Alamo. 1970. Filtration of particles from suspension by American
. oyster, Crassostrea virginica. Biological Bulletin 139:248-264.
RECEIVED
l .A "13
15

Henderson, J. and J. O'Neal. 2003. Economic values associated with construction of oyster reefs
by the corps of engineers. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
Vicksburg, MS, EMRRP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN-EMRRP-ER-01), IOp.
Jones, C.G., J.H. Lawton and M. Shachak. 1994.Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos
69:373-386.
Kennedy, V.S., R.I.E. Newell and A.F. Ebele. 1996. The eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica.
Maryland Sea Grant College, College Park, MD.
Kneib, R.T. 2000. Salt marsh ecoscapes and production transfers by estuarine nekton in the
Southeastern United States. In: M.P. Weinstein and D.A. Kreeger (eds.), Concepts and
Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology. Springer, NY, NY. pp. 267-291.
Lehnert, R.L. and D.M. Allen. 2002. Nekton use of subtidal oyster shell habitat in a southeastern
U.S. estuary. Estuaries 25(5):1015-1024.
Lenihan, H.S. and C.H. Peterson. 1998. How habitat degradation through fishery disturbance
enhances impacts of hypoxia on oyster reefs. Ecological Applications 8(1):128-140.
Lenihan, H.S., F. Micheli, S.W. Shelton and C.H. Peterson. 1999. The influence of multiple
environmental stressors on susceptibility to parasites: an experimental determination with
oysters. Limnology and Oceanography 44:910-924.
Lenihan, H.S., C.H. Peterson, J.E. Byers, J.H. Grabowski and G.W. Thayer. 2001. Cascading of
habitat degradation: oyster reefs invaded by refugee fishes escaping stress. Ecological
Applications 11(3):764-782.
Luckenbach, M:W., R. Mann and J.A. Wesson (eds.) 1999. Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration. A
Synopsis and Synthesis of Approaches. Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press.
Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press, Gloucester Point, VA, 358 pp.
Marshall, M.D. 1995. North Carolina oyster restoration and fishery management plan. North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries and the North Carolina Blue Ribbon Advisory
Council on Oysters, Morehead City, NC, I I6p.
Meyer, D.L., E.C. Townsend and G.W. Thayer. 1997. Stabilization and erosion control value of
oyster cultch for intertidal marsh. Restoration Ecology 5(l):93-99.
Meyer, D.L. and E.C. Townsend. 2000. Faunal utilization of created intertidal eastern oyster
(Crassostrea virginica) reefs in the southeastern United States. Estuaries 23(1):34-45..
Minello, T.J. 1999. Nekton densities in shallow estuarine habitats of Texas and Louisiana and the
identification of essential fish habitat. p. 43-75 In: Benaka, L. R. ed. Fish Habitat:
Essential Fish Habitat and Rehabilitation. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda,
Maryland, 459 p.
RE( -LIVED
16
TY

Nelson, K.A., L.A. Leonard, M.H. Posey, T.D. Alphin and M.A. Mallin. 2004. Transplanted
oyster (Crassostrea virginica) beds as a self-sustaining mechanism for water quality .
improvement in small tidal creeks. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology
298(2): 347-368.
Newell, R.I.E. 2004. Ecosystem influences of natural and cultivated populations suspension -
feeding bivalve mollusks: a review. Journal of Shellfish Research 23(1):51-61.
Peterson, C. H., J.H. Grabowski and S.P. Powers. 2003. Quantitative enhancement of fish
production by oyster reef habitat: restoration valuation. Marine Ecology Progress Series
264:249-264.
Piazza, B. P., P.D. Banks and M.K. La Peyre. 2005.. The potential for created oyster shell reefs as
a sustainable shoreline protection strategy in Louisiana. Restoration Ecology 13(3):499-
506.
Plunket, J. and M.K. La Peyre. 2005.Oyster beds as fish and macroinvertebrate habitat in
Barataria Bay, Louisiana. Bulletin of Marine Science 77(1):155-164.
Posey, M. H., T.D. Alphin, C.M. Powell and E. Townsend. 1999. Use of oyster reefs as habitat
for epibenthic fish and decapods. p. 229-238 In: M.W. Luckenbach, R. Mann and J. A.
Wesson eds. Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration: A Synopsis and Synthesis of Approaches.
Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press, Gloucester Point, VA.
Sedberry, G.R. 1988. Food and feeding of black sea bass, Centropristis striata, in live bottom
habitats in the South Atlantic Bight. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society
104:35-50.
Street, M.W, A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal
Habitat Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC. 656p.
Wenner, E., H. R. Beatty and L. Coen. 1996. A quantitative system for sampling nekton on
intertidal oyster reefs. Journal of Shellf sh Research 15:769-775.
Wendt, P. H., D.M. Knott and R. F. Van Dolah. 1989. Community structure of the sessile biota
on five artificial reefs of different ages. Bulletin of Marine Science 44:1106-1122.
Zimmerman, R., T. J. Minello, T. Baumer, and M. Castiglione. 1989.Oyster reef as habitat for
estuarine macrofauna. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-249. 16 p.
:!
17
RECEi iD
Y

Appendix A .
Project Monitoring Plan
A monitoring program will be implemented to evaluate progress towards the project's habitat
restoration objectives; measure overall project success and to comply with NOAA's minimum
scientific monitoring requirements. The project will be monitored for five years by the federation
working with volunteers to document their success. The monitoring parameters include the
structural and functional parameters listed below. The parameters, where appropriate, will be
measured and monitored prior to the project initiation, concurrent with project implementation
and continue until the results point to a trend of restoration success. Monitoring timing will be
conducted according to the project schedule and the selected parameters. The timing will allow
for any necessary changes or adaptive management during the project.
Oyster Reef Habitat Monitoring
➢ Habitat Restoration Start Date:
o Spring 2013
➢ Monitoring Start Date:
o Pre -project — Winter/Spring 2013
o Post project — Fall 2013, annually there after
➢ Monitoring End Date:
o Fall 2017
➢ Project Goal:
o Create and restore 0.41 acres of viable intertidal and shallow subtidal oyster
habitat offshore of Beacon Island in Pamlico Sound
➢ Project Objectives:
o Increase the acreage of oyster reef habitat (structural)
o Increase the amount of substrate available for oyster recruitment and reef
development (functional)
➢ Monitoring Parameters:
o Acreage of oyster habitat created (structural)
o Abundances and densities of oysters and epifauna (functional)
➢ Monitoring Measurements:
o Structural - Extent and area of created oyster habitat calculated by measuring reef
footprints using on the ground measurements, aerial photographs and mapping
tools
■ Once annually
■ Each patch oyster reef within the project area
o Functional - Sample 20cm x 20cm quadrat random excavations from created and
reference reefs, identify and enumerate all oysters and epifauna within the quadrat
■ Once annually
■ At least one quadrat from one reef
➢ Baseline ConditionsNalues: -7
o Pre -project survey for oysters and oyster habitat in the project area rtEc��.v�
18

o Comparison to existing natural reference reefs representative of existing
conditions at each site and similar reef architecture and landscape characteristics
(series of patch reefs on mudflats or fringing reefs along saltmarsh habitat)
■ 1 reference reef will be selected within the project area that:
• best represent the existing natural condition;
• are similar in architecture and landscape characteristics to designed
created reefs; and
• represent target conditions.
➢ Evaluation of Results:
o Quantitative comparison to baseline pre -project conditions
o Statistical comparison to reference reefs at each site
➢ Success Criteria:
o Increase in oyster habitat in the project area equal to or greater than project goal
o Created reefs exhibit similar densities and abundances of oyster and epifauna as
natural reefs at corresponding sites
➢ Indicators for Adaptive Management/Corrective Action
o Acreage targets not met
o Persistent absence or very low levels of oyster and epifuana on created reefs when
compared to natural reference reefs
➢ Watershed Scale Monitoring, Programs:
o NCDMF conducts spat settlement counts in all the basins it deploys cultch in
o NCDMF also identifies and evaluates the presence of disease in the new juvenile
oysters on the shell planting sites
o UNCW SPAT monitoring program is collecting spat settlement and water
temperature and salinity data from all the major subbasins along the coast
o NCSU CMAST, UNC IMS and others are conducting a series of studies on oyster
larval transport, reef development and water quality trends in estuaries containing
the project areas.
o NCCF is conducting Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) water quality studies
and watershed restoration plans in the Lockwood Folly River and White Oak
River.
RECEIVED
FEB 14 Z013
D�'M-T,SHDCTY
19
---

DCM
CDENR DECo17 2012
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural ResourceWARO
Division of Marine Fisheries
Beverly Eaves Perdue Dr. Louis B. Daniel III Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
December 6, 2012
TO: David Moye, NC Division of Coastal Management 12ECEIvED
FROM: Brian Conrad, Mapping Program, NC DMF 14 2013
VIA: Craig Hardy, Resource Enhancement Section, NC DMF
SUBJECT: Beacon Island Survey Report
The area adjacent to Beacon Island, located at approximately 35° 05.89191'N 76'
02.81872'W in the Pamlico Sound of North Carolina, was mapped and sampled from
11/29/2012 through 12/3/2012 by the NC Division of Marine Fisheries Mapping
Program. The area was mapped and sampled to quantify habitat type boundaries,
acreage and densities of shellfish and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in
cooperation with the Division of Coastal Management to provide comparison data for a
major CAMA permit application site survey for the construction of 0.41 acres of patch
oyster reefs within a 2.4 acre site area.
The survey was conducted utilizing pole probe transect methods and benthic habitat
substrate classifications of the NC DMF Shellfish Mapping Program utilizing Trimble
Geo-XT GPS receivers to map habitat types on a 1:12,000 scale map. Fifteen random
samples were taken within each habitat type found within the 2.4 acres site with meter
square quadrats or patent tongs to quantify shellfish and SAV species densities.
Environmental data was also collected.
The 2.4 acre site area contains about .30 acres of subtidal hard vegetated shell habitat
(Substrate type 1) consisting of sand sediment with shell and SAV grass bottom
composition. Fifteen 0.90m2 samples (13.5m2) were taken within this area of subtidal
hard vegetated shell habitat finding live oysters and Gams mixed with dead shell
amongst the rhizomes of Zostera manna. Nine total oysters were found which
consisted of 7 spat and 2 sublegal oysters, with oyster densities ranging from 0-3/m2.
Thirteen total clams were found which consisted of 6 seed clams, 4 little neck Gams, 1
cherry clam and 2 chowder clams, with clam densities ranging from 0-3/m2. Total
shellfish densities for samples within this area of subtidal hard vegetated shell habitat
ranged from 0-7/m2. The percent density coverage for this area of Zostera marina is
very sparse, 1-10% of a m2 sample.
le
3441 Arendell Street, P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557 orhCarolina
Phone: [phone] FAX: 252-72M2541 Internet www.ncdmf.net
NO
An Equal Opporhovty %AfirmaNe Acton Employer Naturally

The site area also contains about 0.08 acres of intertidal firm vegetated shell habitat
(Substrate type Q) consisting of muddy sand sediment with shell and grass bottom
composition. Fifteen 1.Om2 samples were taken within this area of intertidal firm
vegetated shell habitat finding live oysters and clams mixed with dead shell within
Spartina spp. Total oysters (1019) consisted of 691 spat, 295 sublegal and 33 legal
oysters with oyster densities ranging from 0-396/m2 with a mean average oyster density
of 67.933/m2.
The site also contains about 1.75 acres of subtidal hard vegetated habitat (Substrate
Type J) consisting of sand sediment with a mixture of SAV and detritus bottom
composition. Fifteen 1.Om2 samples were taken within this area of subtidal hard
vegetated habitat finding rhizomes of Zostera marina with very sparse percent density
coverage per m2 sample.
The site also contains about 1.46 acres of subtidal hard non -vegetated without shell
habitat (Substrate type L) consisting of sand sediment. Fifteen 0.90m2 samples
(13.5m2) were taken within this area finding only one seed clam.
Existing oyster shell bags were found on site coinciding with Audubon North Carolina's
CAMA General Permit # 60088 issued July 20, 2012.
The sparseness of SAV species at the time of this survey is perhaps due to the
seasonality of Zostera marina which was at its seasonal end at the time of this survey;
as well as the depth, current and turbidity conditions that currently exist on the
southwestern side of Beacon Island.

NC DMF MAPPING PROGRAM
Beacon .1sland Pamlico Sound
.
• � gv�Mpv A A„M pryer q„ qv
•
tirpir"r�sq vna� � oa Pa dyr•'^
._a t•an •is 'r •w L�.s��,y��•ss tiew
• A
.A+w Mq+�: yAv 1�v� �v�Y�+�
• --r: Apr "•-• l�w�--.
• •
� w q+� w Avg
. U' MP r T r �•
=pa
i.�....'w �'s:...•w ....•wN..
`�L p N •P
\
41 • �1
is
is
:siE J
Legend
• i 4 acre slo mmers
Boman Island Survey Samples
TOW She1Klsh per sample
-- A- Subtldal SoRVepebted Shell
• p
:x e - Sabedal salt Veg>mod wt Shen
i 0.lnoog1- low
iC- Sua,dal Son Wn-vegebted Shen
- 15000001-2OdO
D- SUMWaI Son Nonvegebbd wM Stop
A2Dwm01-s'ad
E - Sus lFin Ve,,wbteal Shell
F- SuNklal Film Vopetebd wk Shell
A 80.0DOW1-30800
1.O- SudldSl Fbm Non- eg ted Shell
H- Subbdal FYm Nor,vegebted w/a Shen
0-I1`11011M Firm Vsgeave SheII
I - Sts fdol -Ism Vepebled Stroll
J-Small Ham Vepehbd w/o Shell
K-Suhddal Hem Nor-"pebbd Shell
I.-Sudkal Ham N "epebted Wo Shen
M-IM maw Son Veyelabd Shs1I
N- Iree oral Son VeDial W. Shell
O- IMil San Nonvayetabd Shell
p- IM U01 Sort Noavegelabe wb Shell
nV7 R - Irdemdal Fln Ve"W Wo Stoll (I•Nrld)
S- Inertial R. Nw"epebted Stoll
T- Inadpal Fin Nm vegstsled w/o SMII
M U - IrIbN4I Ham Vepebted Shell
W V- InIsdael Ham VeyebNd w/o SWI
W-Ir1s,WaI1 id Nw vgwtwt 9011
I E-IMeNdll Ham NOm•p•bbdw/o Shen
For questions regarding
this map or data
please contact:
Brian Conrad
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Resource Enhancement Section
Not For Navigational Use
0 100 200
Feet
N
11,000 n
Layout Created: December 5, 2012

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Director r Secretary
January 22, 2013 JAN 2 5 :;:7413
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tim Walton, Manager
State Property Office
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
RECEIVED
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
,{�
Applicant: Paul and Bryan Irving FF''?013
Project Location: 209 Doxey Lane in Knotts Island, Currituck County I'TY
Proposed Project: Construct a bulkhead
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by 02/12/13 to 400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, NC 28557. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Ron Renaldi at [phone]. When
appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY: ;This>ce has no objection to the project as proposed.
This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
SIGNET;
1367 US 17:
Phone: 252-2
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
Nainally
eCarolina

t
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Paul & Bryan Irving
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: 209 Doxey Lane (off of HWY 615), Knotts Island,
Currituck County, adjacent to Knotts Island Bay.
Photo Index —
2006: 199-7015 (Q,R 3-4) 2000: 199-2372 (Q,R 3-4) 1995: 199-2086 (P,Q 15-16)
1989: 139-7 (J,K 8-9) 1984: 130-645 (H,I 5-6) 1978: 95-1460 (H,I 15-16)
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2908098 Y: 1016794
Lat/Long: N 36030.285' W 75054.611' Quadrangle: Knotts Island, NC, L.R.
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA / Dredge & Fill
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit— 1/10/2013
Was Applicant's Present - Yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received Complete — 1/16/2013
Office - Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Currituck County
Land Classification from LUP - Limited Service and Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: ES, EW, PTA
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Private Residential
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - Septic
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing — Single-family dwelling, small sheds
Planned - Bulkhead
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 2 to 3 feet/year
Source - Applicant
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: (AREA, square feet (SF)]
FILLED DISTURBED
(A) Shallow Bottom PTA, EW AEC's
±1,800 sf
(B) Estuarine Shoreline AEC
±6,165 sf
(D) Total Area Disturbed: ±7,965 sf
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SC Open to Shellfishing: No

Paul & Bryan Irving
Field Investigation Report
Page 2
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a bulkhead on a natural,
scalloped shoreline.
Project Setting
The site of the proposed development is located at 209 Doxey Lane (off of Highway 615),
Knotts Island, Currituck County, and is adjacent to Knotts Island Bay.
The property is ±91,318 sf (2.1 acres) in size and elevations are t8 ft above Normal Water
Level (NWL) near the center of the property and gradually slope down to an erosion
escarpment near the shoreline. Man-made features on the property include a single-family
dwelling and several small sheds. The upland area is vegetated with yard grasses, various
upland trees and shrubs. According to the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service's
Web Soil Survey, the soil on the property is made up of conetoe loamy sand. Based on
available information, there appears to be no archaeological sites on this property or nearby.
The property has ±570' of natural shoreline of which ±450' has an erosion escarpment that is
located 4' to 10' landward of NWL. The applicant's have indicated that the erosion rate on the
shoreline is 2 to 3 feet/year and that Hurricane Irene accelerated it. The erosion escarpment is
t4' in height at the southeastern property line and remains constant for t215' as you follow the
shoreline to the northwest. The escarpment then increases to t8' then gradually decreases to
t1' adjacent to wetlands. The remaining shoreline is vegetated by a patch of coastal wetlands
made up of giant cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides) and cattails (Typha spp.). Common reed
(Phragmites australis) was also observed growing within the coastal wetlands. The
northwestern half of the shoreline is also littered with dead/dying trees that have fallen due to
the erosion.
The immediate adjacent property to the west is a large agricultural parcel that has a natural
shoreline vegetated with wetlands and a small pier. The immediate adjacent properties to the
south contain single-family dwellings, bulkheaded shorelines and docking facilities.
The waters of the Knotts Island Bay are classified as SC by the Environmental Management
Commission and are not open to shellfish taking. Water depths within project area range from
0.1 feet to 1.5 feet below NWL. The bottom substrate within the project area is made up of fine
sands and shell midden that has fallen from the erosion escarpment. Submerged aquatic
Vegetation (SAV) was observed growing within the project area. SAV's identified include, but
are not limited to, water-milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritime).
Development Proposal
The applicant proposes to stabilize the shoreline by removing the trees that have fallen along
the shoreline and constructing t450' of wooden bulkhead. The proposed alignment will tie into
the corner of the existing bulkhead to the south and will run in a northwesterly direction to the
area of wetlands, at which point a return wall will be constructed. No wetland areas are
proposed to be disturbed. Approximately 260' of the bulkhead will be waterward of NWL with
the remaining 190' being at NWL. The proposed bulkhead alignment averages t4' waterward
of NWL with a maximum distance of t15' and will result in the filling of t1800 sf of shallow
water bottom. Water depths within this area average 0.8 ft. below NWL. It is estimated that
N

!/ Paul & Bryan Irving
Field Investigation Report
Page 3
SAV coverage within the project area is ±25% (±450 so with higher coverage waterward of the
proposed alignment. Upon bulkhead completion, clean backfill will be placed from the erosion
escarpment to the bulkhead from an offsite supplier.
Anticipated Impacts
• The construction of the bulkhead along the proposed alignment will result in the filling of
±1800 SF of Estuarine Waters and Public Trust Area AEC's with clean fill from an upland
source.
• The construction of the bulkhead along the proposed alignment will result in the placement
of ±53 cubic yards of fill material below NWL.
• Bulkhead installation, backfill and grading will result in ±6,165 sf of land disturbance within
the Estuarine Shoreline AEC.
Submitted by: Ron Renaldi
Date: 1 /18/2013

Narrative for Paul and Bryan I
Major Permit Application
GEIi./r1
INOV 2 6
L.jr
Project Location: The project is located at 2o9 Doxey Lane, at the southern
end of Knotts Island, North Carolina, 27950 / Currituck County, adjacent to
Knotts Island Bay, and contiguous to the Currituck Sound.
Existing Property Use and Characteristics: This property and adjacent
properties are used as residential and farm fields. This parcel is 91,317.8 sq ft / 2A
acres; with an existing single family residence, sheds and private septic system on
the property.
Upland Area: This property has a flat grade and is vegetated with upland
grasses, shrubs and large trees.
Shoreline Area: There is an existing timber bulkhead at the southeast end of the
property on the adjacent parcel; and a triangularly shaped mixed wetland area of
approximately 3,000 sq ft at the northwest end of the property. The other
adjacent riparian property shore lines do not have any man-made shoreline
stabilization features. There is an approximate aft. to 6ft high severe erosion
escarpment running from the existing bulkhead at the southeast end of this
property to the existing wetland area at the northwest end of this property.
There are no wetlands in this escarpment area.
Proposed Project Description: The project involves the construction of
approximately 45o fin. ft. of wood sheet pile bulkhead along the existing erosion
escarpment. The proposed bulkhead alignment will generally follow the existing
normal waterline (NWL) except in and immediately adjacent to the two washed
out areas at the south end of the project shoreline. The bulkhead will extend out
beyond the NWL line approximately 5ft to i5ft in and adjacent to the two washed
out areas in an effort to maintain as strait alignment as possible; and maintain
the structural integrity of the bulkhead. No wetlands are involved.
Purpose of Project: The bulkhead is necessary in order to stop the severe
erosion of the upland areas; and provide adequate storm and flood protection of
this property and existing and future improvements. The project will eliminate a
clearly visible source of sedimentation of Knotts Island Bay.
Sequence of Events and construction methods: Construct the bulkhead
and backfill; seed, fertilize, and mulch all disturbed areas.
Both mechanical and manual labor will be utilized.

Currituck County GIS Online Mapping
Communities
o Ayalon
❑ FYI - rchard L•n
o Barm
g`h�
9
O Benno
O Colnlock
T/j
O Corolla
>�. Marhn.Fa
O Currituck
✓//YC KnOdiIsland
•hurci I
O Grontly
OGregory
O Harbinger
O Jarvtburg
J
O Knott Wand
Wt y
O klamle
] Bruml yt
O Maple
O Mo k
qII��
Sauers•Ln G
O Point Harbor
1 S
O Poprgr Branch
O Po.VBII¢ Polbl
Q{ L
O $hawtom
Snow Goose•Ln m LL DoxeyL•n
o s11 e
g
o,
o snovtlen
>p
O spo
R
O Waterllly
W r;
Streets
8
Parcels
P.arker:Rd
County
bCurrituck
Background
r.
CANIDEN
jCHOSVAN
CURRITUCK
Rdonmar'Ln
_:DARE
GATES
PASOUOTANK
1 ml
PEROUIk1ANS
TYRRELL
WASHINGTON
Cunituck County GIS
This map should be used for general reference purposes only.
Currituck County assumes no legal liability for the information
(252)232.2o9a
vaww.eo.currituck.nc.us/Geographic-Information-Somices.cfm
shown on this map.

RECEIVED
l.a�' t- ZI
APPLICATION for 1ini' 2 6
Major Development Permit -- -
(Nit rer/teed 1211"ift)
_y
T2J
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. PrimaryApplicand Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (d applicable)
Applicant 1: Fast Name
Al UL
MI
Lest Name
I/TY/NS
Applicenl2, Fist Name
BRYAN
MI
Last Name
IRV/NS
Uadditional applicants, please aharh an sdddional page(s) with names Wed.
-
Mailing Address
PO Box
/53
City KNOT 75
IS1-41VD
State
Nr-
ZIP27950our
CURR/TUCK
Phone No.
252 429 33/9 exL
FAX No_
Street Address (if dMerent horn above)
city
State
ZIP
Email
2. Agent/ContractorInformation
Business Name
Agentl conbaclor 1: First Name
GARY
MI
last Name
PRICE
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Lest Name
Mailing Address
PO Box
nt
Cily
AVON
State
A/C.
ZIP
Z79lS
Phone No. 1
ZTZ - 305'43417 ea.
Phone No. 2
exL
FAX No.
ZS2-995 Y7B3
Contractor #
Street Address(ddifierent from above)
City
$Isla
ZIP
Email
AQHGrn-zgrF YoAoo. cor.-
<Form continues on back>

t
Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 4) APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be nhuitipte)
Street Address
State Rd. S
MOM ITUCK
ZD9 DOKEY IMIK
A//d
Subdivision Name
City KNOTTS
state
Zip
N/A
ISLAND
NZ7950
Phone No. A(/,a
Lot No.(s) (Amany, attach additional page with list) Vld
exL
I ,
a In vh" NC mrer basin is the project located?
b. Name of body ofwater nearest to proposed project
PAS&UOTANf
JUNTS ISLAND BAY
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
Natural []Manmade ❑Unknown
CURR/TUCK SDUND
e. Is proposed work within city Omits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, fist the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
Yes ❑No
work falls within.
CURRITUC:. CDUN71
4. Slte Description
a Total length of shoreline on the tract (fit)
b. Size of entbe tract (sq.fL)
570' a)
9h 317, 8
c. Size of individual lots) A//d
d. Approximate elevation of bad above NHW (ramlal high wafer) or
NWL (normal water levee
(lfmany lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
716, ❑NHW or 2WL
e. Vegetation on bad
UPLQAID WOODY.; LAWN6RGSSiAAID WETLAND3
f. Man-made features and uses now on trail
EY/ST/NG RESIDENCE AND SHEDS
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses a 'a to the proposed project site.
RESIDEAMAL AND FARMING
h. How does local government zone the tract?
h. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
RESIDENT.(LF
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
tJras ❑No ❑NA
j. Is the proposed activity, pan of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ENO
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? t yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes 036o ❑NA
If yes, by whore?
1. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Fonn continues on next page>

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 4)
APPLICATION for
ynt
Major Development Permit
m. () Are there wetlands on the she?
Mres ❑No
(i) Are tltere coastal wetlands on the site? I t'-' "'
t�fYes
(id) If yes to either (i) or (if) above, has a delineation been conducted?
,,]NNo
❑Yes Lhrvo
(Attach documentation, if available)
m Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
SEPTIC
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
WEfL
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems. NIA
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, m private use? ❑Commercial ❑PublidGovemment
Okitvate/Commumly
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operalions of the project when complete.
EROS!NNCONTRDCZ' PRIV4TC RESIDENCEI Nb LITHE. 09SR@T/DN5 PRDRTIED
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
hiRIAI6A!!CA - M. AILI% 66B41; EAaA0EaWA1P TRUCK) SORCD 011517E
d. List all development acdvrdw you propose.
B1/CM11EdD CDNSTRUCT!DN-1BACKrIWAIG
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, a both?
NEW WORK
I. Vyhat is the approximate total disturbed land area resutting Tian the proposed project? 51605 ffSq.Ft or ❑Acres
g. Wig the proposed project encroach on any pudic easement public accessway or other area EfYes WN. ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
.Sl1RFAC E SJEE J FLOW OVER VEGEMR00
Nb IWERV/0415 SURFACE PAOPMED
I. Will wastewater m stcrmwater be discharged into a wetland? ❑Yes gjlo [:]NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes []No ❑NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? Dyes []No EINA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal. AD 11E7LAAADS INWZ119D
<Form continues on bado

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
6. Additional Information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (Q are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A poject narafive.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view arid cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, dearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
beh~ work completed and proposed.
c A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims EOe to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR
I. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail- Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit coffvnerhbl on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management
Name CAROLS RICE, TRUSTCE 1212-PdIPKF.,R[fK�j;; t�16. PfroneNa 252 OS- 9
Address P.Q. BDY M/ a AWA/h NC, 2?9 l5 AKS 279.TO
Name R/ZW.cl y' a EMERIW Phmne No.
Address JZ IsRUAMLEY RC, &#6TZ A.fLAAW, N4 2?M
Name Phone No.
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, pemdtee, and issuing dates.
M/A
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization forth, t applicable.
i. W end damnation, If necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for pojads in acemdront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10). if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date //-7-2O17- Print Name 6ARY PR/CE
Signature
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
126CM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP-3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP-4 Structures Information

5
Form DCM MP-2
I
NOV 2 6 1
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet
Access
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
(excluding
(NLW or
Breakwater
shoreline
NWL)
bilization
Length
Width
Avg. Extsting
NA
NA
Final Project
NA
NA
Depth
11. EXCAVATION 01-his section not applicable
s. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or
cubic yards.
c. () Does the area to be excavated include coastal weaarWNmarsh
(CM, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL ❑None
(li) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
d. High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATEWL Whis section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area. b. Dimensions of disposal area.
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area? d. (I) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes ONO DNA ❑Yes ❑No [DNA
(ti) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner. (11) it yes, where?
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wettands/marsh I. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), ❑Yes []No ❑NA
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected. (iI) If yes. haw much wafer area is affected?
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ❑None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:

3.
SHORELINE STABILIZA
ON _
I i ❑This sedion not applicable
(if development is a wood groin
useAP-4 — SWM T
a.
Type of shoreline sfabil'rzation:
—
b.
E(Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑B
— Other.
C.
Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL
d. Maximum distancewaterward of NHW or NWL
41
/S'CAT WA 5A(&JT)
e.
Type of stabilization material:
f. (i) Has Mere been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
ZJWN CX&tS
�mmo/nths?
Lyres ❑No ❑NA
(it) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
Information.
Z'-3' la melts 0WER✓4714N)
g.
Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
h. Type of fill material.
Bulkhead bacfiill 118M Ripmp _
SAND
BreakwaterlSill Other
I.
Source of fill material.
!lPCdU� awS/TE
4. OTHER FILL ACTMTIES Ellhis section not applicable
(ExdLKkW Shoteiine Stabr7¢abon)
a. () Will fill material be brought to the site? ❑Yes ❑No ❑NA b. m Will fill material be placed in coastal "llandsimarsh (CM.
ItYes,
(6) Amount of material to be placed in the water
(III) Dimensions of fill area
(hr) Purpose of fill
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
LAWN GRASS
c. (i) WIII navigal ajd tionas be required as a result of the project?
❑Yes No tdNA
(It) if yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Date
Project Name
sunmergea aquatic vegemon (SAv), sneu bottom (Sw), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ❑None
(it) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas
b. What type of construction equipment will be
baddroe, or hydraulic dredge)?
54CKAAOEd 44MF TRUCK
d. O Will Wetlands be dossed in transporting equipment to project
site? ❑Yes UNo ❑NA
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
GAKY PRICE CFAle)
Applicant Name
Applicant Applicant S���

i
SECTION VIEW .',�KII �I(
MLERSaxa BACK r
' '��
3�,-�,7PROPOSEDNM—__,PILE8"ENX5
g' ON CENTER
_ —T I �
TIE RODS WX��
6'014 CENTER
PROPOSED FILING
N� LLNGTH PROPOSEDUG
a ON CENTER a ,"SHEETINGrXr
�"�" JAN 16 2013
NOTE: ALL TIMBER TREATED
AND ALL HARDWARE HD GALV.21
'' II
�Gj�'
I
/ I
/ I L_--
x / I EASEMEM
i
olk-
LLS
IWI
PROPOSED BULKHEAD AND BACKFILL FOR: I o
PAUL & BRYAN IRVING
(W.C. DOXEY ESTATE)
209 DOXEY LANE =
KNOTTS ISLAND, N.C., 27950
DATE: 10/11/12 SCALE: 1" = W
0
REVISED 01/10/13 60 p 60 t

N P¢
BOOK 12 0 6 PAGE 0 8 * 8
2 t O"
COASTAL 64Af`l i1Cn_7a'tC,i
Doc ID os/ia%zotatTozpBil?ia PM
Fee Amt: $3A29.00 page I of 3
Excise Tax: $517.00
Currituck County, NC
Charlene y Dowdy Register of Deeds
NOM'HCARouNAE)MESTAMPS RK 1206 PD
XITACHEO AND CANCEI I Fn s _a. 0p 8 38-840
EXECUTOR'S DEED
Prepared by and return to: THOMPSON & PUREZA, PA, ioi West Main Street, Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Tax Parcel: G07700000820000
State of North Carolina, County of Currituck
THIS EXECUTOR'S DEED made this 27tb day of June, 2012, by and between MARTHA L. BURNS,
Executrix of the Estate of William Colin Doxey, whose mailing address is 156 Lewark Lane, Knotts Island, NC
2795o (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), and BRYAN D. IRVING (a 1h undivided interest) and PAUL D.
IRVING and wife JOESEY M. IRVING (a 1h undivided interest as tenants by the entirety), whose mailing address
is 225 Doxey Lane, Knotts Island, NC 27950 (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Grantees"):
WHEREAS, Martha L Burns is the duly appointed and qualified Executrix of the Estate of William Colin
Doxey, and
WHEREAS, The Last Will and Testament of William Colin Doxey ("the Will") is duly probated and of
record in the Office of the Currituck County Clerk of Superior Court in File No. o9-E-114; and
WHEREAS, rl"EM FOUR of the Will authorizes, directs and empowers the Executor to sell all of the
property of William Colin Doxey, including the property hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, the said-Eke-cnTrik has agreed to -sell- the property hereinafter described to Grantees upon
_a „h terms as in her opinion are most advantageous to those interested in the Estate of William Colin Doxey.
NOW, 'THEREFORE, for and consideration of the sum of TWO HUNDRED FIFTY-EIGHT
THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($258,5oo.00), receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the said
MARTHA L. BURNS, Executrix of the Estate of William Colin Doxey, does by these present sell and convey unto
Grantees, their heirs and assigns, that certain lot or parcel of land situated in Fruitville Township, Currituck
County, North Carolina and more particularly described as follows:
See "EXHIBIT A" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Per N.C.G.S. §105-317.2, the property herein described does not include the primary residence of Grantor.
This document was prepared by David R. Pureza, a licensed North Carolina attorney, without title examination,
closing or tax advice. Delinquent taxes, if any, to be paid by the closing attorney to the County Tax Collector upon
disbursement of closing proceeds.
T)2ANSFER TAX AMOUNT QQ
DAMCOLLECI'OR - (0 - 2 20i 2 -V2-T-

BOOK I206PAGE0840 i
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid tract or parcel of land to said Grantees and their heirs and
assigns forever, in as full and ample manner as MARTHA L. BURNS, as Executrix of the Estate of Williams Colin
Doxey, is directed, authorized and empowered to convey the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said MARTHA L. BURNS, Executrix of the Estate of William Colin
Doxey, has hereunto set her hand and seal the day and year firs`tt written above�.! Wl (X �O
I &/1 (SEAL)
MARTHA L. BURNS, Executrix of the Estate of
William Colin Doxey
State of North Carolina - County of Carrituck
I, the undersigned Notary public of the County and State aforesaid, certify that _MARTHA I- BURNS,
Executrix of the Estate of William Colin Doxey, personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due
execution of the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein expressed.
0,11#lp es my hand and Notarial stamp or seal this 27& day of June, 20i2.
\D R' PU9���''a
%A0Tg9 y�y�

.�
i
BOOK 12 0 6 PmE 0 g 3,9
IwgIiIt��r�
A certain tract or parcel of land in Currhuck County, State of North Carolina, adjoining the lands, now or formerly
of Isaac Doxey and others, and bounded as follows, viz:
Bounded on the Notch by Mill Cove; on the East by East Bay; on the South by other land now or formerly of Isaac
Doxey: and on the West by other lands now or formerly of Lssac Doxey; containing one and one-half acres, more
or less, and being a parcel of land known as Mill Point located at the approximate northeast comer of the tract of
land now or formerly known as the Ansell Farm purchased by Isaac Doxey from Walter Capps by deed recorded in
the Public Registry for Currituck County. Said buds are on Knotts Island.
The same being all that certain lot or parcel of land located in Fmitville Township, Currituck County, North
Carolina, being more commonly known and designated as tog Doxey lane in Knotts Island, North Carolina which
is identified as tax parcel 007700000820000. This tract of land is known as Mill Point and is bounded on the
north by Mill Cove and on the east by Knotts Island Bay, also known as East Bay, and is further described in the
deed recorded in Deed Book 77, Page 218, Currituck County Public Registry.

� �,yy3 �DENiB ' � FEB 0 7 2013
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management DMF- .ABIT ROT
4;4ECT
ION
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director SecreFa .
MEMORANDUM
FEB 12 2013
TO: Ms. Anne Deaton/Kevin Hart
Division of Marine Fisheries DMF-HABITAT PROTECTION
FROM: Doug Huggett Respond to Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator Morehead City Office
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013 (at Ear LED
�'�f'!/�fI'3
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by .18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Signed Date 201
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX 252-94M478 Internet: www.nCCoastalmanagament.net
An Equal eppoduniq l Affirmative Acfion Employer

Pat McCrory
Governor
w�
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Braxton C. Davis John E. Skvarla, III
Director
MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
Secretary
TO: Mr. John Thayer
JAN 3 0 2013
District Planner
Division of Coastal Management
TT) CITY
FROM: Doug Huggett
Respond to Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Morehead City Office
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed. Nd CON�` i -/1 AA
-4 IIlWdA,2a '� A4 4,-
This office has no comment on the proposed project. L, t
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Si d %�'
11
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: 252-946-Wl \ FAX: [phone] Internet: www.ncooastalmanagement.net
An Equal opportunity 1 Afirtnabve Acbon Employer

A��
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory
Braxton C. Davis
Governor
Director MT
TO: Ms. Patti Fowler
NCDENR
Division of Environmental Health
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
01�-'
Natural Resources
f
JAN 3 0 2013
Shellfish Sanitation 6 recreational
Water "-�
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Respond to Doug Huggett
Morehead City Office
RECEIVED
--'052013
," 44-A^FTD CITY
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
XThis office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Signed ir4kLi;r Date 1/31/i3
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.ncooastaimanagement.net
An Equal opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

NCDENR Q G-
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis U
Governor DirectorI x
MEMORANDUM TQ �' 'Cy
TO:
Hyde County Building Inspector
.�
Mr. Jerry Hardison
FROM:
Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Coastal Management Division
Morehead City Office
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
RECEIVED
DATE:
28 January 2013
SUBJECT:
CAMA Application Review
F FB 0 8 2013
APPLICANT:
Audubon North Carolina
PCM-Vl?D C'TY
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. W7his
ropnate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY office has no objection to the project as proposed.
This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal opportunity 1 Afimuilin Action Employer

W4L ME111M A
TO.,
.DATE:l
NoM Carolina
NCDENR
n'bf C68tal MgQpgdritqpt
8'rax(on.G.Davis
:,
Direddr-
PUMORANDOV'
!Ms, - R - e-nee Gledhill-Eitrly
NCDcp.irtipent..oi'tuttlikal,R,csdurces'
Archives &I-Tistor',,B ild' �y' ul In
Doug ITuggqft
Major -Pciiiiir9Proces§ifiE ' �Cciordinat&
,Coastal NI . ana2ei . nent Division
400'tornmerce-Avenue,
,Morchdad,City ,NC'28557
'28January 20,13,
SUINE�CT; ';CAMA.Application;RdAeW
Audubon N orth,Caroli no:
F"tespo"'to Doug ug Hugged.*
Morehead ,c ty,Offide: ,
I reduce
(W"
erosion and'provid6 oysteriffishery habitat.
PleaseAndicaid bel6wyour position or'viewpoint-on the propbsed,orqj6d and.rgturn tbisform by Is-,
rebruidli -piease -Ve tiox�ell at 252-9483854 ifyou liaO any qudstions-regar trigilie
awny
propoS�ed'v VbenapprqpTi�tei,in,ctepth,romrnedfs,.N�itli.s p 0
r9ject ulp rtingdatziare,reque ted.:,
REPLY Tliis-6ffl&d liar no,6b* .....th" d
_Umfion,to.. eproiect.asptoposc
This, orrime,has. no -comment on the proposed,projecL propq� prqjp� �ou y d hanges
This office approic's�6fihe: ed i'.' I Af thexeco-mir-h-en c :c
are incorporated.. See ,atwcheld.'
This office ob_�ectsao the proposed project forreasons-described irc c attached.
comments..
,
Signed
�&AVi - Date, 13
- IQA-16—
AMA-. 91,3;,,

NCDENR �G
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director
. 13 . D1. 2 `A . D I MEMORANDUM
TO: Mrs. Maria Dunn
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Respond to Doug Huggett
Morehead City Office
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Signed Date 2113/4213
,,�2029311 1 1c
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal opportunity \ Affimia6ve Action Employer

r
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder
Governor Director
February 7, 2013
MEMORANDUM:
To: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
From: Joey White, Environmental Specialist, PWSS/WaRO
Subject: CAMA Application Review
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
John E. Skvarla III
Secretary
Project Location: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles northwest of
Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in
the Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to construct 9 -20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce erosion
and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
REPLY: X This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
Comments:
• Proposed project /should not impact any potable water sources. No objection to the project as proposed.
SIGNED l DATE
RECEIVED
FEB 12 2011
Public Water Supply Section — Jessica C. Godreau, P.E., 3CEE, Chief
Washington Regional Office DCNI-N"One
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 NOrthCarOftila
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]Internet: www.ncwater.org/pws/ Naturally
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: Audubon North Carolina
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5
miles northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
Photo Index - 2006: N/A 2000: N/A 1995: N/A
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,882,000 Y: 504,000
Portsmouth Quad. (upper right corner)
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/Dredge and Fill
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 18 July 2012
Was Applicant Present - Yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 18 January 2013
Office - Washington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Hyde County
Land Classification - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: EW, PTA
(D) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Private
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - None
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - 400' oyster bag marsh toe revetment and nonconforming enclosed.
structure on pilings.
Planned - 9 - Oyster shell patch reef/sills.
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 3' average (applicant reported).
HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Non -Vegetated Wetlands
18,000 ftz(Oyster
patch reef/sill)
(Pamlico Sound Bottom)
(c) Other
Uplands
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 18,000 ft2 (0.41 acres)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SA HQW
Open: Yes
RECEi— cD
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct 9 — 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to
reduce erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat. FEB 12 2013
DCM IN*m CITY

Audubon North Carolina
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Pamlico Sound
Hyde County
Project Setting
The 2.4 acre project site is the nearshore area adjacent the western shore of Beacon
Island, a 7.6 acre marsh island located in the eastern Pamlico Sound 2.5 miles northwest of
Ocracoke Net between Blair and Wallace channels near Ocracoke Village in Hyde County,
North Carolina. The entire Island is a Coastal Wetland marsh vegetated with marsh grass species
mainly Mina. including S tina Alterniflora and S patens. The marsh is growing
on a peat substrate 1' to 1.5' above the normal water level (NWL). The vertical erosion
escarpment around the perimeter has experienced varying amounts of overwash which has
deposited sand forming an overwash berm of varying heights. The island is an important nesting
site for brown pelicans, one of nine sites in North Carolina In 2011 the site supported 423
nesting pairs representing 9% of the total nesting pairs in North Carolina. There is a
nonconforming pile supported enclosed structure with windows and a door on the northwest tip
of the island.
The NC Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) Bottom Mapping Program investigated the
nearshore area on the western side of Beacon Island from 11/29/12 through 12/3/12(See 6
December 2012 Beacon Island Bottom Survey Report). The purpose of this investigation was to
map and quantify bottom habitat type boundaries and assess the densities of shellfish and
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). DMF agreed to conduct the survey during a pre -
application scoping meeting held on 8 November 2012 in the Washington Regional Office. The
nearshore area (within 400' of NWL) along the western shoreline of Beacon Island is
characterized by the Division of Marine Fisheries Bottom Mapping Program, as_ subtidal hard
sand substrate. Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), mainly eel grass Zostera marina was
characterized as very sparse. The bottom substrate within 100' of the NWL was characterized as
a hard vegetated shell consisting of sand and shell with some eel grass rhizomes. The sparseness
of SAV may have been due to the fact that the survey was conducted in late November. The site
is also subject to strong tidal currents due to its proximity to Ocracoke Inlet. Shellfish densities
were greatest within 50' of the NWL and consisted mainly of sublegal oysters with an average
density of 67.9/m2. Clam densities in this area were low with the highest sample containing 3
/m2. Shellfish were sparse or non-existent in the subtidal hard sandy substrate from beyond 50'
offshore the NWL.
The Pamlico Sound adjacent to the project area is designated as Coastal Waters by the
Marine Fisheries Commission, SA HQW by the Environmental Commission, and itmcl Walo
shellfish harvest.
Project Description
Hi 12 'nta
The North Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF) has formed a partnership with the owner
of Beacon Island, Audubon North Carolina, to construct a series of patch oyster reefs in the
nearshore area adjacent the western shore of Beacon Island for the purpose of abating erosion
occurring along the western shore of the island as well as to provide the associated fishery
habitat and water quality benefits. The NCCF has received federal funding for the project from
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) through the Southeast Aquatic
Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries. As a part of the erosion control

Audubon North Carolina
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Pamlico Sound
Hyde County
Page Two
measures, the NCCF constructed 400' of marsh toe revetment out of oyster bags during the fall
of 2012. The Division of Coastal Management issued CAMA/Dredge and Fill General Permit
no. 60088-B on 20 July 2012 authorizing the construction of the marsh toe revetment. The
project was completed on 11 November 2012. NCCF proposes to construct a series of 9 —±20'
wide x 100' long oyster reefs constructed out or recycled oyster shell. The patch reefs will be
constructed in the 2.4 acre area mapped by DMF in water depths that range from 1' to 4' deep.
The reefs will be constructed with a profile not to exceed 1.5' in vertical height above the sand
substrate. The reef construction will start 30' offshore of the NWL in three rows of three reefs
spaced 50' apart with a maximum distance of 200' offshore the NWL. The recycled oyster shell
will be deployed from a shallow draft barge by an excavator. PVC pipe with reflective tape will
be placed at each corner of the 2.4 acre site.
Once constructed the oyster patch reefs will be designated as a shellfish management area
or sanctuary by DMF for four years for the establishment of the oyster reefs and to allow annual
grant required monitoring of the reefs for oyster recruitment and habitat utilization. The
monitoring will be undertaken by NCCF volunteers. After four years, half of the patch reefs will
remain a shellfish management area pending annual approval by DMF to satisfy a NOAA grant
requirement.
Anticipated Impacts
The construction of the patch oyster reef system will result in the filling of 0.41 acres
(18,000 ft2) of Pamlico Sound bottom. Based on the bottom survey conducted by the DMF the
filling impacts will not affect significant areas of SAV or shellfish. There will be some localized
short-term turbidity during placement of the recycled oyster shell.
Steve Trowell — Washington Regional Office — 24 January 2013
RECEi rED
FFR 12 2013
DCM-WID CITY

DO MP-1
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
(last revised 12!27!06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (it applicable)
Audubon North Carolina
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
I
Last Name
Walker
Golder
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
If additional applicants, please adach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
7741 Market Street, Unit D
Wilmington
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28411
USA
910-686-7527 ext.
910-686-7587
Street Address (ifdl%rent from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
North Carolina Coastal Federation
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Lexia
M
Weaver
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Todd
Miller
PO Box
City
State
Mailing Address
NC
3609 Hwy 24 (Ocean)
I
Newport
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
ZIP
ZIP
252.393 - 8185 ext.
252 - 646.2408 ext.
FAX No.
Contractor #
252 393 7508
Street Address (ifdtlferent from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail], [e-mail]
�rvn
<Form continues on back> FEB 12 2013
252.008-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.necoasta l management ."-}fliDCTTp

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Hyde
off Hwy 12, Beacon Island, +/- 3 miles NW of Ocracoke Inlet
Hwy 12
Subdivision Name
city
State
Zip
N/A
Ocracoke
NC
27960-
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (d many, attach additional page with list)
- - ext.
,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Tar -Pamlico
Pamlico Sound
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
Pamlico Sound
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
❑Yes ®No
work falls within.
State waters.
4.
Site Description
a.
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
2.264
332,000 (7.6 acres)
c.
Size of individual lolls)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
n/a,
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
2 ft. ❑NHW or ®NWL
e.
Vegetation on tract
Tidal marsh and herbaceous upland/grassland
f.
Man-made features and uses now on tract
A duck blind is present on the northwest section of the island that is only sometimes used by Audubon North Carolina to
perform their bird surveys. Several section of oyster shell bag marsh toe revelments totalling 393.5 linear ft. were
constructed along the western shoreline of the island in 2012 (CAMA General Permit No.60088-attached to the project
narrative).
g.
Identify and describe the existing land uses a latent to the proposed project site.
The surrounding waters are public trust waters and are used for multiple recreational and commercial use, i.e. fishing and
boat transportation. Adjacent to Shell Castle and North Rock.
h.
How does local government zone the tract?
I. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
NIA, land use is designated "wildlife and nature
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
conservation and research'
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j.
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k.
Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, by whom?
I.
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
_
F.C:.iVFn
<Form continues on next page>
FEB 12 2013
252-808-2808 :: 1.888-41RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.n MFM4 MD C;TY

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? NYes []No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? NYes []No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes NNo
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
None
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
None
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
None
5. Avdvitfas and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial NPubliclGovemment.
❑Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
This project will create up to 9 patch oyster reefs using recycled oyster shells just offshore of the western side of Beacon
Island (see Project Narrative and Essential Fish Habitat Assesment). The patch oyster reefs will be constructed within a 2.4
acre area (106,000 sq. ft.) but will cumulatively only disturb/cover 0.41 acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of sand/mud estuarine bottom
that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. This habitat restoration activity will help to prevent and reduce erosion
along the shoreline of Beacon Island and will also provide valuable habitat for wildlife, finfish and shellfish. The recycled
oyster shells will provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in these traditionally productive waters, thereby
increasing oyster biomass and broodstock (increased larvae production). The established oysters will then help to filter the
water, thereby improving the water quality and clarity of Pamlico Sound. Once constructed, the patch oyster reefs will be
designated as a shellfish management area or research sanctuary by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries for four years to
allow the oyster reefs to establish and to allow grant required monitoring of the reefs. Half of the patch reefs will then be open
to harvest after the four years, the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management area/research
sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
The patch oyster reeefs will be built by a private contractor. Recycled oyster shells will be placed on a barge and deployed
using an excavator (also loaded on the barge). Each patch o'tyster reef will be constructed to be approximately 100 ft. long,
20 ft. wide and will not exceed 1.5 ft. in height. The reefs will be placed approximately 50 fi. apart from one another on
bare/sand bottom that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. The barge and excavator will be stored offsite on the
mainland at a stockpile location. See Project Narrative and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment.
d. List all development activities you propose.
-Creation of up to 9 patch oyster reeefs using recycled oyster shells on the western side of Beacon Island.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? New work.
I. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 0.41 ❑Sq.Ft or NAcres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area NYes ❑No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
NIA REC Val)
252.808.2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.netD"4-),,`IDCITY

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
I. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland?
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water?
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed?
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
�o......nn hartd
6. AdditionalInformation
in addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in orderfor the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (0 are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to property prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give lats, drawings to distinguish
proposed project. Is any portion already cgnplete7 If previously auMorized work, cleariy Indicate on mtus —of the
aps, p 9 9
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims 8tle to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
- Phone No.
Name WA
Address
Phone No,
Name NIA
Address
Phone No.
Name NIA
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permiltee, and issuing dates.
CAMA/Dredge 8 Fill General Permit No. 60088
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
I. Weiland delineation, 9 necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Poliby Act (N.C.G.S. 113A with), e necessary. n III the projectinvolves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
T Certcation and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit Issued In response to this application well allow only the development described In the applicabon
The project will be subject to the conditions and restr coons contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter o t the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date _January 16, 2013 Print Name _Lexia Weaver RECENED
Signature 4���
FEB 12 2013
252-808-2808 :: 1-888.4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net
CITY

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 5 of 5)
APPLIGAI IVn"'
Major Development Permit
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP-3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP-4 Structures Information
252.808-2808 :: 1-a88-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP-2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
Access
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
Breakwater
(excluding
shoreline
(NLW or
NWL)
stabilization
Length
900 ft.
Width
20.0 ft.
Avg. Existing
NA
NA
aft.
Depth
Final Project
NA
NA
1.5 ft.
Depth
1 EXCAVATION 0This section not applicable I
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
c. (1) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlandstmarsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ❑None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
d. High -ground excavation in Cubic yards.
2, DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ®This section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area.
C. (1) Do you claim tale to disposal area?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(it) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW _ ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL _ ❑None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
Dimensions of disposal area.
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes []No ❑NA
(a) If yes, where?
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(a) If yes, how much water area is affected?
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www nccoastalmanaaement.net revised: 12/26/06

Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 3)
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
(if development is a wood groin, use MP-4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization:
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑Breakwater/Sill ®Other: patch
oyster reefs
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: Reefs will be
constructed offshore of Beacon Island, beginning 30 ft. from NWL.
e. Type of stabilization material:
recyled oyster shells
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill _ Riprap
Breakwater/Sill _ Other 18 000
i. Source of fill material.
recycled oyster shells from shucking houses.
❑ This section not applicable
b. Length: 900 ft.
Width: 20.0'ft.
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 200 ft.
f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
SYes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
Ranging from 1 to 5 ft. due to wind and waves from natural
forces. (Personal observation, NC Coastal Federation)
In. Type of fill material.
recycled oyster shells
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES 0This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ❑Yes ❑No ❑NA b. (1) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW),
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water
(III) Dimensions of fill area _
(iv) Purpose of fill -
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
Material will be placed on estuarine bottom and will shift slightly
after construction. Once it settles, it will remain on site.
c. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
Was [:]No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Each of the four comers of the 2.4 acre area will be posted with
PVC pipes containing reflective tape.
suDmergee aquatic vegetation tanv/, snen ocaom kao/, or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ❑None
(it) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
excavator mounted on barge
d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? ❑Yes SNo ❑NA
(il) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
WA
RECE,, ED
January, 16, 2013 Project Name ' C
Date
Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Lexia Weaver (authorized agent for Walker
Applicant Name
252-608-2808 :: 1-888.4RCOAST :: www.necoastaimanagement.net revised: 12/26/06

Form DCCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 3 of 3)
Aga& lce a 4Lg4
Applicant Signature
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www nccoastalmanaaement.net
RECEIVED
FEB 12 2013
POV-7,"D C7Y
revised: 12/26106

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Plan View of Proposed Patch Oyster Reefs
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
Authorized Agent: North Carolina Coastal Federation
Date: January 16, 2013
e�
Water Depths at N W L
2, 1
bl,
C

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Cross Section View of Proposed Patch Oyster Reefs
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
Authorized Agent: North Carolina Coastal Federation
Date: January 16, 2013
Approximate width of the
base of the proposed oyster
reefs = 10-30' (depending
upon site conditions).
Approximate height of the
proposed oyster reefs = 12-
18" (depending upon site
conditions).
NWL

Project Narrative
Title: Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Applicant: Audubon North Carolina
Authorized Agent: North Carolina Coastal Federation
Date: January 16, 2012
Summary
Federal funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization (NOAA) through the
Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries was awarded
to the North Carolina Coastal Federation to construct patch oyster reefs in partnership with
Audubon North Carolina at Beacon Island located in Hyde County in Pamlico Sound,
approximately 3.5 miles southwest of Ocracoke Island, NC (350 5' 53.01" N, 760 2' 49.99" W,
Figure 1).
Figure 1. Location of Beacon Island.
Background
The remote 7.6-acre Beacon Island hosts a sanctuary that is one of only nine nesting sites for
brown pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) in the state (Figure 2). In 2011, the island supported 423
nesting pairs of pelicans or 9% of the North Carolina population. The buds, whose available
habitat has been rapidly disappearing in recent years, depend on the island's shore. But that
shoreline is also diminishing annually due to erosion and the loss of salt marsh habitat from the
increased frequency of tropical storms and hurricanes and boat wake activity (Figure 2). The
waters adjacent to the island were also historically rich in oysters, however, over time, harvest
pressure, disease and declines in water quality have reduced this important substrate that allows
new oyster colonies to form.
RECEIVED
FEB 12 2013
DCM-MUD CITY

Figure 2. Left. A newborn pelican at Beacon Island. Right. The eroding Beacon Island shoreline.
To address these issues and help restore the eroding salt marsh habitat as well as to create oyster
and fish habitat just offshore of the island, the North Carolina Coastal Federation and the
landowner, Audubon North Carolina, received funding from TogetherGreen, an Audubon/Toyota
Alliance, NOAA/Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership and NOAA/Restore America's
Estuaries. Through these grants, the federation and its partners are using inventive coastal
restoration techniques to create a series of living shorelines around the island that will create
valuable habitat and slow erosion.
On July 20, 2012, a CAMA General Permit was received to create eight oyster shell bag marsh
toe revetments totaling up to 411 linear ft. along the western shoreline of the island to prevent
further erosion and create habitat (Figure 3). The CAMA General Permit is attached to this
narrative. Construction of these revetments began in late August 2012 and a total of 393.5 linear
ft. of oyster shell bag marsh toe revetment were constructed by November 12 (Figure 4). The
bags have remained in place, despite several storms that have affected the area, including
Hurricane Sandy.
Figure 3. Locations
of permitted oyster
shell bag marsh toe
revetments at Beacon
Island.

Y-
Figure 4. Several of the constructed oyster shell bag marsh toe revetments at Beacon Island at low tide.
Project Description
In order to create additional oyster reef habitat in the waters surrounding Beacon Island, a total
of nine patch oyster reefs (0.41 acres) are proposed to be constructed within a 2.4 acre area to the
west of the island using recycled oyster shells (Figure 5). The coordinates of the four comers
outlining the 2.4 acre project area are:
• Northwest corner: 35' 5.902'N, 76° 2.910'W
• Northeast corner: 35° 5.913N, 76° 2.871'W
• Southwest corner: 35' 5.824N,16' 2.863'W
• Southeast corner: 35° 5.842N, 76° 2.828'W
atvE
Figure 5. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island within the 2.4 acre project area (red pins).
F F B 12 2013
DCM-WI MCITY

0
These locations were selected following a thorough assessment of the waters surrounding
Beacon Island on September 25, 2012 to determine the presence of seagrass and to characterize
bottom type. The project area is characterized by subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in depth
from 0 to 4 ft. Implementation of this project is not expected to cause any significant adverse
impacts to any species.
The patch oyster reefs will provide habitat for finfish and shellfish. The recycled oyster shells
will also provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in these traditionally productive
waters. Once established, the oysters will help to filter nutrients and pollutants, and thereby
improve the water quality of Pamlico Sound.
Restoration Methods and Techniques:
The patch oyster reefs will be similar to those that the federation has constructed at Jones Island
in the White Oak River in Onslow County, NC (Figure 6). Recycled oyster shells will be loaded
onto privately contracted barges and deployed using an excavator that will also be loaded on the
barge (Figure 7).
Figure 6. Example of patch oyster reefs at low tide at Jones Island in the White Oak River.
Figure 7. Example of an excavator deploying oyster shells from a barge to create patch oyster reefs.

01
Each of the proposed patch oyster reefs will be approximately 100 ft. long, 20 ft. wide and will
not exceed 18 inches in height (Figure 8). The reefs will be placed approximately 50 ft. apart
from one another on bare sand/mud bottom that does not contain seagrass or other shellfish. The
nine proposed patch oyster reefs will cumulatively only disturb 0.41 acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of
sand/mud bottom and will be located over an area of 2.4 acres (106,0p0 sq. ft.).
MHW
Approximate. width
of the base of the
created oyster reef =
10-30'(depending
upon site conditions)
Approx. height of the
created oyster reef =
12-18" (depending
upon site conditions)
Figure 8. Conceptual diagram of the proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island.
Previously constructed patch oyster reefs at Jones Island have successfully recruited numerous
juvenile and adult oysters and are providing valuable habitat to a variety of commercially and
recreationally important fmfish and shellfish (Figure 9). Because of the natural presence of
oysters at Beacon Island (Figure 10), these same results are expected there.
Figure 9. New oysters growing on one of the previously constructed patch oyster reefs at Jones Island. MWED
was taken only 15 months after deployment.

Figure 10. A natural oyster reef near Beacon Island at low tide.
Once constructed, the patch oyster reefs will be designated as a shellfish management area or
research sanctuary by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries for four years to allow the oyster
reefs to establish and to allow annual grant required monitoring of the reefs for oyster
recruitment and habitat utilization. Half of the patch reefs will then be open to harvest after the
four years, the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management
area/research sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C.
Division of Marine Fisheries.
w
c

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Proposed Project
The proposed project continues efforts made by the North Carolina Coastal Federation to restore
the eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) in coastal North Carolina. Federal funding from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization (NOAA) through the Southeast Aquatic
Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries was awarded to the Federation
to construct patch oyster reefs in partnership with Audubon North Carolina at Beacon Island (350
5' 53.01" N, 760 2' 49.99" W) located in Hyde County in Pamlico Sound, approximately 3.5
miles southwest of Ocracoke Island, NC (Figure 1). Audubon North Carolina is the landowner
and the federation is their authorized agent.
Figure 1. Location of Beacon Island.
RECEIVED
D-M-%. "•D ,^rry
The remote 7.6-acre Beacon Island hosts a sanctuary that is one of only nine nesting sites for
brown pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) in the state. In 2011, the island supported 423 nesting
pairs of pelicans or 9% of the North Carolina population. The birds, whose available habitat has
been rapidly disappearing in recent years, depend on the island's shore. But that shoreline is also
diminishing annually due to erosion and the loss of salt marsh habitat from the increased
frequency of tropical storms and hurricanes and boat wake activity. The waters adjacent to the
island were also historically rich in oysters, however, over time, harvest pressure, disease and
declines in water quality have reduced this important substrate that allows new oyster colonies to
form.
The purpose of the patch oyster reefs is to provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in
these traditionally productive waters. Once established, the oysters will help to filter nutrients
and pollutants, and thereby improve the water quality of Pamlico Sound. The patch oyster reefs

will also provide habitat for finfish and shellfish and help to reduce erosion of the island's
shoreline.
A total of nine shallow patch oyster reefs, covering 0.41 acres are proposed to be constructed
within a 2.4 acre project area to the west of Beacon Island using recycled oyster shells (Figure
2). The coordinates of the four comers outlining the 2.4 acre project area are:
• Northwest corner: 35° 5.902N, 760 2.9101W
• Northeast comer: 35° 5.913N, 760 2.871'W
• Southwest corner: 35° 5.824N, 760 2.8631W
• Southeast comer: 35° 5.842N, 76° 2.828'W
Figure 2. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island within the 2.4 acre project area (red pins).
The project area was selected following a qualitative assessment of water depths, bottom type
and presence of seagrass around the island that was performed by the federation in summer 2012.
The western side of the island was chosen for the construction of the patch oyster reefs as it is
much shallower than the eastern side and experiences lower wind and wave energy. It is
characterized by intertidal and subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in depth from 0 to 4 feet. A
few small patches of seagrass exist within the project area and will be avoided during patch
oyster reef construction. Other shellfish (i.e., clams) were not observed within the project area. A
recent shellfish survey was performed by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries within the
project area and will be used to guide the exact placement of the patch oyster reefs so as not tokfCEIVED
cover any existing shellfish resources. This survey is included with the permit application.
FEB 12 2013
DCV-511`11) CITY

Methodoloav
The waters surrounding Beacon Island have adequate levels of oyster larval recruitment and
settlement as well as nekton and epifauna utilization. The patch oyster reefs are designed to
further enhance larvae recruitment and settlement, water flow and transport of oxygen and food
for the oysters, habitat provision and other ecosystem services. The design will also allow for
protection of the island's shoreline.
Prior to reef construction, the federation will mark the boundary of the 2.4 acre project area as
well as the patch oyster reef locations with PVC posts according to the project design. Oyster
shells will be purchased from shucking houses and transported by truck to a stockpile location on
Ocracoke Island. Project contractors will load the reef material onto small, shallow draft barges.
The barges will travel to the project site where the contractors will spread the shells into the reef
locations with the use of an excavator.
Each of the proposed patch oyster reefs will be constructed to be approximately 100 ft. long, 20
ft. wide and will not exceed 18 inches in height (Figure 3). The reefs will be placed
approximately 50 ft. apart from one another on bare sand/mud bottom that does not contain
seagrass or shellfish. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs will cumulatively only disturb 0.41
acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of sand/mud bottom and will be located over an area of 2.4 acres (106,000
sq. ft.).
Approximate. width
of the base of the
created oyster reef =
10-30'(depending
upon site conditions)
Approx. height of the
created oyster reef =
12-18" (depending
upon site conditions)
Figure 3. Conceptual diagram of the proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island.
Using its flat bottom boats, the federation will monitor reef construction activities to ensure that
project design specifications are met. Upon the satisfactory completion of the reef material
deployment, the federation will place signage on the project area indicating their designation by
the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries as either a shellfish research sanctuary or a shellfish
management area for four years to allow the oyster reefs to establish and grant required
monitoring of the reefs. Half of the patch reefs will then be open to harvest after the four years,
the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management area/research
sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C. Division ofRECOMD
FEB 12 2013
DCM-MHD MY

Marine Fisheries. Post project monitoring will then begin according to the monitoring schedule
(see Appendix A).
Previous monitoring of federation restored oyster reefs in North Carolina indicates that they
provide oyster habitat during the first spatfall season and that recruitment may be heavy
depending upon larval availability and seasonal fluctuations. Oysters generally reach maturity in
two to three years and the reefs will provide oyster habitat for as long as they exist, since new
oysters will continue to attach onto previous oyster shell layers. Lifecycle estimates of the
individual oysters are highly variable, and are not impacted by the project, but by natural
predation, oyster diseases and pollution. Monitoring of previously created federation reefs also
showed that they provide habitat and are used by a variety of finfish during the first year. Again,
the reefs will provide habitat for finfish for as long as the reefs exist. Since the reefs are formed
from oyster shells, there is no known limit to the structure lifetime.
Project Background
Oyster reefs are one of the most threatened habitats in the world (Beck et al. 2009). As the
primary intertidal and subtidal reef -building species along the east coast of the United States, the
eastern oyster has declined more than 90 percent from historic levels. Worldwide, functional
extinction (greater than 99 percent loss) of oyster reefs in estuaries is common (Beck et al. 2009)
and habitat losses exceed levels reported for more well-known coral reef, mangrove and seagrass
habitats. Both human activities and natural phenomena including over -harvest, disease, coastal
development and habitat disturbance have affected oyster distribution and abundance, as well as
contributed to oyster habitat losses (Lenihan and Peterson 1998, Coen and Luckenbach 2000,
Luckenbach et al. 1999, Breitburg et al. 2000).
In 2007, NOAA's Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team conducted a status review (EOBRT
2007). The review determined that oyster harvest along the east coast of the United States is only
2 percent of the peak historical harvest and that oyster restoration and enhancement efforts are
"necessary to sustain populations" in about half of the estuaries in the middle and south Atlantic
Ocean coast. The historical oyster harvest in North Carolina is showing significant decline
(Street et al. 2005), and they are currently listed as a species of concern. Estimates of historical
acreage of oyster reefs compared to current levels determined through N.C. Division of Marine
Fisheries Substrate Mapping Program, suggest a 50 percent decline in oyster reef habitat in
North Carolina.
Once valued primarily as a food resource, oysters are now recognized as ecosystem engineers
(Jones et al. 1994). Oyster reefs are regarded as one of the key structural elements within
southeast estuaries. Reefs create complex habitats which are used by fish, crustaceans and
bivalves that include commercial and recreational species as well as other invertebrates, birds
and mammals (Zimmerman et al. 1989; Wenner et al. 1996; Coen et al. 1999; Coen and
Luckenbach 2000, Meyer and Townsend 2000). Oyster reefs also offer critical habitat for oyster
populations, providing preferred substrate (oyster shell) for larval settlement (Marshall 1995;
Kennedy et al. 1996; DMF 2008). Oysters can improve water quality and clarity by filtering
large quantities of water. One mature oyster can filter approximately 200 liters of water per day.
(Nelson et al. 2004; Newell 2004; Grizzle et al. 2008). Therefore, observed declines in oyster
populations not only affect the resource but are also closely associated with adverse effects to
RECEIVED
FF'r 12 2013
II"""'. ':� CITY

reef -associated species and reduced water quality, ultimately leading to shifts away from natural
ecosystem functioning.
The structural relief of oyster reefs has another important role in the estuarine system. High relief
oyster reefs alter currents and water flows, and physically trap and stabilize large quantities of
suspended solids, reducing turbidity (Dame et al. 1989; Coen et al. 1999; Lenihan et al. 1999;
Grabowski et al. 2000). In addition, intertidal oyster reefs protect shoreline habitats from waves
and currents, which aids in creek bank stabilization and reduction of salt marsh erosion (Bahr
and Lanier 1981; Dame and Patten 1981; Marshall 1995; Breitburg et al. 2000; Henderson and
O'Neil 2003; Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). By decreasing erosive forces, intertidal oyster
reefs reduce vegetative losses and, in some instances, promote marsh accretion (Meyer and
Townsend 2000; Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). In North Carolina, Meyer et al. (1997) found
that placement of oyster cultch along the lower intertidal fringe of Spartina marshes resulted in
net sediment accretion, while noncultched shorelines eroded. Additional studies in the Gulf of
Mexico and along the Atlantic coast have also suggested the value of shell bottom for shoreline
protection and erosion control, indicating lower erosion rates at shorelines protected by intertidal
oyster reefs as compared to unprotected locations (Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007).
In southeastern states, including North Carolina, intertidal oyster reefs are critical to maintaining
the integrity of fringing marshes along the complex tidal creek networks commonly found within
the barrier island and lagoonal estuaries of the region; such networks form a protective
breakwater that reduces shoreline erosion (Coen and Fischer 2002; Grizzle et al. 2002; Coen and
Bolton-Warberg 2003). Fringing marshes throughout the southeastern United States are vitally
important as fisheries habitat (Bell 1997, Kneib 2000). Once oyster reefs are lost or damaged,
marshes can rapidly erode. The ability of viable oyster reefs to prevent shoreline erosion will
also be critical to ameliorate the future challenge of sea level rise, attributable to global warming.
Oyster reefs have also been widely recognized as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for oysters and
other reef -forming mollusks (Coen et al. 1999; ASMFC 2007). The functional value of shell
bottom for oysters includes aggregation of spawning stock, chemical cuesfor successful spat
settlement and refuge from predators and siltation (Coen et al. 1999). As a reef matures, a
complex habitat with greater reef height and more interstitial spaces for recruiting oysters to
settle is created. This has led numerous authors to describe oysters as ecosystem engineers in
recognition of the importance of the biogenic reef structure to estuarine biodiversity, fishery
production, water quality and hydrodynamic processes (Lenihan and Peterson 1998; Gutierrez et
al. 2003; Dame 2005; Brumbaugh et al. 2006).
In addition to the role as essential habitat for oysters, reefs also provide critical fisheries habitat
for ecologically and economically important finfish, mollusks and crustaceans which use the
shell bottom as spawning, nursery, foraging and/or refuge areas. In the 1990s, state and federal
fisheries management agencies formally began to recognize oyster reef habitat as critical to
fisheries production. Although fully functional reefs may require three to five years to develop,
data suggest that oyster shell alone attracts many more fish than adjacent bare mud -flats (Coen et
al. 1999; Lehnert and Allen 2002; Garwood et al. submitted). In North Carolina, well over 40
species of fish and decapod crustaceans have been documented using natural and restored oyster
reefs including American eel, Atlantic croaker, Atlantic menhaden, black sea bass, sheepshead}ECErvED
FEB 12 2013
T)PVWHD MY

spotted seatrout, red drum and southern flounder (Coen et al. 1999; Lenihan et al. 2001; Peterson
et al. 2003; Grabowski et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). These documented species include twelve
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission managed species and seven South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council managed species, suggesting the importance of this habitat for recreational
and commercial fisheries. In consideration of the economic importance of shellfish producing
areas, the N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission classified oyster reefs as critical habitat areas
under 15A NCAC 3I.0101. The South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council also recognizes
oyster reefs as Essential Fish Habitat for estuarine and near shore coastal ecosystems (Coen et al.
1999).
The most abundant species on oyster reefs, however, are generally small forage fishes and
crustaceans, such as pinfish, gobies, grass shrimp and mud crabs (Coen et al. 1999; Minello
1999; Posey et al. 1999; Plunket and La Peyre 2005; ASMFC 2007). These small fish and
crustaceans are important prey items in the diet of the larger recreationally and commercially
important invertebrates and fish that make foraging excursions to this habitat, reflecting the
aforementioned importance of shell bottom to fisheries production.
Management strategies, including restoration efforts designed to conserve or even improve reef
conditions, are recommended to reverse the negative consequences of reef losses (Brumbaugh et
al. 2006, Beck et al. 2009). Unlike many other global regions, oyster reefs in the southeastern
United States are characterized as good -to -poor (Beck et al. 2009), in part because of historical
under -exploitation and, until the 1990s, delayed coastal development. Although far from ideal,
the good -to -poor condition of southeastern oyster habitats represents an opportunity to be
proactive environmentally and attempt to reverse the losses before' oyster reefs become
functionally extinct in the region.
This project will help to restore oyster reef habitat in Pamlico Sound by providing adequate reef
and settlement substrate that will significantly enhance the oyster population and oyster reef
habitat in Pamlico Sound. These reefs will also protect existing oyster and salt marsh habitat and
provide valuable habitat for commercial and recreational species. This project will implement
estuarine habitat creation and restoration objectives described in the N.C. Oyster Protection and
Restoration Action Plan, the N.C. Oyster Fishery Management Plan and the N.C. Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan, the Onslow Bight Conservation Forum and the Cape Fear Arch Conservation
Council plan.
Essential Fisheries Habitat Habitat Areas of Particular Concern and Manaeed Species
The 1996 Congressional amendments to the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSFCMA) (PL 94-265) set forth new requirements for the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), regional fishery management councils (FMC), and other federal
agencies to identify and protect important marine and anadromous fish habitat. These amendments
established procedures for the identification of Essential Fish Habitat (EFIT) and a requirement for
interagency coordination to further the conservation of federally managed fisheries. Table 1 shows
the categories of EFH and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for managed species
which were identified in the Fishery Management Plan Amendments of the South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council and which may occur in southeastern states. Table 2 lists, by life
stages, 77 fish species which may occur in the vicinity of the project area and which are manage fkCEtvEn
FH 12 2013
r' !2k' ,D C'.'Y

Table 1. Categories of Essential Fish Habitat and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in
Southeast United States t'1(N/A= Not Applicable; NS = Not Significant).
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT
Present within or adjacent to
project area
Impacts from filling for patch
oyster reefs
Estuarine Areas
1. Aquatic Beds
YES
NO
2. Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
YES
NO
3. Estuarine Scrub/shrub Mangroves
NO
N/A
4. Estuarine Water Column
YES
NO
5. Intertidal Flats
YES
NO
6. Oyster Reefs & Shell Banks
YES
NO
7. Palustrine Emergent & Forested
Wetlands
NO
N/A
8. Sea ass
YES
NO
Marine Areas
9. Artificial/Manmade Reefs
NO
N/A
10. Coral & Coral Reefs
NO
N/A
11. Live/Hard Bottoms
NO
N/A
12. Saz assum
NO
N/A
13, Water Column
NO
N/A
GEOGRAPHICALLY DEFINED HABITAT AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN
Area -Wide
14. Council -designated Artificial Reef
Special Management Zones
NO
N/A
15. Hermatypic (reef -forming) Coral
Habitat
& Reefs
NO
N/A
16. Hard Bottoms
NO
N/A
17. Hoyt Hills
NO
N/A
18. Saz assum Habitat
NO
N/A
19. State -designated Areas Important
for Managed Species
YES
NO
20. Submerged Aquatic
Ve etation SAV
YES
NO
North Carolina
21. Big Rock
NO
N/A
22. Bogue Sound
NO
N/A
23. Cape Fear, Lookout & Hatteras
(sandy shoals
NO
N/A
24. New River
NO
N/A
25. The Ten Fathom Ledge
NO
N/A
26. The Point
NO
N/A
'Areas shown are identified in Fishery Management Plan Amendments or the soum Auantic Fishery Managemenr Councii and
are included in Essential Fish Habitat: New Marine Fish Habitat Mandate for Federal Agencies. February 1999. (Tables 6 and 7).
RECEIVED
FEB 12 20Q
D^MU IIDCITY

Table 2. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Species of Pamlico, Pamlico Sound and its tributaries,
North Carolina.
Source: NMFS, Beaufort, North Carolina, October 1999.
E=Eggs; L=Larval; J=Juvenile; A=Adult; N/A=Not Found
EFH FISH SPECIES
Waterbody
EFH FISH SPECIES
Waterbody
Pamlico
Sound
Pamlico
Sound
Bluefish
ELJA
Gray tri erfish
N/A
Summer flounder
L J A
Yellow jack
N/A
grouper
J
Blue runner
N/A
-Gag
Gray snapper
J
Crevalle'ack
N/A
N/A
Bar'ack
N/A
-Dolphin
Cobia
ELJA
Greater ambe jack
N/A
mackerel
JA
Almaco jack
N/A
-King
mackerel
J A
Bended mdderfish
N/A
-Spanish
Black sea bass
L J A
Spade fish
N/A
dogfish
ELJA
White grunt
N/A
-Spiny
Brown shrimp
ELJA
Ho fish
N/A
Pink shrimp
ELJA
Puddin ife
N/A
White shrimp
ELJA
Blackfm snapper
N/A
Atlantic bi e e tuna
N/A
Red snapper
N/A
Atlantic.bluefin tuna
N/A
Cubera snapper
N/A
Ski jack tuna
N/A
Silk snapper
N/A
Lon bills earfish
N/A
Blueline tilefish
N/A
Shortfin mako shark
N/A
Sand tilefish
N/A
Blue shark
N/A
Bank sea bass
N/A
shark
N/A
Rock sea bass
N/A
-Spinner
Swordfish
N/A
Grasb
N/A
Yellowfm tuna
N/A
Speckled bird
N/A
Blue ri ra in
N/A
Yellowedge grouper
N/A
White ri -ra in
N/A
Con
N/A
Sailfish .
N/A
Red bird
N/A
Calico scallop
N/A
Jewfish
N/A
hammerhead shark
N/A
Red grouper
N/A
-Scalloped
nose shark
N/A
Misty grouper
N/A
-Big
Black tip shark
N/A
Warsaw grouper
N/A
shark
N/A
Snowy grouper
N/A
-Dusky
shark
N/A
Yellowmouth grouper
N/A
-Night
Sandbar shark
J A
Scam
N/A
shark
N/A
Sheepshead
J A
-Silky
Tiger shark
N/A
Red porgy
N/A
Atlantic sharpnose shark
N/A
Lon s ine porgyN/A
Lon fin mako shark
N/A
Scup
N/A
Whitetip shark
N/A
Little turn
N/A
Thresher shark
N/A
N/A
RECEIVED
FEB 12 2013
DCM-MHD CITY

under MSFCMA. These fish species and habitats require special consideration to promote their
viability and sustainability. The potential impacts of the proposed project on these fish and
habitats can be seen in Table 1 and are discussed below.
Aquatic Beds, Seagrass and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
A few small patches of seagrass exist within the project area. Algal beds may also be observed in
the project area in spring. The project protocol and coordination with the N.C. Division of
Marine Fisheries prohibits deployment of cultch material in any areas contacting seagrass. The
project strives to enhance estuarine habitat and covering existing seagrass would not be
consistent with program goals. Impacts to any seagrasses that might be present in waters adjacent
to the project area are expected to be turbidly from deployment operations and would be
negligible or minimal and short-lived. The proposed patch oyster reefs will not be constructed
where seagrass or other submerged vegetation exists and will therefore not have an adverse
impact on aquatic beds and seagrass.
Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Spartina marsh surrounds the entire shoreline of Beacon Island. The 2.4 acre project area,
however, does not contain any estuarine emergent wetlands and therefore, will not be impacted
by the construction of the patch oyster reefs.
Estuarine Scrub/Shrub Mangroves
This type of habitat is not located anywhere near the project area. The construction of the patch
oyster reefs will therefore not have an adverse impact on mangrove habitat.
Estuarine Water Column
The estuarine water column is defined as a medium of transport for nutrients, larvae and
migrating organisms between river systems and the open ocean. The patch oyster reefs will be
constructed to be no more than 1.5 ft. in elevation, utilizing very minimal space within the water
column. As a result, they are not expected to alter currents and velocity in the immediate
vicinity. This project will also not impede the flow of waters to or from wetland areas nor the
ocean waters. This project intends on adding hard substrate on which multiple organisms,
especially oysters, may attach and produce an abundance of larvae. The reef formation will
interact with the estuarine water column enabling a variety of organisms to inhabit the water
column and enable water currents to swirl and eddy, promoting the deposition of fine materials
and the settlement of oyster larvae. The additional abundance of larvae will help restore the
oyster population in North Carolina. Project construction may result in a temporary increase in
localized turbidity as the recycled oyster shells are being placed into the water. The impacts on
the estuarine water column are expected to be none to minimal.
Intertidal Flats
The project area is primarily subtidal with only a very narrow (<30 ft. wide) portion along the
eastern boundary of the project area containing intertidal flats that surround the western side of
Beacon Island. The eastern sides of proposed reefs 1 through 3 (Figure 2) will be constructed
within this intertidal flat area, restoring shell bottom habitat that has been found to have
significant positive impacts on population dynamics and community ecology. In addition to the
well -studied benefits of oyster areas for fisheries, research indicates that oysters provide RECEIVED
F F P 12 2r,'?
n^�� ��rr'tJ CITY

additional values such as water quality improvements, benthic pelagic coupling, nutrient
dynamics and sediment stabilization. Researchers have begun to connect the role of oyster
habitat in maintaining the integrity of fringing marshes, forming a protective breakwater that
retards shoreline erosion. The project will have a beneficial impact on the intertidal flats along
the western side of Beacon Island.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Numerous natural oyster reefs are found adjacent to but not within the project area (North Rock,
Shell Castle). The project protocol and coordination with the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries
prohibits deployment of cultch material on existing shellfish resources. This project intends on
adding hard substrate on which multiple organisms, especially oysters, may attach and produce
an abundance of larvae. By design, the construction of the patch oyster reefs will not have an
adverse impact on oyster reefs and shell banks.
Palustrine Emergent & Forested Wetlands
This type of habitat is not located in or near the project area. The construction of the patch oyster
reefs will therefore not have an adverse impact on palustrine emergent and forested wetlands.
State —Designated Areas Important for Managed Species
Primary and Secondary Nursery Areas are designated by the NC Marine Fisheries Commission
and are defined as tidal salt waters that provide essential habitat for the early development of
commercially important fish and shellfish. This project provides fishery nursery habitats that are
consistent with the existing habitats within primary and secondary nursery areas.
Unconsolidated Soft Bottom
Surficial sediments on a soft bottom can act as habitat for a variety of microscopic plants and
benthic epifauna/infauna species. These organisms may serve as food sources for many other
organisms. These other organisms in turn can feed larger, economically important, fishery
species such as red drum, summer flounder, spot, Atlantic croaker, weakfish and striped bass to
name a few.
The 2.4-acre project area consists of intertidal and shallow subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in
depth from 0 to 4 feet of which 0.41 acres of soft bottom will be covered with recycled oyster
shells, altering the estuarine substrate. However, areas of soft bottom will remain between the
reef patches as well as expansive areas of soft bottom habitat surrounding the reefs. In addition,
the reefs will slow down water flow and allow sediment to settle out. This will result in the
maintenance and addition of unconsolidated soft bottom.
The activities proposed have been demonstrated to have minimal affects overall on this EFH
type, but it is important to consider post -larval development that may occur in these areas. This
habitat serves as feeding and resting grounds for juvenile and adult species. Thus, these
organisms may be indirectly affected by filling of the substrate, But, given the mobility of the
organisms resting or feeding and the extensive areas of remaining soft bottom, the area of
disturbance is likely to have no significant adverse effects.
RECEIVED
10 FE c 1 ?El+?

Additional Project Area Concerns
In addition to the EFH species in Table 2, prey species such as spot, croaker and pinfish may also
occupy the estuarine waters of Pamlico Sound during varying life stages. The proposed project
will not adversely affect prey species populations.
Impact Summary for Essential Fish Habitat
The objectives of this project are to enhance/restore and protect intertidal and shallow subtidal
patch oyster reef habitat to the west of Beacon Island in Pamlico Sound by providing suitable
substrate for oyster spat settlement. The project is also designed to reduce shoreline erosion of
the island caused by storm activity, boat wakes and rising sea levels. The targeted project area
has environmental conditions that will allow oyster recruitment and provide for their subsequent
survival and growth.
Created oyster reefs are constructed to change habitats from a soft substrate to a mixture of hard
and soft substrates by adding cultch material in a low profile (< 0.5 m.) deployment scheme.
These reefs are generally deployed to provide fisheries habitat in a desired location that provides
some measurable benefit to several different species as well as humans..When manmade reefs
are constructed, they provide new hard substrate similar in function to newly exposed hard
bottom (Goren, 1985). Aside from the differences in the physical characteristics and nature of the
materials involved in creating a manmade reef, the ecological succession and processes involved
in the establishment of the epibenthic assemblages (i.e. oysters) occur in a similar fashion on
natural hard substrates and man -placed hard substrates (Wendt et al., 1989). Finfish use natural
and manmade hard substrates in very similar ways and often interchangeably (Sedberry, 1988).
The changes in species composition and local abundance of important species in a specific area
are often seen as the primary benefits of artificial reef deployment activities.
Additional benefits of created oyster reefs placed on soft bottoms are the increase of diversity
and edges. The increase of biotic diversity is accomplished by adding hard substrate where none
existed, This in turn will attract organisms that settle on hard bottom but cannot settle on a
shifting bottom and then attract predators that feed on these sessile organisms. Edges can be
described as areas of transition between habitat types. Edges can also create areas of high
diversity, more so than over continuous areas of one habitat type. This has come to be known as
the edge effect principle. The edge created by deploying cultch material onto a soft bottom
habitat may also create a habitat of its own. The edge habitat is a culmination of the two habitats
(i.e. soft and hard substrates) because it is inhabited by a characteristic set of species. By adding
hard substrate to a soft bottom habitat the possible effect is that a third habitat is created. This
has been observed on oyster sanctuary mounds where reef fishes congregate near the center of
the substrate to graze on algae and are afforded the sense of security. Sheepshead, on the other
hand, patrol the edge of the substrate foraging out into the soft bottom habitat but continuously
return to hard substrate.
Oysters have often been described as the "keystone" species in an estuary (Bahr and Lanier
1981) and provide significant surface area as habitat. Sometimes compared to submerged aquatic
vegetation in the mid -Atlantic states, the oyster community has been identified as critical to a
healthy estuarine ecosystem. Direct and indirect ecosystem services (filtering capacity, benthic-
pelagic coupling, nutrient dynamics, sediment stabilization, provision of habitat, etc.) derived RECEIVED
11 1 2 2�'11113
r�q._,vaTJ CITY

from the oyster reef have been largely underestimated (Coen and Lukenbach 1998). Oyster reefs
can remove, via filter feeding, large amounts of particulate material from the water column, and
release large quantities of inorganic and organic nutrients that will benefit other co -inhabitants of
the reef (Haven and Morales -Alamo 1970; Dame and Dankers 1988; Dame et al. 1989).
The ecological role of the oyster reef as structure, providing food and protection, contribute to its
value as a critical fisheries habitat. The three-dimensional oyster reef provides more area for
attachment of oysters and other sessile organisms and creates more habitat niches than occur on
the surrounding flat or soft bottom habitat. Clams, mussels, anemones, polychaetes, amphipods,
sponges and many species of crabs are part of the oyster reef community. The invertebrates
recycle nutrients and organic matter and are prey for many finfish. Red and black drum, striped
bass, sheepshead, weakfish, spotted seatrout, summer and southern flounder, oystertoads, and
other fish frequent the oyster reef.
Created oyster reefs are known to promote extensive invertebrate communities and enhance
habitat for reef fish and other fish species, including cryptic, tropical, and gamefrsh species, as
well as many of commercial or recreational significance. The success of a reef and its
contributions to stock enhancement varies geographically and is determined by a wide range of
complex parameters, including existing habitat, physical limitations, material design, reef
configuration, reef management and the health of the targeted species complex, which in turn is
reliant on effective fisheries management locally, regionally and nationally. This potential is
further enhanced since domestic reef programs today possess better information and improved
technology and are more focused in using this tool towards specific stock enhancement and
fishery management needs.
For species which may be to some degree habitat -limited, the establishment of additional suitable
habitat targeted to specific life -history stages may improve survival. Additional manmade habitat
designed specifically to promote survival of targeted species in "protected" areas could
potentially enhance existing ecosystems or create new ones to fill in gaps where essential fish
habitat had been damaged, lost or severely over -fished. Man-made structures also may provide
essential habitat while simultaneously acting as a deterrent to illegal fishing practices in specially
managed areas (e.g. oyster sanctuaries).
Free swimming organisms will be able to avoid the area directly affected by project activities
and move to other soft bottom habitat and thus impacts to these organisms shall be minimal.
Some impacts to EFH will be permanent since the deployment of cultch onto soft bottom will
change the availability of the bottom under the reef material.
In contrast to the permanent impacts to the existing EFH, the ecological functions of oyster reefs,
be it manmade or natural, are numerous and an essential component of the estuarine system.
While a few EFH types will be subject to temporary impacts and other EFH categories will have
permanent impacts, these disturbances are trade-offs that will increase biomass (broodstock) of
oysters to help restore the oyster population, creating habitat in a hard substrate limited system,
that supports high diversity and multiple ecological functions. Implementation of this project is
not expected to cause any significant adverse impacts to any managed species and in fact will
REcENTD
FE 1 2 2013
12
DCvi MIM CITY

hopefully facilitate the recovery of the oyster population and its beneficiaries, add essential fish
habitat, create additional salt marsh habitat for fishery utilization and benefit estuarine systems.
RECEIVED
FFc 1 S ?nl1
13
n �`_ _.TY

References
ASMFC (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission). 2007. The importance of habitat created
by molluscan shellfish to managed species along the Atlantic coast of the United States.
Habitat Management Series 8, 108p.
Bahr, L.N. and W.P. Lanier. 1981. The ecology of intertidal oyster reefs of the South Atlantic
coast: a community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Reports,
FWS/OBS-81/15, 105p.
Beck, M.W., R.D. Brumbaugh, L. Airoldi, A. Carranza, L.D. Coen, C. Crawford, O. Defeo, G.J.
Edgar, B. Hancock, M. Kay, H. Lenihan, M.W. Luckenbach, C.L. Toropova and G.
Zhang. 2009. Shellfish reefs at risk: a global analysis of problems and solutions. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 52 p.
Bell, F.W. 1997. The economic valuation of saltwater marsh supporting marine recreational
fishing in the southeastern United States. Ecological Economics 21: 243-254.
Breitburg, D.L., L.D. Coen, M.W. Luckenbach, R. Mann, M. Posey and J.A. Wesson. 2000.
Oyster reef restoration: convergence of harvest and conservation strategies. Journal of
Shellfish Research 19(1): 371-377.
Brumbaugh, R.D., M.W. Beck, L.D. Coen, L. Craig and P. Hicks. 2006. A practitioners' guide to
the design and monitoring of shellfish restoration projects: an ecosystem approach. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 28p.
Coen, L. D. and M.W. Luckenbach. 1998. Developing success criteria and goals for evaluating
shellfish habitat restoration: ecological function or resource exploitation? Goal Setting
and Success Criteria for Habitat Restoration Conference, January 13-15.
Coen, L.D., M.W. Luckenbach and D.L. Breitburg. 1999. The role of oyster reefs as essential
fish habitat: a review'of current knowledge and some new perspectives. p. 438-454 In:
L.R. Benaka (ed.). Fish habitat: essential fish habitat and rehabilitation. American
Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, Symposium 22, 459 p.
Coen, L.D. and M.W. Luckenbach. 2000. Developing success criteria and goals for evaluating
oyster reef restoration: ecological function or resource exploitation? Ecological
Engineering 15:323-343.
Coen, L.D. and A. Fischer. 2002. Managing the future if South Carolina's oysters: an
experimental approach to evaluating current harvesting practices and boat wake impacts.
Journal of Shellfish Research 21:894.
Coen, L.D. and M. Bolton-Warberg. 2003. Evaluating the impacts of harvesting practices, boat
wakes and associated shoreline erosion on intertidal creek habitats in the southeastern
U.S.: managers and restoration programs take note. Journal of Shellfish Research 22:325.
RECEIVED
14 FEB 12 2013
DD44411.D CITY

DMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2008. North Carolina oyster fishery
management plan amendment H. NC Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC,
282p.
Dame, R. F. and N. Dankers. 1988. Uptake and release of materials by a Wadden Sea mussel
bed. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 118:207-216.
Dame, R.F. and B.C. Patten. 1981. Analysis of energy flows in an intertidal oyster reef. Marine
Ecology Progress Series 5:115-124.
Dame, R.F., J.D. Spurrier and T.G. Wolaver. 1989. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus processing
by an oyster reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series 54:249-256.
Dame, R. 2005. Oyster reefs as complex ecological systems. p. 331-343 In: R. Dame and S.
Olenin (eds.). The comparative roles of suspension -feeders in ecosystems. Springer, The
Netherlands.
Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team. 2007. Status review of the eastern oyster (Crassostrea
virginica). Report to the National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional Office.
February 16, 2007. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/SPO-88, 105 p.
Garwood, J.A., D.C. Abel and K. Walters. Submitted. The effect of vertical structure on inshore
artificial reef fish and macroinvertebrate communities. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology.
Grabowski, J.H., D. Pettipas, M.A. Dolan, A.R. Hughes and D.L. Kimbro. 2000. The economic
and biological value of restored oyster reef habitat to the nursery function of the estuary.
NC Sea Grant, Morehead City, NC, FRG # 97-EP-6, 29p.
Grabowski, J.H., A.R. Hughes, D.L. Kimbro and M.A. Dolan. 2005. How habitat setting
influences restored oyster reef communities. Ecology 86(7):1926-1935.
Goren, M. 1985. Succession of benthic community on artificial substratum at Elat (Red Sea).
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 38: 19-40.
Grizzle, R.E., J.R. Adams and & L.J. Walters. 2002. Historical changes in intertidal oyster
(Crassostrea virginica) reefs in a Florida lagoon potentially related to boating activities.
Journal of Shellfish Research 21: 749-756.
Grizzle, R.E., J.K. Green and L.D. Coen. 2008. Seston removal by natural and constructed
intertidal eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) reefs: a comparison with previous
laboratory studies, and the value of in situ methods. Estuaries & Coasts 31:1208-1220.
Gutierrez, J.L., C.G. Jones, D.L. Strayer and O.O. Iribame. 2003. Mollusks as ecosystem
engineers: the role of shell production in aquatic habitats. Oikos 101(1):79-90.
Haven, D. and R. Morales -Alamo. 1970. Filtration of particles from suspension by American
oyster, Crassostrea virginica. Biological Bulletin 139:248-264.
RECEIVED
15 FEB 12 2013
DCM-Y.11D CITY

Henderson, J. and J. O'Neal. 2003. Economic values associated with construction of oyster reefs
by the corps of engineers. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
Vicksburg, MS, EMRRP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN-EMRRP-ER-OI), 1Op.
Jones, C.G., J.H. Lawton and M. Shachak. 1994.Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos
69:373-386.
Kennedy, V.S., R.I.E. Newell and A.F. Ebele. 1996. The eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica.
Maryland Sea Grant College, College Park, MD.
Kneib, R.T. 2000. Salt marsh ecoscapes and production transfers by estuarine nekton in the
Southeastern United States. In: M.P. Weinstein and D.A. Kreeger (eds.), Concepts and
Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology. Springer, NY, NY. pp. 267-291.
Lehnert, R.L. and D.M. Allen. 2002. Nekton use of subtidal oyster shell habitat in a southeastern
U.S. estuary. Estuaries 25(5):1015-1024.
Lenihan; H.S. and C.H. Peterson. 1998. How habitat degradation through fishery disturbance
enhances impacts of hypoxia on oyster reefs. Ecological Applications 8(1):128-140.
Lenihan, H.S., F. Micheli, S.W. Shelton and C.H. Peterson. 1999. The influence of multiple
environmental stressors on susceptibility to parasites: an experimental determination with
oysters. Limnology and Oceanography 44:910-924.
Lenihan, H.S., C.H. Peterson, J.E. Byers, J.H. Grabowski and G.W. Thayer. 2001. Cascading of
habitat degradation: oyster reefs invaded by refugee fishes escaping stress. Ecological
Applications 11(3):764-782.
Luckenbach, M.W., R. Mann and J.A. Wesson (eds.) 1999. Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration. A
Synopsis and Synthesis of Approaches. Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press.
Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press, Gloucester Point, VA, 358 pp.
Marshall, M.D. 1995. North Carolina oyster restoration and fishery management plan. North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries and the North Carolina Blue Ribbon Advisory
Council on Oysters, Morehead City, NC, 116p.
Meyer, D.L., E.C: Townsend and G.W. Thayer. 1997. Stabilization and erosion control value of
oyster cultch for intertidal marsh. Restoration Ecology 5(1):93-99.
Meyer, D.L. and E.C. Townsend. 2000. Faunal utilization of created intertidal eastern oyster
(Crassostrea virginica) reefs in the southeastern United States. Estuaries 23(1):34-45._
Minello, T.J. 1999. Nekton densities in shallow estuarine habitats of Texas and Louisiana and the
identification of essential fish habitat. p. 43-75 In: Benaka, L. R. ed. Fish Habitat:
Essential Fish Habitat and Rehabilitation. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda,
Maryland, 459 p.
16
RECENED
FFB 12 2013
PrM-Tlffln C;TY

Nelson, K.A., L.A. Leonard, M.H. Posey, T.D. Alphin and M.A. Mallin. 2004. Transplanted
oyster (Crassostrea virginica) beds as a self-sustaining mechanism for water quality .
improvement in small tidal creeks. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology
298(2): 347-368.
Newell, R.I.E. 2004. Ecosystem influences of natural and cultivated populations suspension -
feeding bivalve mollusks: a review. Journal of Shellfish Research 23(1):51-61.
Peterson, C. H., J.H. Grabowski and S.P. Powers. 2003. Quantitative enhancement of fish
production by oyster reef habitat: restoration valuation. Marine Ecology Progress Series
264:249-264.
Piazza, B. P., P.D. Banks and M.K. La Peyre. 2005. The potential for created oyster shell reefs as
a sustainable shoreline protection strategy in Louisiana. Restoration Ecology 13(3):499
506.
Plunket, J. and M.K. La Peyre. 2005. Oyster beds as fish and macroinvertebrate habitat in
Barataria Bay, Louisiana. Bulletin of Marine Science 77(1):155-164.
Posey, M. H., T.D. Alphin, C.M. Powell and E. Townsend. 1999. Use of oyster reefs as habitat
for epibenthic fish and decapods. p. 229-238 In: M.W. Luckenbach, R. Mann and J. A.
Wesson eds. Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration: A Synopsis and Synthesis of Approaches.
Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press, Gloucester Point, VA.
Sedberry, G.R. 1988. Food and feeding of black sea bass, Centropristis striata, in live bottom
habitats in the South Atlantic Bight. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society
104:35-50.
Street, M.W, A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal
Habitat Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC. 656p.
Wenner, E., H. R. Beatty and L. Coen. 1996. A quantitative system for sampling nekton on
intertidal oyster reefs. Journal of Shellfish Research 15:769-775.
Wendt, P. H., D. M. Knott and R. F. Van Dolah.1989. Community structure of the sessile biota
on five artificial reefs of different ages. Bulletin of Marine Science 44:1106-1122.
Zimmerman, R., T. J. Minello, T. Baumer, and M. Castiglione. 1989.Oyster reef as habitat for
estuarine macrofauna. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-249. 16 p.
RECEIVED
17
FE2 12 7.013

Appendix A .
Project Monitoring Plan
A monitoring program will be implemented to evaluate progress towards the project's habitat
restoration objectives; measure overall project success and to comply with NOAA's minimum
scientific monitoring requirements. The project will be monitored for five years by the federation
working with volunteers to document their success. The monitoring parameters include the
structural and functional parameters listed below. The parameters, where appropriate, will be
measured and monitored prior to the project initiation, concurrent with project implementation
and continue until the results point to a trend of restoration success. Monitoring timing will be
conducted according to the project schedule and the selected parameters. The timing will allow
for any necessary changes or adaptive management during the project.
Oyster Reef Habitat Monitoring
➢ Habitat Restoration Start Date:
o Spring 2013
➢ Monitoring Start Date:
o Pre -project— Winter/Spring 2013
o Post project — Fall 2013, annually there after
➢ Monitoring End Date:
o Fall 2017
➢ Project Goal:
o Create and restore 0.41 acres of viable intertidal and shallow subtidal oyster
habitat offshore of Beacon Island in Pamlico Sound
➢ Project Objectives:
o Increase the acreage of oyster reef habitat (structural)
o Increase the amount of substrate available for oyster recruitment and reef
development (functional)
➢ Monitoring Parameters:
o Acreage of oyster habitat created (structural)
o Abundances and densities of oysters and epifauna (functional)
➢ Monitoring Measurements:
o Structural - Extent and area of created oyster habitat calculated by measuring reef
footprints using on the ground measurements, aerial photographs and mapping
tools
■ Once annually
■ Each patch oyster reef within the project area
o Functional - Sample 20cm x 20cm quadrat random excavations from created and
reference reefs, identify and enumerate all oysters and epifauna within the quadrat
■ Once annually
■ At least one quadrat from one reef
➢ Baseline ConditionsNalues:
o Pre -project survey for oysters and oyster habitat in the project area
RECEIVED
18 FEB 12 2013
P. M?MMCITY

o Comparison to existing natural reference reefs representative of existing
conditions at each site and similar reef architecture and landscape characteristics
(series of patch reefs on mudflats or fringing reefs along saltmarsh habitat)
■ 1 reference reef will be selected within the project area that:
• best represent the existing natural condition;
• are similar in architecture and landscape characteristics to designed
created reefs; and
• represent target conditions.
➢ Evaluation of Results:
o Quantitative comparison to baseline pre -project conditions
o Statistical comparison to reference reefs at each site
➢ Success Criteria:
o Increase in oyster habitat in the project area equal to or greater than project goal
o Created reefs exhibit similar densities and abundances of oyster and epifauna as
natural reefs at corresponding sites
➢ Indicators for Adaptive Management/Corrective Action
o Acreage targets not met
o Persistent absence or very low levels of oyster and epifauna on created reefs when
compared to natural reference reefs
➢ Watershed Scale Monitoring Programs:
o NCDMF conducts spat settlement counts in all the basins it deploys cultch in
o NCDMF also identifies and evaluates the presence of disease in the new juvenile
oysters on the shell planting sites
o UNCW SPAT monitoring program is collecting spat settlement and water
temperature and salinity data from all the major subbasins along the coast
o NCSU CMAST, UNC IMS and others are conducting a series of studies on oyster
larval transport, reef development and water quality trends in estuaries containing
the project areas.
o NCCF is conducting Total Maximum Daily Load (MDL) water quality studies
and watershed restoration plans in the Lockwood Folly River and White Oak
River.
19
RECEMED
FEB 12 2013
Drpq_r IND CITY

DCM
®�
DEC 17 2012
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
ResourcesW ARC
Division of Marine Fisheries
Beverly Eaves Perdue Dr. Louis B. Daniel III
Dee Freeman
Director
Secretary
December 6, 2012
TO: David Moye, NC Division of Coastal Management
FROM: Brian Conrad, Mapping Program, NC DMF
VIA: Craig Hardy, Resource Enhancement Section, NC DMF
SUBJECT: Beacon Island Survey Report
The area adjacent to Beacon Island, located at approximately 350 05.89191'N 760
02.81872'W in the Pamlico Sound of North Carolina, was mapped and sampled from
11/29/2012 through 12/3/2012 by the NC Division of Marine Fisheries Mapping
Program. The area was mapped and sampled to quantify habitat type boundaries,
acreage and densities of shellfish and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in
cooperation with the Division of Coastal Management to provide comparison data for a
major CAMA permit application site survey for the construction of 0.41 acres of patch
oyster reefs within a 2.4 acre site area.
The survey was conducted utilizing pole probe transact methods and benthic habitat
substrate classifications of the NC DMF Shellfish Mapping Program utilizing Trimble
Geo-XT GPS receivers to map habitat types on a 1:12,000 scale map. Fifteen random
samples were taken within each habitat type found within the 2.4 acres site with meter
square quadrats or patent tongs to quantify shellfish and SAV species densities.
Environmental data was also collected.
The 2.4 acre site area contains about .30 acres of subtidal hard vegetated shell habitat
(Substrate type 1) consisting of sand sediment with shell and SAV grass bottom
composition. Fifteen 0.90m' samples (13.5m2) were taken within this area of subtidal
hard vegetated shell habitat finding live oysters and Gams mixed with dead shell
amongst the rhizomes of Zostera manna. Nine total oysters were found which
consisted of 7 spat and 2 sublegal oysters, with oyster densities ranging from 0-3/m2.
Thirteen total clams were found which consisted of 6 seed clams, 4 little neck clams, 1
cherry clam and 2 chowder clams, with clam densities ranging from 0-3/m2. Total
shellfish densities for samples within this area of subtidal hard vegetated shell habitat
ranged from 0-7/m2. The percent density coverage for this area of Zostera marina is
very sparse, 1-10% of a m2 sample.
3441 Avendell Street P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: ww.w.ncdmf.net
An Equal Oppurtuniry I Aflirmalbe Adon Employer
RECEIVED
FEB 12 2013
U."
NorthCarolina
Alaturally
DCM-MHD CITY

The site area also contains about 0.08 acres of intertidal firm vegetated shell habitat
(Substrate type Q) consisting of muddy sand sediment with shell and grass bottom
composition. Fifteen 1.0mz samples were taken within this area of intertidal firm
vegetated shell habitat finding live oysters and clams mixed with dead shell within
Spartina spp. Total oysters (1019) consisted of 691 spat, 295 sublegal and 33 legal
oysters with oyster densities ranging from 0-396/m2 with a mean average oyster density
of 67.933/m2.
The site also contains about 1.75 acres of subtidal hard vegetated habitat (Substrate
Type J) consisting of sand sediment with a mixture of SAV and detritus bottom
composition. Fifteen 1.Om' samples were taken within this area of subtidal hard
vegetated habitat finding rhizomes of Zostera manna with very sparse percent density
coverage per mz sample.
The site also contains about 1.46 acres of subtidal hard non -vegetated without shell
habitat (Substrate type L) consisting of sand sediment. Fifteen 0.90m2 samples
(13.5m2) were taken within this area finding only one seed clam.
Existing oyster shell bags were found on site coinciding with Audubon North Carolina's
CAMA General Permit # 60088 issued July 20, 2012.
The sparseness of SAV species at the time of this survey is perhaps due to the
seasonality of Zostera manna which was at its seasonal end at the time of this survey;
as well as the depth, current and turbidity conditions that currently exist on the
southwestern side of Beacon Island.

r
•
:�.�a—Beacon Island, Pamlico Sound
J
Legend
L
.24 acre afmmen
Beacon Island Survey Samples
Total Shellfish per sample
...A- SWtlMI Son VegHatad Shell
• 0
�B- Soaldal Sot Vegetated wN SMII
® 0000001-1000
tac-sWaMlsoallonvspehhasMY
1000e001-2000
D- SLWdeI Soft N*r,9"W w/o eheX
-200o00a1-6000
�E-6Wdtlal Fkm VapehW SMX
F- SubtlMl Flml VapNeW w SMII
®60WW01-3%00
D-SWtlMIF Nonwpetabd Shell
m N-sua1MlF NonvgptaWWo Shell
� O- IMtNMI FXm vepehW 91e11
I -SWAMI Haoi Vepehled Shell
J-SOW Hard Vegehtad w/o Shell
K- SWtlMI Had Nonvegehhd Stroll
� L-SUCWaI HaN Norwepsbad WO SMY
M - IrOeNdal Soa Vwpehhd Shell
N- IrMnWal soft Vapelsted Wo Shell
� O- IoaNMI Soft NonvepMaW SMII
M P- abrtlMl Son Nonvepetated w/c SMII
R - kilor"l Fhtn VepetaW Wo SMII (Island)
WS-Irft IRnn Nonvgphtad SMII
T- III•NMI FXm Nm-veaehted wlo SMN
U- ItMnkal Hard Vegetated SMII
V - I Wadda l Hard Vepehtad w/o ShM I
W- InbNMI Han! Wn4ogshW SMII
= K- IraartlMl Hold Nonvphbd Wo SMe
• =l •^yam=^�Y. ryv.����y� P�s��d.
For questions regarding
this map or data
please contact:
Brian Conrad
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Resource Enhancement Section
Not For Navigational Use
0 100 200
Feet
N
1:1,000 /1
Layout Created December 5, 2012

CDEEIR
arolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Pat
Audubon North Carolina
Mr, Walker Golder
7741 Market Street, Unit D
Wilmington, NC 28411
Charles Wakild, P. E.
Director
March 12, 2013
John E. Skvarla, III
DWQ Project# 13-0089
Hyde County
Subject Property: Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Ter -Pamlico River Basin, Pamlico Sound [Tar 08, 29-(40.5); SA, HQW]
Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification (GC3900) with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Golder:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill
within or otherwise impact 0.41 acres of open waters, by placement of fill, for the purposed construction
of 9 — 20 foot by 100 foot offshore oyster shell sills to reduce shoreline erosion as described within your
CAMA Major application dated January 18, 2013 and received by the N.C. Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) on January 28, 2013. The impacts described in your application are covered by General Water
Quality Certification Number(s) 3900 (GC3900). This Certification(s) is issued in conjunction with the
CAMA Major Permit and General Permit(s) 199000291 issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE). This Certification allows you to use the CAMA Major Permit when the Division of
Coastal Management issues it. In addition, you should obtain or otherwise comply with any other
required federal, state or local permits before you go ahead With your project including (but not limited
to) Erosion and Sediment Control, Non -discharge regulations. Also, this approval to proceed with your
proposed impacts or to conduct impacts to waters 'as depicted in your application shall expire upon
expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit.
This approval is for the purpose and design that you described.in your application. Approved plans and
specifications for this project are incorporated by reference and are enforceable parts of the permit. If you
change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If the
property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is
thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total fills for this project (now or in the future)
exceed one acre of wetland or 150 linear feet of stream, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). This approval requires you to follow the conditions listed in the
attached certification and any additional conditions listed below.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Internet w mewateraualityare
943 Washington Square Mall Phone: [phone] e
Washington, NC 27889 FAX [phone] �f�C�aNrolina
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Adon Employer-50% RecydedN6°% Post Consumer Paper y.I{TLallY

` ~ Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Mr. Welker Golder
March 12, 2013
T .yrPage 2 of 3
r pl
0<9 .
The Additional Conditions of the Certification are:°
1. Impacts Approved 'eIr
r;
The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all of the other specific and general conditions
of this Certification (or Isolated Wetland Permit) are met. No other impacts are approved
including incidental impacts:
Amount Approved nits
Plan Leeation or Reference
Stream
feet
404/CAMA Wetlands
acres
Waters
0.41 acres fill
Plan Sheets 1 of 1
Buffers
(square ft.
2. Water Quality Certification
The proposed project must comply with all of the conditions of General Water Quality Certification
(GC) 3900.
3. Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable
Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached
certificate of completion to the 401.Oversight/8xpress Review Permitting Unit, North Carolina
Division of Water Quality, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result in
criminal and/or civil penalties. The authorization to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct
impacts to waters as depicted in your application and as authorized by this Certification shall expire upon
expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this Certification (associated with the approved water
impacts), you.may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you
receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the
North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act as described within 15A NCAC 2H .0500. If you have any questions, please telephone Roberto
Scheller of the Washington Regional Office at 252-948-3940 or Karen Higgins of the Wetlands, Buffers,
Stormwater, Compliance and Permitting (Webscape) Unit at 919-807-6360. .

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Mr. Walker Golder
March 12, 2013
Page 3 of 3
Sincerely,
For Charles Wakild, P.E.
Enclosures: Certificate of Completion
GC 3900
cc: Raleigh Bland, Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
DWQ Webscape Unit
DCM, Doug Haggett, Morehead Office
DCM, Steve Trowell
File copy

f'A R R
y23 RESVER QFc��odFEB 07 2013
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management DMF �01 AT ROTEC CN
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director Secretary
MEMORANDUM
FEB 12 2013
TO: Ms. Anne Deaton/Kevin Hart
Division of Marine Fisheries
DIF-HABITAT PROTECTION
FROM: Doug Huggett Respond to Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator Morehead City Office
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013 z- E"�Aff D
I✓
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
A— This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Signed Date L201
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] l FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity Affimalive Action Employer

NCDENR p�
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director
RECEWED _4
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Lee Padrick FEB 11 2013
Division of Community Assistance
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Respond to Doug Huggett
Morehead City Office
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY is office has no objection to the project as proposed.
This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
�J , /comments.
Signed
lv+2 �•A,
Date Z/ Y/3
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] PAX: 252-948-0478 Internet: www.nocoastaimanagement.net
An Equal opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

RUM Oc-
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Director Secretary
I6I516[s]'"i 01111u'I
TO: Mr. Pat McClain
Division of Land Quality
FROM: Doug Huggett Respond to Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator Morehead City Office
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as Beacon Island located 2.5 miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY / This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
✓ This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
t d kr1
Signed �ld-z� Date��� 3
RECEid&D
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 1- E H 2 8 2013
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
DCM-MHD CITY

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Ken D. Pace
NCDOT Roadside
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Coastal Management Division
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City NC 28557
DATE: 28 January 2013
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Respond to Doug Iluggett
Morehead City Office
UNIT
Envir.--
EC & Vag. rv:y'
Field Oper. Eml.
JAN b U 2013
Design___
APPLICANT: Audubon North Carolina S a W Engineering
Rest Area
Vegetation Algl.
PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is a marsh island known as BeacofieNhMtllegiat� � S miles
northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 18
February 2013. Please contact Steve Trowell at 252-948-3854, if you have any questions regarding the
proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
�(
/ � This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Signed / Date 11It)17
RECEIVED
FEB 14 2013
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www,nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal OppoMnity \ Alfinnab" Action Employer DCM-MHD CITY

MEMORANDUM
To:
Doug Huggett
From:
Steve Trowells5r
Through:
David Moye 00"
Subject:
Beacon Island Major CAMA/Dredge and Fill Permit Application
Date:
28 January 2012
This memo is in reference to the Major CAMA/Dredge and Fill permit application
submitted by the North Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF) for the construction of 9 — oyster
shell patch reefs/sills to be constructed offshore of Beacon Island, owned by Audubon North
Carolina, located 2.5 miles northwest of Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channel
southwest/near Ocracoke Village in Hyde County, North Carolina. The patch reefs are to be
constructed of unconsolidated recycled oyster shell. Because the stated purpose was to construct
a patch reef/sill to reduce erosion, thus an erosion control structure or sill, the filling activity was
viewed as development and the decision was made to review the project through the Major
CAMA/Dredge and Fill permit process.
This project was subject of a pre -application scoping meeting held on 8 November 2012.
During this meeting the project received a favorable review. DMF volunteered to undertake a
bottom survey of the project site to quantify the bottom substrate type and assess the
density/presence of SAV and shellfish. DMF issued a report that is a part of the application
package. Both SAV and shellfish were present in the project area but not at densities that would
warrant project design changes or project denial. Staff does not feel that navigation in the area
will be negatively impacted. Staff is skeptical that the reefs will abate erosion in such a high
energy environment. Staff feels the shell will likely scatter reducing the vertical relief necessary
to reduce wind generated wave energy from reaching the island shore. However, recruitment
rates for oysters in the area appear to be good based on the number of spat observed during DMF
sampling in the area. The recycled oyster shell will increase the available hard substrate locally
for oyster recruitment. Staff has reviewed the project per the development standards as found in
North Carolina Administrative Code 7H.0206 and .0208 and have determined the project to be
consistent baring any significant objections from the review agencies. Staff recommends that the
permit be issued with the standard permit conditions for offshore sill construction. The check
covering the application fee has been deposited.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-MHD CITY

April 1, 2013
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. SAW 2013-00285
Mr. Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-3421
Dear Mr. Huggett:
Reference the application of Walker Golder and Audubon North Carolina to construct 9-20
foot by 100 foot offshore oyster shell sills, on Beacon Island, located 2.5 miles northwest of
Ocracoke, in the Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina.
The Federal agencies have completed review of the proposal as presented by the
application and your field investigation report.
We recommend that the following conditions be included in the State authorization:
1. All work authorized by this permit must be performed in strict compliance with the
attached plans, which are a part of this permit. Any modification to these plans must be approved
by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) prior to implementation.
2. The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States
require the removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or
if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or
work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the
permittee will be required, upon due notice from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to remove,
relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the
United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal,
relocation, or alteration. The permittee shall notify NOAA/NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE
Chief Source Data Unit N CS261, 1315 E West HWY- RM 7316, Silver Spring, MD 20910-
3282 at least two weeks prior to beginning work and upon completion of work.
3. Except as specified in the plans attached to this permit, no excavation, fill or mechanized

land -clearing activities shall take place at any time in the construction or maintenance of this
project, in such a manner as to impair normal flows and circulation patterns within waters or
wetlands or to reduce the reach of waters or wetlands.
4. Except as authorized by this permit or any USACE approved modification to this
permit, no excavation, fill or mechanized land -clearing activities shall take place at any time in
the construction or maintenance of this project, within waters or wetlands. This permit does not
authorize temporary placement or double handling of excavated or fill material within waters or
wetlands outside the permitted area. This prohibition applies to all borrow and fill activities
connected with this project.
5. Unless otherwise authorized by this permit, all fill material placed in waters or wetlands
shall be generated from an upland source and will be clean and free of any pollutants except in
trace quantities. Metal products, organic materials (including debris from land clearing
activities), or unsightly debris will not be used.
6. The authorized structure and associated activity must not interfere with the public's right
to free navigation on all navigable waters of the United States. No attempt will be made by the
permittee to prevent the full and free use by the public of all navigable waters at or adjacent to
the authorized work for reason other than safety.
7. The permittee shall advise the Corps in writing at least two weeks prior to beginning the
work authorized by this permit and again upon completion of the work authorized by this permit.
8. The permittee shall require its contractors and/or agents to comply with the terms and
conditions of this permit in the construction and maintenance of this project, and shall provide
each of its contractors and/or agents associated with the construction or maintenance of this
project with a copy of this permit. A copy of this permit, including all conditions, shall be
available at the project site during construction and maintenance of this project.
9. The permittee shall employ all sedimentation and erosion control measures necessary to
prevent an increase in sedimentation or turbidity within waters and wetlands outside the permit
area. This shall include, but is not limited to, the immediate installation of silt fencing or similar
appropriate devices around all areas subject to soil disturbance or the movement of earthen fill,
and the immediate stabilization of all disturbed areas. Additionally, the project must remain in
full compliance with all aspects of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North
Carolina General Statutes Chapter 113A Article 4).
10. The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent a significant increase in
turbidity outside the area of construction or construction -related discharge. Increases such that
the turbidity in the waterbody is 50 NTU's or less in all rivers not designated as trout waters by
the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM), 25 NTU's or less in all
saltwater classes and in all lakes and reservoirs, and 10 NTU's or less in trout waters, are not
considered significant.

11. Violations of these conditions or violations of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act must be reported in writing to the Wilmington District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers within 24 hours of the permittee's discovery of the violation.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Josh Pelletier, Washington Field Office,
Regulatory Division, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Josh Pelletier
Regulatory Project Manager
Copies Furnished:
Mr. Ian McMillan
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Mr. Pete Benjamin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Fritz Rhode
National Marine Fisheries Service
Habitat Conservation Service
101 Pivers Island Road
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. Jeffrey Garnett
Wetlands and Marine Regulatory Section
Water Protection Division -Region IV
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
David Moye, District Manager

Washington Field Office
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management

Major Permit Fee Schedule
DCM %
DWQ %
Development Type
Fee
(14300160143510009316256253)
(2430016024351000952341)
I. Private, non-commercial
development that does not involve
e filling or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
$250
100% ($250)
0% ($0)
11. Public or commercial
development that does not Involve
he filling or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
$400
100% ($400)
0% ($0)
III. For development that Involves
the filling andlor excavation of up
to t acre of wetlands and/or open
water areas, determine ifA,B, C,
or D below applies:
fll(A). Private, noncommercial
development, if General Water
Quality Certification No. 3490
(See attached) can be applied:
$250
100% ($250)
0% ($0)
III(B). Public or commercial
development, 9 General Water
Quality Certification No. 3490
(See attached) can be applied:
$400
100% ($400)
0% ($0)
I II(C). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3490 (see
attached) could be applied, but
DCM staff determined that
additional review and written
DWQ concurrence is needed
because of concerns related to
water quality or aquatic life:
$400
1 60% ($240)
40% ($160)
. If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3490 (see
attached) cannot be applied:
$400
60% ($240)
40% ($160)
IV. Development that involves the
filling and/or excavation of more
than one acre of wetlands and/or
open water areas:
1 $475
60% ($285)
40% ($190)
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DC.A-f-. ?IDCITY

—This is a word processing form to be completed in Microsoft Word —
NC Division of Coastal Management
Major Permit Application Computer Sheet
(02/15/2010) r
Applicant:Ave)iep
Date:1/28/2013
Project Site County
G
Staff: ^`
V G
l
7,-r��1/
District: ❑Elizabeth City Washington
❑Morehead City ❑Wilmington
Project Name:
i
Rover File:
I
Permit Authorization: C&CAMA MDredge & Fill XBoth
SITE DESCRIPTIONIPERMIT INFORMATION
PNA: []Yes JONo
Photos Taken: Yes ❑ NoZ
Setback Required (riparian): ❑Yes ZNo
Critical Habitat: ❑Yes ANo Nat Sure
15 foot waiver obtained: ❑Yes JUNo
Hazard Notification Returned:
❑Yes [ANo
SAV: ❑Yes ®No ❑Not Sure
Shell Bottom: []Yes [allo ❑ Not Sure
Temporary Impacts: Yes 21No
Sandbags: ❑Yes ®No Not Sure
Did the land use classification come from
county LUP: ®Yes []No
Mitigation Required (optional):
[]Yes 0No
Moratorium Conditions: []Yes KNo
[]NA
EnvironTe,ntal Assessment Done:
❑Yes ISTNo ❑NA
SECONDARY WATER CLASSIFICATION — OPTIONAL (choose MAX of 4)
WETLANDS IMPACTED
❑ (404) Corp. of Engineers (Jurisdictional
(LS) Sea lavender (Limonium sp.)
(SS) Glasswort (Salicomia sp.)
wetlands)
El (CJ) Saw grass (Cladium jamaicense)
El (SA) Salt marsh cordgrass (Spartina
❑ (SY) Salt reed grass (Spartina
altemiflora)
cynosuroides)
❑ (DS) Salt or spike grass (Distichlis
0 (SC) Bullrush or three square (Scirpus
(TY) Cattail (Typha sp.)
spicata)
sp.)
El (JR) Black needlerush (Juncos
❑ (SP) Salt/meadow grass (Spartina
roemerianus)
patens)
APPLICATION FEE
El No fee required - $0.00
❑ III(A) Private w/ D&F up to 1 acre; 3490
III(D) Priv. public or comm w/ D&F to 1
can be applied - $250
are; 3490 cant be applied - $400
El Minor Modification to a CAMA Major
❑ Major Modification to a CAMA Major
❑ IV Any development involving D&F of
permit - $100
permit -$250
more than 1 acre - $475
Lj Permit Transfer - $100
❑ III(B) Public or commercial w/ D&F to 1
❑ Express Permit - $2000
acre; 3490 can be applied - $400
LJ Major development extension request -
❑ II. Public or commerciallno dredge
$100
and/or fill - $400
❑ 1. Private no dredge and/or fill - $250
III(C) Priv. public or comm w /D&F to 1
RECEi JED
acre; 3490 can be applied; DCM needs
DWQ agreement - $400
beNn!"' 252.808-2808 :: 1-8884RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net reused: 02HS/1a

NC Division )of Coastal Mgty Appligation Computer Sheet, Page 2 of 3)
Applicant: AUdv `^ DS 7,
Date: 1 /28/2013
Describe below the ACTIVITIES that have been applied for. All values should match the dimension order, and units of
measurement found in your Activities code sheet.
Activity Name I Number
TYPE
REPLACE
Choose
Choose
One
One
Dimension 1
Dimension 2 Dimension 3 Dimension 4
/
New Work ❑
Replace
r
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work ❑
Replace
.
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work ❑
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work ❑
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work ❑
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work ❑
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work ❑
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work ❑
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y [IN
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work EF
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
RECfi
D
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-14HDDCM C�
revised 0211 SM0

FIC Division of Coastal Mgt. Application Computer Sheet, Page 3 of 3)
Applicant:
Date: 128/2013
Describe below the HABITAT disturbances for the application. All values should match the name, and units of measurement
found in your Habitatcode sheet.
Habitat Name
DISTURB TYPE
Choose One
TOTAL Sq. Ft.
(Applied for.
Disturbance
y
anticipated
restoration or
tamp impacts)
FINAL Sq. Ft
(Anticipated final
disturbance.
y
restoration
and/or temp
impact amount)
TOTAL Feet
(Applied for.
ance
total includes
any anticipated
restoration or
tamp impacts)
FINAL Feet
(Anticipated final
disturbance.
Excludes an y
restoration and/or
temp impact
amount
jk� }
Dredge ❑ Fill [a Both ❑ Other ❑
77
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
-
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
RECEiJED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-MHD CITY
252.803-2808 :: 1.8884RCOAST :: www_nccoastalmanaaement.net revised: 02/15/10

North Carolina
Pat McCrory
Governor
-AV
iTU TIR
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Coastal Federation
Ms. Lexia M. Weaver
3609 Hwy 24 (Ocean)
Newport, NC 28570
Dear Ms. Weaver:
Braxton C. Davis
Director
28 January 2013
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM-MHD CrrY
The NC Division of Coastal Management hereby acknowledges receipt of your
application for State approval for development of the property located 2.5 miles northwest of
Ocracoke Inlet between Wallace and Blair channels southwest of Ocracoke Village in the
Pamlico Sound, Hyde County, North Carolina It was received on 18 January 2013, and appears
to be adequate for processing at this time. The projected deadline for making a decision is 2
April 2013. An additional 75-day review period is provided by law when such time is necessary
to complete the review. If you have not been notified of a final action by the initial deadline
stated above, you should consider the review period extended. Under those circumstances, this
letter will serve as your notice of an extended review. However, an additional letter will be
provided on or about the 75th day.
If this agency does not render a permit decision within 70 days from the 18 January 2013,
you may request a meeting with the Director of the Division of Coastal Management and permit
staff to discuss the status of your project. Such a meeting will be held within five working days
from the receipt of your written request and shall include the property owner, developer, and
project designer/consultant.
NCGS 113A-119(b) requires that Notice of an application be posted at the location of the
proposed development. Enclosed you will find a "Notice of Permit Filing" postcard which must
be posted at the property of your proposed development. You should post this notice at a
conspicuous point along your property where it can be observed from a public road Some
examples would be: Nailing the notice card to a telephone pole or tree along the road right-of-
way fronting your property, or at a point along the road right-of-way where a private mad would
lead one into your property. Failure to post this notice could result in an incomplete application.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX'. 252-948-0478 Internet: www.nccoastalmanagementnet
An Equal opportunity I Afinnafive Action Employer

Audubon North Carolina
Mr. Walker Golder
28 January 2013
Page 2
An onsite inspection will be made, and if additional information is required, you will be
contacted by the appropriate State or Federal agency. Please contact me if you have any
questions and notify me in writing if you wish to receive a copy of my field report and/or
comments from reviewing agencies.
Sincerely,
Steve Trowell
Coastal Management Representative
Division of Coastal Management
Washington Regional Office
Enclosure
RECEIVED
Cc: Audubon North Carolina
Doug Huggett JAN 3 0 2013
WARO
DC11?-M11D CITY

t.
Z
a
LAMA PERMIT
APPLIE FOR
PROJECT: A®n1�&A-Jr PfOeMes AM C QA,4<.kcY X ice'
re �Ar-c Prrc�SAJ�
COMMOILE-NTS ACCEPTED THROUGH
APPLICANT: aA &4bbd► FOR MORE DETAILS CONTACT
THE LOCAL PERMIT OFFICER BELOW:
oc
3-am�v._._ - -t:S l f$e cry � Ply at
c-�
I

-- a
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director
Beaufort Hyde News
PO Box 99
Belhaven, NC 27810
28 January 2013
Attention: Legal Advertising Department
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Please include the enclosed Notice of Filing m the Public Notice section of the 6
February 2013 edition of your newspaper. If it will not be possible to include this notice in that
edition, or if you should have any questions about this notice, please call me as soon as possible
at 948-3820.
The State Office of Budget and Management requires an original Affidavit of Publication
prior to payment for newspaper advertising. Please send the affidavit, an original copy of the
published notice, and an original invoice to:
Melissa Sebastian
NCDENR
COASTAL MANAGEMENT DIVISION
400 COMMERCE AVENUE
MOREHEAD NC 28557
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Sherry Tyson, Secretary
Division of Coastal Management
ATTACHMENT
Cc: File
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastaimanagement.net
DCM-MHD CITY
An Equal opportunity 1 Afirmafive Acllon Employer

NOTICE OF FILING
OF APPLICATION FOR
CAMA MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources hereby gives public notice as
required by N.C.G.S. 113A-119(b) that an application for a development permit in an Area of
Environmental Concern as designated under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) was
received on 18 January 2013. According to the said application submitted by Audubon North
Carolina, applicant proposes to construct 9 - 20' x 100' offshore oyster shell sills to reduce
erosion and provide oyster/fishery habitat, in Hyde County, North Carolina.
A copy of the entire application maybe examined or copied at the office of David W.
Moye, District Manager, Washington Regional Office, 943 Washington Square Mall,
Washington, NC, during normal business hours. Public comments received by 25 Februray 2013
will be considered. Later comments will be accepted and considered up to the time of pemmt
decision. Project modifications may occur based on further review and comments. Notice of the
permit decision in this matter will be provided upon written request.
Steve Trowell, Field Representative
Coastal Management Representative
NC Division of Coastal Management
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, North Carolina 27889
[phone]
Please publish on: 6 February 2013
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone]i 1 FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastaimanagement.net
An Equal Opponunny 1 Affirmative Action Employer DC-M-NAHD CITY

F
DCM
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Marine Fisheries
Beverly Eaves Perdue Dr. Louis B. Daniel III
Governor Director
December 6, 2012
DEC 17 2012
Natural ResourceswARlO
TO: David Moye, NC Division of Coastal Management
FROM: Brian Conrad, Mapping Program, NC DMF
VIA: Craig Hardy, Resource Enhancement Section, INC DMF
SUBJECT: Beacon Island Survey Report
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The area adjacent to Beacon Island, located at approximately 350 05.89191'N 760
02.81872'W in the Pamlico Sound of North Carolina, was mapped and sampled from
11/29/2012 through 12/3/2012 by the NC Division of Marine Fisheries Mapping
Program. The area was mapped and sampled to quantify habitat type boundaries,
acreage and densities of shellfish and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in
cooperation with the Division of Coastal Management to provide comparison data for a
major CAMA permit application site survey for the construction of 0.41 acres of patch
oyster reefs within a 2.4 acre site area.
The survey was conducted utilizing pole probe transect methods and benthic habitat
substrate classifications of the NC DMF Shellfish Mapping Program utilizing Trimble
Geo-XT GPS receivers to map habitat types on a 1:12,000 scale map. Fifteen random
samples were taken within each habitat type found within the 2.4 acres site with meter
square quadrats or patent tongs to quantify shellfish and SAV species densities.
Environmental data was also collected.
The 2.4 acre site area contains about .30 acres of subtidal hard vegetated shell habitat
(Substrate type 1) consisting of sand sediment with shell and SAV grass bottom
composition. Fifteen 0.90m' samples (13.5m2) were taken within this area of subtidal
hard vegetated shell habitat finding live oysters and clams mixed with dead shell
amongst the rhizomes of Zostera manna. Nine total oysters were found which
consisted of 7 spat and 2 sublegal oysters, with oyster densities ranging from 0-3/m2.
Thirteen total clams were found which consisted of 6 seed clams, 4 little neck dams, 1
cherry clam and 2 chowder clams, with clam densities ranging from 0-3/m2. Total
shellfish densities for samples within this area of subtidal hard vegetated shell habitat
ranged from 0-7/m2. The percent density coverage for this area of Zostera marina is
very sparse, 1-10% of a m' sample.
RECEIVED One
3441 Arendell Street, P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557 NorthCaroll/ina
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet
t: w .ncdmf.net a�lJtlll'U��lf
An Equai oaoorUNty� nf,matA�sa� Emn✓► w� JAN 30 2013
DCM-MHD CITY

The site area also contains about 0.08 acres of intertidal firm vegetated shell habitat
(Substrate type Q) consisting of muddy sand sediment with shell and grass bottom
composition. Fifteen 1.Om2 samples were taken within this area of intertidal firm
vegetated shell habitat finding live oysters and clams mixed with dead shell within
Spartina spp. Total oysters (1019) consisted of 691 spat, 295 sublegal and 33 legal
oysters with oyster densities ranging from 0-396/m2 with a mean average oyster density
of 67.933/m2.
The site also contains about 1.75 acres of subtidal hard vegetated habitat (Substrate
Type J) consisting of sand sediment with a mixture of SAV and detritus bottom
composition. Fifteen 1.Om' samples were taken within this area of subtidal hard
vegetated habitat finding rhizomes of Zostera marina with very sparse percent density
coverage per m' sample.
The site also contains about 1.46 acres of subtidal hard non -vegetated without shell
habitat (Substrate type L) consisting of sand sediment. Fifteen 0.9Om2 samples
(13.5m2) were taken within this area finding only one seed clam.
Existing oyster shell bags were found on site coinciding with Audubon North Carolina's
CAMA General Permit # 60088 issued July 20, 2012.
The sparseness of SAV species at the time of this survey is perhaps due to the
seasonality of Zostera marina which was at its seasonal end at the time of this survey;
as well as the depth, current and turbidity conditions that currently exist on the
southwestern side of Beacon Island.
RECENED
JAN 3 0 2013
DCN'- ilD MY

NC DMF MAPPING PROGRAIV
Beacon Island, Pamlico Sound
J
J r
!,a1'y •.ri'� :Kr �'°' ^ �'r'fr y �.K£"�'rC•y �'rr+: �
�'� �..r•wL yaw w�•• �L w w�.��`.
•w ��.. w" er, 'mow`^�,� •-
A� A• A• A� AM A� A�
��� .-. lr.� •tip a. •h y •M� •M� �. •w ,. '1
• • (^. � �. 1Au�!AA. A• .emu
_ p V K
u M� M� �. A� ! •M
-' �L, hAJ^Y J �iA• 4Ar
•,` ^� ^ate
w y •M�` ••.� .• •w.LL y M
w iA Oe As
A" 1A" ';A• �A'
%
±yA aA
R
• J
Legend
.2.4 am are comer,
Seal island Survey Samples
Total SheRrfsl per sample
�A- �pkal Soft Vegetated sell
• p
S- Saead bndalsonVagabw 11
a o.000001-10,00
C-&1%dal Solt Non-vapeoiWSnell
- lg ODm01.10W
D - &tidal Solt Nor,veglddi d wlo shell
.2D+W OOI -OD'DD
E - Subatlal S m Vepeabd Snell
F - 9tladal Fem Vepabaa Wb S 11
-eo.00gom - aea.ao
c - SLtddal Fan Nanvparaad Snell
H - Submal Fan Nonvopaated w/o Shell
o- (,a,nail Fi m vpataad mall
I - scowl Had vap.read sell
J- Suotdal Had Vapebad W/o Snell
K- SubOdal Had Norvvepoaad Shall
L-SubtlMl Had Norvvepeabd Wo Shell
1111111 la -Ira r l Soa Vepebad Shell
N - Iderrdal Soft Vegeaad W/o Shell
1111111 o- mandrel soft Noromgftad sell
RECEIVED
01111 P- Idadwl Soft Norwepebbd w/o Snell
R- Ir1adoal Flnn Vpebbd Wo Shall (laand)
S- Idedwl Firm Norwepsaad$Nil
/r1� nnI
YN 3 0
T-naffidal Firm Na vapebbd w/o Stoll
2013
� U - Idedkbl Fad Vepabbd Snell
Sl♦ V-Ireanwl Had Vpeaad wlo Shall
W- InMtkial Had Nonve"red Shell
SI%- INeddal Had Noo-vapabted w/o Stoll
DCM.-MHDC"--
For questions regarding
this map or data
please contact:
Brian Conrad
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Resource Enhancement Section
Not For Navigational Use
0 100 200
Feet
1:1,000 ^
Layout Created: December 5, 2012

Beacon Island Oyster Habitat Restoration Project
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Proposed Project
The proposed project continues efforts made by the North Carolina Coastal Federation to restore
the eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) in coastal North Carolina. Federal funding from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organization (NOAA) through the Southeast Aquatic
Resources Partnership (SARP) and Restore America's Estuaries was awarded to the Federation
to construct patch oyster reefs in partnership with Audubon North Carolina at Beacon Island (350
5' 53.01" N, 76' 2' 49.99" W) located in Hyde County in Pamlico Sound, approximately 3.5
miles southwest of Ocracoke Island, NC (Figure 1). Audubon North Carolina is the landowner
and the federation is their authorized agent.
RECEIVED 4
JAN 3 0 2013
DCM.MHD CITY
Figure 1. Location of Beacon Island.
The remote 7.6-acre Beacon Island hosts a sanctuary that is one of only nine nesting sites for
brown pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) in the state. In 2011, the island supported 423 nesting
pairs of pelicans or 9% of the North Carolina population. The birds, whose available habitat has
been rapidly disappearing in recent years, depend on the island's shore. But that shoreline is also
diminishing annually due to erosion and the loss of salt marsh habitat from the increased
frequency of tropical storms and hurricanes and boat wake activity. The waters adjacent to the
island were also historically rich in oysters, however, over time, harvest pressure, disease and
declines in water quality have reduced this important substrate that allows new oyster colonies to
form.
The purpose of the patch oyster reefs is to provide substrate for the attachment of oyster larvae in
these traditionally productive waters. Once established, the oysters will help to filter nutrients
and pollutants, and thereby improve the water quality of Pamlico Sound. The patch oyster reefs

RECEIVED
will also provide habitat for finfish and shellfish and help to reduce erosion of the island's "AN 3 0 2013
shoreline.
n,^.1M_MHD C!TY
A total of nine shallow patch oyster reefs, covering 0.41 acres are proposed to be constructed
within a 2.4 acre project area to the west of Beacon Island using recycled oyster shells (Figure
2). The coordinates of the four corners outlining the 2.4 acre project area are:
• Northwest corner: 35° 5.902N, 76' 2.910'W
• Northeast corner: 35° 5.913N, 76° 2.871'W
• Southwest corner: 35' 5.824N, 76' 2.863'W
• Southeast corner: 35° 5.842N, 76° 2.828'W
Figure 2. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island within the 2.4 acre project area (red pins).
The project area was selected following a qualitative assessment of water depths, bottom type
and presence of seagrass around the island that was performed by the federation in summer 2012.
The western side of the island was chosen for the construction of the patch oyster reefs as it is
much shallower than the eastern side and experiences lower wind and wave energy. It is
characterized by intertidal and subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in depth from 0 to 4 feet. A
few small patches of seagrass exist within the project area and will be avoided during patch
oyster reef construction. Other shellfish (i.e., clams) were not observed within the project area. A
recent shellfish survey was performed by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries within the
project area and will be used to guide the exact placement of the patch oyster reefs so as not to
cover any existing shellfish resources. This survey is included with the permit application.
2

RECEIVED
Methodoloiry
The waters surrounding Beacon Island have adequate levels of oyster larval recruitment and)AN 10 2013
settlement as well as nekton and epifauna utilization. The patch oyster reefs are designed to
further enhance larvae recruitment and settlement, water flow and transport of oxygen and food,
.,D MY
for the oysters, habitat provision and other ecosystem services. The design will also allow for
protection of the island's shoreline.
Prior to reef construction, the federation will mark the boundary of the 2.4 acre project area as
well as the patch oyster reef locations with PVC posts according to the project design. Oyster
shells will be purchased from shucking houses and transported by truck to a stockpile location on
Ocracoke Island. Project contractors will load the reef material onto small, shallow draft barges.
The barges will travel to the project site where the contractors will spread the shells into the reef
locations with the use of an excavator.
Each of the proposed patch oyster reefs will be constructed to be approximately 100 ft. long, 20
ft. wide and will not exceed 18 inches in height (Figure 3). The reefs will be placed
approximately 50 ft. apart from one another on bare sand/mud bottom that does not contain
seagrass or shellfish. The nine proposed patch oyster reefs will cumulatively only disturb 0.41
acres (18,000 sq. ft.) of sand/mud bottom and will be located over an area of 2.4 acres (106,000
sq. ft.).
Approximate. width
of the base of the
created oyster reef =
10-30' (depending
upon site conditions)
Approx. height of the
created oyster reef =
12-18"(depending
upon site conditions)
Figure 3. Conceptual diagram of the proposed patch oyster reefs at Beacon Island.
Using its flat bottom boats, the federation will monitor reef construction activities to ensure that
project design specifications are met. Upon the satisfactory completion of the reef material
deployment, the federation will place signage on the project area indicating their designation by
the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries as either a shellfish research sanctuary or a shellfish
management area for four years to allow the oyster reefs to establish and grant required
monitoring of the reefs. Half of the patch reefs will then be open to harvest after the four years,
the other half of the patch oyster reefs will remain a shellfish management area/research
sanctuary (due to a NOAA grant requirement) pending annual approval by the N.C. Division of

RECEIVED
Marine Fisheries. Post project monitoring will then begin according to the monitoring schedule
^ 2�J13
(see Appendix A).
Previous monitoring of federation restored oyster reefs in North Carolina indicates that the}bCN 1c'ID C=TY
provide oyster habitat during the first spatfall season and that recruitment may be heavy
depending upon larval availability and seasonal fluctuations. Oysters generally reach maturity in
two to three years and the reefs will provide oyster habitat for as long as they exist, since new
oysters will continue to attach onto previous oyster shell layers. Lifecycle estimates of the
individual oysters are highly variable, and are not impacted by the project, but by natural
predation, oyster diseases and pollution. Monitoring of previously created federation reefs also
showed that they provide habitat and are used by a variety of finfish during the first year. Again,
the reefs will provide habitat for finfish for as long as the reefs exist. Since the reefs are formed
from oyster shells, there is no known limit to the structure lifetime.
Proiect Background
Oyster reefs are one of the most threatened habitats in the world (Beck et al. 2009). As the
primary intertidal and subtidal reef -building species along the east coast of the United States, the
eastern oyster has declined more than 90 percent from historic levels. Worldwide, functional
extinction (greater than 99 percent loss) of oyster reefs in estuaries is common (Beck et al. 2009)
and habitat losses exceed levels reported for more well-known coral reef, mangrove and seagrass
habitats. Both human activities and natural phenomena including over -harvest, disease, coastal
development and habitat disturbance have affected oyster distribution and abundance, as well as
contributed to oyster habitat losses (Lenihan and Peterson 1998, Coen and Luckenbach 2000,
Luckenbach et al. 1999, Breitburg et al. 2000).
In 2007, NOAA's Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team conducted a status review (EOBRT
2007). The review determined that oyster harvest along the east coast of the United States is only
2 percent of the peak historical harvest and that oyster restoration and enhancement efforts are
"necessary to sustain populations" in about half of the estuaries in the middle and south Atlantic
Ocean coast. The historical oyster harvest in North Carolina is showing significant decline
(Street et al. 2005), and they are currently listed as a species of concern. Estimates of historical
acreage of oyster reefs compared to current levels determined through N.C. Division of Marine
Fisheries Substrate Mapping Program, suggest a 50 percent decline in oyster reef habitat in
North Carolina.
Once valued primarily as a food resource, oysters are now recognized as ecosystem engineers
(Jones et al. 1994). Oyster reefs are regarded as one of the key structural elements within
southeast estuaries. Reefs create complex habitats which are used by fish, crustaceans and
bivalves that include commercial and recreational species as well as other invertebrates, birds
and mammals (Zimmerman et al. 1989; Wenner et al. 1996; Coen et al. 1999; Coen and
Luckenbach 2000, Meyer and Townsend 2000). Oyster reefs also offer critical habitat for oyster
populations, providing preferred substrate (oyster shell) for larval settlement (Marshall 1995;
Kennedy et al. 1996; DMF 2008). Oysters can improve water quality and clarity by filtering
large quantities of water. One mature oyster can filter approximately 200 liters of water per day
(Nelson et al. 2004; Newell 2004; Grizzle et al. 2008). Therefore, observed declines in oyster
populations not only affect the resource but are also closely associated with adverse effects to

RECEIVER
reef -associated species and reduced water quality, 1!`, 3 0 2013�
p q ty, ultimately leading to shifts away from natural
ecosystem functioning.
.DC TV
The structural relief of oyster reefs has another important role in the estuarine system. High relief !
oyster reefs alter currents and water flows, and physically trap and stabilize large quantities of
suspended solids, reducing turbidity (Dame et al. 1989; Coen et al. 1999; Lenihan et al. 1999;
Grabowski et al. 2000). In addition, intertidal oyster reefs protect shoreline habitats from waves
and currents, which aids in creek bank stabilization and reduction of salt marsh erosion (Bahr
and Lanier 1981; Dame and Patten 1981; Marshall 1995; Breitburg et al. 2000; Henderson and
O'Neil 2003; Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). By decreasing erosive forces, intertidal oyster
reefs reduce vegetative losses and, in some instances, promote marsh accretion (Meyer and
Townsend 2000; Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). In North Carolina, Meyer et al. (1997) found
that placement of oyster cultch along the lower intertidal fringe of Spartina marshes resulted in
net sediment accretion, while noncultched shorelines eroded. Additional studies in the Gulf of
Mexico and along the Atlantic coast have also suggested the value of shell bottom for shoreline
protection and erosion control, indicating lower erosion rates at shorelines protected by intertidal
oyster reefs as compared to unprotected locations (Piazza et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007).
In southeastern states, including North Carolina, intertidal oyster reefs are critical to maintaining
the integrity of fringing marshes along the complex tidal creek networks commonly found within
the barrier island and lagoonal estuaries of the region; such networks form a protective
breakwater that reduces shoreline erosion (Coen and Fischer 2002; Grizzle et al. 2002; Coen and
Bolton-Warberg 2003). Fringing marshes throughout the southeastern United States are vitally
important as fisheries habitat (Bell 1997, Kneib 2000). Once oyster reefs are lost or damaged,
marshes can rapidly erode. The ability of viable oyster reefs to prevent shoreline erosion will
also be critical to ameliorate the future challenge of sea level rise, attributable to global warming.
Oyster reefs have also been widely recognized as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for oysters and
other reef -forming mollusks (Coen et al. 1999; ASMFC 2007). The functional value of shell
bottom for oysters includes aggregation of spawning stock, chemical cues for successful spat
settlement and refuge from predators and siltation (Coen et al. 1999). As a reef matures, a
complex habitat with greater reef height and more interstitial spaces for recruiting oysters to
settle is created. This has led numerous authors to describe oysters as ecosystem engineers in
recognition of the importance of the biogenic reef structure to estuarine biodiversity, fishery
production, water quality and hydrodynamic processes (Lenihan and Peterson 1998; Gutierrez et
al. 2003; Dame 2005; Brumbaugh et al. 2006).
In addition to the role as essential habitat for oysters, reefs also provide critical fisheries habitat
for ecologically and economically important fmfish, mollusks and crustaceans which use the
shell bottom as spawning, nursery, foraging and/or refuge areas. In the 1990s, state and federal
fisheries management agencies formally began to recognize oyster reef habitat as critical to
fisheries production. Although fully functional reefs may require three to five years to develop,
data suggest that oyster shell alone attracts many more fish than adjacent bare mud flats (Coen et
al. 1999; Lehnert and Allen 2002; Garwood et al. submitted). In North Carolina, well over 40
species of fish and decapod crustaceans have been documented using natural and restored oyster
reefs including American eel, Atlantic croaker, Atlantic menhaden, black'sea bass, sheepshead,

RECEIVED A
JAN 3 0 2013
spotted seatrout, red drum and southern flounder (Coen et al. 1999; Lenihan et al. 2001; Peterson
et al. 2003; Grabowski et al. 2005; ASMFC 2007). These documented species include twelve L_
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission managed species and seven South Atlantic Fishery O CITY
Management Council managed species, suggesting the importance of this habitat for recreational
and commercial fisheries. In consideration of the economic importance of shellfish producing
areas, the N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission classified oyster reefs as critical habitat areas
under 15A NCAC 3I .0101. The South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council also recognizes
oyster reefs as Essential Fish Habitat for estuarine and near shore coastal ecosystems (Coen et al.
1999).
The most abundant species on oyster reefs, however, are generally small forage fishes and
crustaceans, such as pinfish, gobies, grass shrimp and mud crabs (Coen et al. 1999; Minello
1999; Posey et al. 1999; Plunket and La Peyre 2005; ASMFC 2007). These small fish and
crustaceans are important prey items in the diet of the larger recreationally and commercially
important invertebrates and fish that make foraging excursions to this habitat, reflecting the
aforementioned importance of shell bottom to fisheries production.
Management strategies, including restoration efforts designed to conserve or even improve reef
conditions, are recommended to reverse the negative consequences of reef losses (Brumbaugh et
al. 2006, Beck et al. 2009). Unlike many other global regions, oyster reefs in the southeastern
United States are characterized as good -to -poor (Beck et al. 2009), in part because of historical
under -exploitation and, until the 1990s, delayed coastal development. Although far from ideal,
the good -to -poor condition of southeastern oyster habitats represents an opportunity to be
proactive environmentally and attempt to reverse the losses before'oyster reefs become
functionally extinct in the region.
This project will help to restore oyster reef habitat in Pamlico Sound by providing adequate reef
and settlement substrate that will significantly enhance the oyster population and oyster reef
habitat in Pamlico Sound. These reefs will also protect existing oyster and salt marsh habitat and
provide valuable habitat for commercial and recreational species. This project will implement
estuarine habitat creation and restoration objectives described in the N.C. Oyster Protection and
Restoration Action Plan, the N.C. Oyster Fishery Management Plan and the N.C. Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan, the Onslow Bight Conservation Forum and the Cape Fear Arch Conservation
Council plan.
Essential Fisheries Habitat Habitat Areas of Particular Concern and Managed Species
The 1996 Congressional amendments to the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSFCMA) (PL 94-265) set forth new requirements for the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), regional fishery management councils (FMC), and other federal
agencies to identify and protect important marine and anadromous fish habitat. These amendments
established procedures for the identification of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) and a requirement for
interagency coordination to further the conservation of federally managed fisheries. Table 1 shows
the categories of EFH and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for managed species
which were identified in the Fishery Management Plan Amendments of the South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council and which may occur in southeastern states. Table 2 lists, by life
stages, 77 fish species which may occur in the vicinity of the project area and which are managed

RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 Z013
Table 1. Categories of Essential Fish Habitat and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in
Southeast United States t'1(N/A= Not Applicable; NS = Not Significant).
DCS!-T.t'`.i:D CITY
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT
Present within or adjacent to
project area
Impacts from filling for patch
oyster reefs
Estuarine Areas
I. Aquatic Beds
YES
NO
2. Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
YES
NO
3. Estuarine Scrub/shrub Mangroves
NO
N/A
4. Estuarine Water Column
YES
NO
5. Intertidal Flats
YES
NO
6. Oyster Reefs & Shell Banks
YES
NO
7. Palustrine Emergent & Forested
Wetlands
NO
N/A
8. Sea ass
YES
NO
Marine Areas
9. Artifrcial/Manntade Reefs
NO
N/A
10. Coral & Coral Reefs
NO
N/A
11. Live/Hard Bottoms
NO
N/A
12. Saz assum
NO
N/A
13. Water Column
NO
N/A
GEOGRAPHICALLY DEFINED HABITAT AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN
Area -Wide
14. Council -designated Artificial Reef
Special Management Zones
NO
N/A
15. Hermatypic (reef -forming) Coral
Habitat
& Reefs
NO
N/A
16. Hard Bottoms
NO
N/A
17. Hoyt Hills
NO
N/A
18. Sarassum Habitat
NO
N/A
19. State -designated Areas Important
for Managed Species
YES
NO
20. Submerged Aquatic
Ve etation SAV
YES
NO
North Carolina
21. Big Rock
NO
N/A
22. Bogae Sound
NO
N/A
23. Cape Fear, Lookout & Hatteras
(sandy shoals
NO
N/A
24. New River
NO
N/A
25. The Ten Fathom Ledge
NO
N/A
26. The Point
NO
N/A
'Areas shown are identified in Fishery Management Plan Amendments of the Soum Atiannc r rsnery Management wurwu mid,
are included in Essential Fish Habitat: New Marine Fish Habitat Mandate for Federal Agencies. February 1999. (Tables 6 and 7).

Table 2. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Species of Pamlico, Pamlico Sound and its tributaries,
North Carolina.
Source: NMFS, Beaufort, North Carolina, October 1999.
E=Eggs; L=Larval; J=Juvenile; A=Adult; N/A=Not Found
EFH FISH SPECIES
Waterbody
EFH FISH SPECIES
Waterbody
Pamlico
Sound
Pamlico
Sound
Bluefish
E L J A
Gray tri erfish
N/A
Summer flounder
L J A
Yellow jack
N/A
Gag grouper
J
Blue runner
N/A
Gray snapper
J
Crevalle'ack
N/A
Dolphin
N/A
Bar'ack
N/A
Cobia
E L J A
Greater amber'ack
N/A
King mackerel
JA
Ahnaco'ack
N/A
Spanish mackerel
J A
Bended rudderfish
N/A
Black sea bass
L J A
Spade fish
N/A
Spiny dogfish
E L J A
White grunt
N/A
Brown shrimp
E L J A
Ho fish
N/A
Pink shrimp
E L J A
Puddin ife
N/A
White shrimp
E L J A
Blackfm snapper
N/A
Atlantic bi e e tuna
N/A
Red snapper
N/A
Atlantic.bluefin tuna
N/A
Cubera snapper
N/A
Ski jack tuna
N/A
Silk snapper
N/A
Lon bills earfish
N/A
Blueline tilefish
N/A
Shortfm mako shark
N/A
Sand tilefish .
N/A
Blue shark
N/A
Bank sea bass
N/A
Spinner shark
N/A
Rock sea bass
N/A
Swordfish
N/A
Grasb
N/A
Yellowfm tuna
N/A
Speckled bird
N/A
Blue ri -ra in
N/A
Yellowed a grouper
N/A
White ri -ra in
N/A
Cone
N/A
Sailfish
N/A
Red bird
N/A
Calico scallop
N/A
Jewfish
N/A
Scalloped hammerhead shark
N/A
Red grouper
N/A
nose shark
N/A
Misty grouper
N/A
-Big
Black tip shark
N/A
Warsaw grouver
N/A
shark
N/A
Snowy grouper
N/A
-Dusky
shark
N/A
Yellowmouth grouper
N/A
-Night
Sandbar shark
J A
Scam
N/A
Silky shark
N/A
Shee shead
J A
Tiger shark
N/A
Red porgy
N/A
Atlantic sharlmose shark
N/A
Lon s ine porgy
N/A
Lon fin mako shark
N/A I
Scup
N/A
Whitetip shark
N/A
Little turn
N/A
Thresher shark
N/A
N/A
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
DC1W.LTD CITY

RECEIVED
under MSFCMA. These fish species and habitats require special consideration to promote their 3 0 2013
viability and sustainability. The potential impacts of the proposed project on these fish and
habitats can be seen in Table I and are discussed below.
IDCIvl-MM CITY
Aquatic Beds, Seagrass and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
A few small patches of seagrass exist within the project area. Algal beds may also be observed in
the project area in spring. The project protocol and coordination with the N.C. Division of
Marine Fisheries prohibits deployment of cultch material in any areas contacting seagrass. The
project strives to enhance estuarine habitat and covering existing seagrass would not be
consistent with program goals. Impacts to any seagrasses that might be present in waters adjacent
to the project area are expected to be turbidly from deployment operations and would be
negligible or minimal and short-lived. The proposed patch oyster reefs will not be constructed
where seagrass or other submerged vegetation exists and will therefore not have an adverse
impact on aquatic beds and seagrass.
Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Spartina marsh surrounds the entire shoreline of Beacon Island. The 2.4 acre project area,
however, does not contain any estuarine emergent wetlands and therefore, will not be impacted
by the construction of the patch oyster reefs.
Estuarine Scrub/Shrub Mangroves
This type of habitat is not located anywhere near the project area. The construction of the patch
oyster reefs will therefore not have an adverse impact on mangrove habitat.
Estuarine Water Column
The estuarine water column is defined as a medium of transport for nutrients, larvae and
migrating organisms between river systems and the open ocean. The patch oyster reefs will be
constructed to be no more than 1.5 ft. in elevation, utilizing very minimal space within the water
column. As a result, they are not expected to alter currents and velocity in the immediate
vicinity. This project will also not impede the flow of waters to or from wetland areas nor the
ocean waters. This project intends on adding hard substrate on which multiple organisms,
especially oysters, may attach and produce an abundance of larvae. The reef formation will
interact with the estuarine water column enabling a variety of organisms to inhabit the water
column and enable water currents to swirl and eddy, promoting the deposition of fine materials
and the settlement of oyster larvae. The additional abundance of larvae will help restore the
oyster population in North Carolina. Project construction may result in a temporary increase in
localized turbidity as the recycled oyster shells are being placed into the water. The impacts on
the estuarine water column are expected to be none to minimal.
Intertidal Flats
The project area is primarily subtidal with only a very narrow (<30 ft. wide) portion along the
eastern boundary of the project area containing intertidal flats that surround the western side of
Beacon Island. The eastern sides of proposed reefs I through 3 (Figure 2) will be constructed
within this intertidal flat area, restoring shell bottom habitat that has been found to have
significant positive impacts on population dynamics and community ecology. In addition to the
well -studied benefits of oyster areas for fisheries, research indicates that oysters provide

RECEIVED
]AN additional values such as water quality improvements, benthic pelagic coupling, nutrient 3 0 2013
dynamics and sediment stabilization. Researchers have begun to connect the role of oyster
habitat in maintaining the integrity of fringing marshes, forming a protective breakwater that
retards shoreline erosion. The project will have a beneficial impact on the intertidal flats along
the western side of Beacon Island.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Numerous natural oyster reefs are found adjacent to but not within the project area (North Rock,
Shell Castle). The project protocol and coordination with the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries
prohibits deployment of cultch material on existing shellfish resources. This project intends on
adding hard substrate on which multiple organisms, especially oysters, may attach and produce
an abundance of larvae. By design, the construction of the patch oyster reefs will not have an
adverse impact on oyster reefs and shell banks.
Palustrine Emergent & Forested Wetlands
This type of habitat is not located in or near the project area. The construction of the patch oyster
reefs will therefore not have an adverse impact on palustrine emergent and forested wetlands.
State —Designated Areas Important for Managed Species
Primary and Secondary Nursery Areas are designated by the NC Marine Fisheries Commission
and are defined as tidal salt waters that provide essential habitat for the early development of
commercially important fish and shellfish. This project provides fishery nursery habitats that are
consistent with the existing habitats within primary and secondary nursery areas.
Unconsolidated Soft Bottom
Surficial sediments on a soft bottom can act as habitat for a variety of microscopic plants and
benthic epifauna/infauna species. These organisms may serve as food sources for many other
organisms. These other organisms in turn can feed larger, economically important, fishery
species such as red drum, summer flounder, spot, Atlantic croaker, weakfish and striped bass to
name a few.
The 2.4-acre project area consists of intertidal and shallow subtidal soft bottom habitat ranging in
depth from 0 to 4 feet of which 0.41 acres of soft bottom will be covered with recycled oyster
shells, altering the estuarine substrate. However, areas of soft bottom will remain between the
reef patches as well as expansive areas of soft bottom habitat surrounding the reefs. In addition,
the reefs will slow down water flow and allow sediment to settle out. This will result in the
maintenance and addition of unconsolidated soft bottom.
The activities proposed have been demonstrated to have minimal affects overall on this EFH
type, but it is important to consider post -larval development that may occur in these areas. This
habitat serves as feeding and resting grounds for juvenile and adult species. Thus, these
organisms may be indirectly affected by filling of the substrate: But, given the mobility of the
organisms resting or feeding and the extensive areas of remaining soft bottom, the area of
disturbance is likely to have no significant adverse effects.

RECEIVED
Additional Project Area Concerns JAN 3 0 2013
In addition to the EFH species in Table 2, prey species such as spot, croaker and pinfish may also
occupy the estuarine waters of Pamlico Sound during varying life stages. The proposed projemcki yum C1TY
will not adversely affect prey species populations.
Impact Summary for Essential Fish Habitat
The objectives of this project are to enhance/restore and protect intertidal and shallow subtidal
patch oyster reef habitat to the west of Beacon Island in Pamlico Sound by providing suitable
substrate for oyster spat settlement. The project is also designed to reduce shoreline erosion of
the island caused by storm activity, boat wakes and rising sea levels. The targeted project area
has environmental conditions that will allow oyster recruitment and provide for their subsequent
survival and growth.
Created oyster reefs are constructed to change habitats from a soft substrate to a mixture of hard
and soft substrates by adding cultch material in a low profile (< 0.5 m.) deployment scheme.
These reefs are generally deployed to provide fisheries habitat in a desired location that provides
some measurable benefit to several different species as well as humans. When manmade reefs
are constructed, they provide new hard substrate similar in function to newly exposed hard
bottom (Goren, 1985). Aside from the differences in the physical characteristics and nature of the
materials involved in creating a manmade reef, the ecological succession and processes involved
in the establishment of the epibenthic assemblages (i.e. oysters) occur in a similar fashion on
natural hard substrates and man -placed hard substrates (Wendt et al., 1989). Finfish use natural
and manmade hard substrates in very similar ways and often interchangeably (Sedberry, 1988).
The changes in species composition and local abundance of important species in a specific area
are often seen as the primary benefits of artificial reef deployment activities.
Additional benefits of created oyster reefs placed on soft bottoms are the increase of diversity
and edges. The increase of biotic diversity is accomplished by adding hard substrate where none
existed. This in turn will attract organisms that settle on hard bottom but cannot settle on a
shifting bottom and then attract predators that feed on these sessile organisms. Edges can be
described as areas of transition between habitat types. Edges can also create areas of high
diversity, more so than over continuous areas of one habitat type. This has come to be known as
the edge effect principle. The edge created by deploying cultch material onto a soft bottom
habitat may also create a habitat of its own. The edge habitat is a culmination of the two habitats
(i.e. soft and hard substrates) because it is inhabited by a characteristic set of species. By adding
hard substrate to a soft bottom habitat the possible effect is that a third habitat is created. This
has been observed on oyster sanctuary mounds where reef fishes congregate near the center of
the substrate to graze on algae and are afforded the sense of security. Sheepshead, on the other
hand, patrol the edge of the substrate foraging out into the soft bottom habitat but continuously
return to hard substrate.
Oysters have often been described as the "keystone" species in an estuary (Bahr and Lanier
1981) and provide significant surface area as habitat. Sometimes compared to submerged aquatic
vegetation in the mid -Atlantic states, the oyster community has been identified as critical to a
healthy estuarine ecosystem. Direct and indirect ecosystem services (filtering capacity, benthic-
pelagic coupling, nutrient dynamics, sediment stabilization, provision of habitat, etc.) derived
11

RECEIVED
from the oyster reef have been largely underestimated (Coen and Lukenbach 1998). Oyster reefs AN 3 0 2013
can remove, via filter feeding, large amounts of particulate material from the water column, and
release large quantities of inorganic and organic nutrients that will benefit other co -inhabitants o fiCM_VHD MY
the reef (Haven and Morales -Alamo 1970; Dame and Dankers 1988; Dame et al. 1989).
The ecological role of the oyster reef as structure, providing food and protection, contribute to its
value as a critical fisheries habitat. The three-dimensional oyster reef provides more area for
attachment of oysters and other sessile organisms and creates more habitat niches than occur on
the surrounding flat or soft bottom habitat. Clams, mussels, anemones, polychaetes, amphipods,
sponges and many species of crabs are part of the oyster reef community. The invertebrates
recycle nutrients and organic matter and are prey for many finfish. Red and black drum, striped
bass, sheepshead, weakfish, spotted seatrout, summer and southern flounder, oystertoads, and
other fish frequent the oyster reef.
Created oyster reefs are known to promote extensive invertebrate communities and enhance
habitat for reef fish and other fish species, including cryptic, tropical, and gamefish species, as
well as many of commercial or recreational significance. The success of a reef and its
contributions to stock enhancement varies geographically and is determined by a wide range of
complex parameters, including existing habitat, physical limitations, material design, reef
configuration, reef management and the health of the targeted species complex, which in turn is
reliant on effective fisheries management locally, regionally and nationally. This potential is
further enhanced since domestic reef programs today possess better information and improved
technology and are more focused in using this tool towards specific stock enhancement and
fishery management needs.
For species which may be to some degree habitat -limited, the establishment of additional suitable
habitat targeted to specific life -history stages may improve survival. Additional manmade habitat
designed specifically to promote survival of targeted species in "protected" areas could
potentially enhance existing ecosystems or create new ones to fill in gaps where essential fish
habitat had been damaged, lost or severely over -fished. Man-made structures also may provide
essential habitat while simultaneously acting as a deterrent to illegal fishing practices in specially
managed areas (e.g. oyster sanctuaries).
Free swimming organisms will be able to avoid the area directly affected by project activities
and move to other soft bottom habitat and thus impacts to these organisms shall be minimal.
Some impacts to EFH will be permanent since the deployment of cultch onto soft bottom will
change the availability of the bottom under the reef material.
In contrast to the permanent impacts to the existing EFH, the ecological functions of oyster reefs,
be it manmade or natural, are numerous and an essential component of the estuarine system.
While a few EFH types will be subject to temporary impacts and other EFH categories will have
permanent impacts, these disturbances are trade-offs that will increase biomass (broodstock) of
oysters to help restore the oyster population, creating habitat in a hard substrate limited system,
that supports high diversity and multiple ecological functions. Implementation of this project is
not expected to cause any significant adverse impacts to any managed species and in fact will
12

hopefully facilitate the recovery of the oyster population and its beneficiaries, add essential fish
habitat, create additional salt marsh habitat for fishery utilization and benefit estuarine systems.
RECEIVED
r,N302013
P-CM MM OTY
13

RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
References
ASMFC (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission). 2007. The importance of habitRfFY-MUST1'
by molluscan shellfish to managed species along the Atlantic coast of the United States.
Habitat Management Series 8, 108p.
Bahr, L.N. and W.P. Lanier. 1981. The ecology of intertidal oyster reefs of the South Atlantic
coast: a community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Reports,
FWS/OBS-81/15, 105p.
Beck, M.W., R.D. Brumbaugh, L. Airoldi, A. Carranza, L.D. Coen, C. Crawford, O. Defeo, G.J.
Edgar, B. Hancock, M. Kay, H. Lenihan, M.W. Luckenbach, C.L. Toropova and G.
Zhang. 2009. Shellfish reefs at risk: a global analysis of problems and solutions. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 52 p.
Bell, F.W. 1997. The economic valuation of saltwater marsh supporting marine recreational
fishing in the southeastern United States. Ecological Economics 21: 243-254.
Breitburg, D.L., L.D. Coen, M.W. Luckenbach, R. Mann, M. Posey and J.A. Wesson. 2000.
Oyster reef restoration: convergence of harvest and conservation strategies. Journal of
Shellfish Research 19(1): 371-377.
Brumbaugh, R.D., M.W. Beck, L.D. Coen, L. Craig and P. Hicks. 2006. A practitioners' guide to
the design and monitoring of shellfish restoration projects: an ecosystem approach. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 28p.
Coen, L. D. and M.W. Luckenbach. 1998. Developing success criteria and goals for evaluating
shellfish habitat restoration: ecological function or resource exploitation? Goal Setting
and Success Criteria for Habitat Restoration Conference, January 13-15.
Coen, L.D., M.W. Luckenbach and D.L. Breitburg. 1999. The role of oyster reefs as essential
fish habitat: a review of current knowledge and some new perspectives. p. 438-454 In:
L.R. Benaka (ed.). Fish habitat: essential fish habitat and rehabilitation. American
Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, Symposium 22, 459 p.
Coen, L.D. and M.W. Luckenbach. 2000. Developing success criteria and goals for evaluating
oyster reef restoration: ecological function or resource exploitation? Ecological
Engineering 15:323-343.
Coen, L.D. and A. Fischer. 2002. Managing the fixture if South Carolina's oysters: an
experimental approach to evaluating current harvesting practices and boat wake impacts.
Journal of Shellfish Research 21:894.
Coen, L.D. and M. Bolton-Warberg. 2003. Evaluating the impacts of harvesting practices, boat
wakes and associated shoreline erosion on intertidal creek habitats in the southeastern
U.S.: managers and restoration programs take note. Journal of Shellfish Research 22:325.
14

DMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2008. North Carolina oyster fishery
management plan amendment II. NC Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC,
282p.
Dame, R. F. and N. Dankers. 1988. Uptake and release of materials by a Wadden Sea mussel
bed. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 118:207-216.
Dame, R.F. and B.C. Patten. 1981. Analysis of energy flows in an intertidal oyster reef. Marine
Ecology Progress Series 5:115-124.
Dame, R.F., J.D. Spurrier and T.G. Wolaver. 1989. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus processing
by an oyster reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series 54:249-256.
Dame, R. 2005. Oyster reefs as complex ecological systems. p. 331-343 In: R. Dame and S.
Olenin (eds.). The comparative roles of suspension -feeders in ecosystems. Springer, The
Netherlands.
Eastern Oyster Biological Review Team. 2007. -Status review of the eastern oyster (Crassostrea
virginica). Report to the National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional Office.
February 16, 2007. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/SPO-88, 105 p.
Garwood, J.A., D.C. Abel and K. Walters. Submitted. The effect of vertical structure on inshore
artificial reef fish and macroinvertebrate.communities. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology.
Grabowski, J.H., D. Pettipas, M.A. Dolan, A.R. Hughes and D.L. Kimbro. 2000. The economic
and biological value of restored oyster reef habitat to the nursery function of the estuary.
NC Sea Grant, Morehead City, NC, FRG # 97-EP-6, 29p.
Grabowski, J.H., A.R. Hughes, D.L. Kimbro and M.A. Dolan. 2005. How habitat setting
influences restored oyster reef communities. Ecology 86(7):1926-1935.
Goren, M. 1985. Succession of benthic community on artificial substratum at Elat (Red Sea).
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 38: 19-40.
Grizzle, R.E., J.R. Adams and & L.J. Walters. 2002. Historical changes in intertidal oyster
(Crassostrea virginica) reefs in a Florida lagoon potentially related to boating activities.
Journal of Shellfish Research 21: 749-756.
Grizzle, R.E., J.K. Green and L.D. Coen. 2008. Seston removal by natural and constructed
intertidal eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) reefs: a comparison with previous
laboratory studies, and the value of in situ methods. Estuaries & Coasts 31:1208-1220.
Gutierrez, J.L., C.G. Jones, D.L. Strayer and 0.0, Iribarne. 2003. Mollusks as ecosystem
engineers: the role of shell production in aquatic habitats. Oikos 101(1):79-90.
Haven, D. and R. Morales -Alamo. 1970. Filtration of particles from suspension by American
oyster, Crassostrea virginica. Biological Bulletin 139:248-264.
RECEIVED
is
JAN 3 0 2013.
DCM-MRD CITY

Henderson, J. and J. O Neal. 2003. Economic values associated with construction of oyster reefs
by the corps of engineers. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
Vicksburg, MS, EMRRP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN-EMRRP-ER-01), 10p.
Jones, C.G., J.H. Lawton and M. Shachak. 1994.Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos
69:373-386.
Kennedy, V.S., R.I.E. Newell and A.F. Ebele. 1996. The eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica.
Maryland Sea Grant College, College Park, MD.
Kneib, R.T. 2000. Salt marsh ecoscapes and production transfers by estuarine nekton in the
Southeastern United States. In: M.P. Weinstein and D.A. Kreeger (eds.), Concepts and
Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology. Springer, NY, NY. pp. 267-291.
Lehnert, R.L. and D.M. Allen. 2002. Nekton use of subtidal oyster shell habitat in a southeastern
U.S. estuary. Estuaries 25(5):1015-1024.
Lenihan; H.S. and C.H. Peterson. 1998. How habitat degradation through fishery disturbance
enhances impacts of hypoxia on oyster reefs. Ecological Applications 8(1):128-140.
Lenihan, H.S., F. Micheli, S.W. Shelton and C.H. Peterson. 1999. The influence of multiple
environmental stressors on susceptibility to parasites: an experimental determination with
oysters. Limnology and Oceanography 44:910-924.
Lenihan, H.S., C.H. Peterson, J.E. Byers, J.H. Grabowski and G.W. Thayer. 2001. Cascading of
habitat degradation: oyster reefs invaded by refugee fishes escaping stress. Ecological
Applications 11(3):764-782.
Luckenbach, M.W., R. Mann and J.A. Wesson (eds.) 1999. Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration. A
Synopsis and Synthesis of Approaches. Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press.
Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press, Gloucester Point, VA, 358 pp.
Marshall, M.D. 1995. North Carolina oyster restoration and fishery management plan. North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries and the North Carolina Blue Ribbon Advisory
Council on Oysters, Morehead City, NC, 116p.
Meyer, D.L., E.C. Townsend and G.W. Thayer. 1997. Stabilization and erosion control value of
oyster cultch for intertidal marsh. Restoration Ecology 5(1):93-99.
Meyer, D.L. and E.C. Townsend. 2000. Faunal utilization of created intertidal eastern oyster
(Crassostrea virginica) reefs in the southeastern United States. Estuaries 23(1):34-45..
Minello, T.J. 1999. Nekton densities in shallow estuarine habitats of Texas and Louisiana and the
identification of essential fish habitat. p. 43-75 In: Benaka, L. R. ed. Fish Habitat:
Essential Fish Habitat and Rehabilitation. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda,
Maryland, 459 p.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2013
16
p".'.!-1".ED CITY
-

Nelson, K.A., L.A. Leonard, M.H. Posey, T.D. Alphin and M.A. Mallin. 2004. Transplanted
oyster (Crassostrea virginica) beds as a self-sustaining mechanism for water quality .
improvement in small tidal creeks. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology
298(2): 347-368.
Newell, R.I.E. 2004. Ecosystem influences of natural and cultivated populations suspension -
feeding bivalve mollusks: a review. Journal of Shellfish Research 23(1):51-61.
Peterson, C. H., J.H. Grabowski and S.P. Powers. 2003. Quantitative enhancement of fish
production by oyster reef habitat: restoration valuation. Marine Ecology Progress Series
264:249-264.
Piazza, B. P., P.D. Banks and M.K. La Peyre. 2005. The potential for created oyster shell reefs as
a sustainable shoreline protection strategy in Louisiana. Restoration Ecology 13(3):499-
506.
Plunket, J. and M.K. La Peyre. 2005. Oyster beds as fish and macroinvertebrate habitat in
Barataria Bay, Louisiana. Bulletin of Marine Science 77(1):155-164.
Posey, M. H., T.D. Alphin, C.M. Powell and E. Townsend. 1999. Use of oyster reefs as habitat
for epibenthic fish and decapods. p. 229-238 In: M.W. Luckenbach, R. Mann and J. A.
Wesson eds. Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration: A Synopsis and Synthesis of Approaches.
Virginia Institute of Marine Science Press, Gloucester Point, VA.
Sedberry, G.R. 1988. Food and feeding of black sea bass, Centropristis striata, in live bottom
habitats in the South Atlantic Bight. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society
104:35-50.
Street, M.W, A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal
Habitat Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC. 656p.
Wenner, E., H. R. Beatty and L. Coen. 1996. A quantitative system for sampling nekton on
intertidal oyster reefs. Journal of Shellfish Research 15:769-775.
Wendt, P. H., D. M. Knott and R. F. Van Dolah. 1989. Community structure of the sessile biota
on five artificial reefs of different ages. Bulletin of Marine Science 44:1106-1122.
Zimmerman, R., T. J. Minello, T. Baumer, and M. Castiglione. 1989. Oyster reef as habitat for
estuarine macrofauna. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-249. 16 p.
17
RECEIVED
Jl,fv 10 2013
D^1V�TinLT C, V

Appendix A .
Project Monitoring Plan
A monitoring program will be implemented to evaluate progress towards the project's habitat
restoration objectives; measure overall project success and to comply with NOAA's minimum
scientific monitoring requirements. The project will be monitored for five years by the federation
working with volunteers to document their success. The monitoring parameters include the
structural and functional parameters listed below. The parameters, where appropriate, will be
measured and monitored prior to the project initiation, concurrent with project implementation
and continue until the results point to a trend of restoration success. Monitoring timing will be
conducted according to the project schedule and the selected parameters. The timing will allow
for any necessary changes or adaptive management during the project.
Oyster Reef Habitat Monitoring
➢ Habitat Restoration Start Date:
o Spring 2013
➢ Monitoring Start Date:
o Pre -project — Winter/Spring 2013
o Post project —Fall 2013, annually thereafter
➢ Monitoring End Date:
o Fall 2017
• Project Goal:
o Create and restore 0.41 acres of viable intertidal and shallow subtidal oyster
habitat offshore of Beacon Island in Pamlico Sound
➢ Project Objectives:
o Increase the acreage of oyster reef habitat (structural)
o Increase the amount of substrate available for oyster recruitment and reef
development (functional)
➢ Monitoring Parameters:
o Acreage of oyster habitat created (structural)
o Abundances and densities of oysters and epifauna (functional)
➢ Monitoring Measurements:
o Structural - Extent and area of created oyster habitat calculated by measuring reef
footprints using on the ground measurements, aerial photographs and mapping
tools
■ Once annually
■ Each patch oyster reef within the project area
o Functional - Sample 20cm x 20cm quadrat random excavations from created and
reference reefs, identify and enumerate all oysters and epifauna within the quadrat
■ Once annually
■ At least one quadrat from one reef
➢ Baseline ConditionsNalues:
o Pre -project survey for oysters and oyster habitat in the project area RECEIVED
l "N 3 0 2313
18
CITY

o Comparison to existing natural reference reefs representative of existing
conditions at each site and similar reef architecture and landscape characteristics
(series of patch reefs on mudflats or fringing reefs along saltmarsh habitat)
■ 1 reference reef will be selected within the project area that:
• best represent the existing natural condition;
• are similar in architecture and landscape characteristics to designed
created reefs; and
■ represent target conditions.
➢ Evaluation of Results:
o Quantitative comparison to baseline pre -project conditions
o Statistical comparison to reference reefs at each site
➢ Success Criteria:
o Increase in oyster habitat in the project area equal to or greater than project goal
o Created reefs exhibit similar densities and abundances of oyster and epifauna as
natural reefs at corresponding sites
➢ Indicators for Adaptive Management/Corrective Action
o Acreage targets not met
o Persistent absence or very low levels of oyster and epifuana on created reefs when
compared to natural reference reefs
➢ Watershed Scale Monitoring Programs:
o NCDMF conducts spat settlement counts in all the basins it deploys cultch in
o NCDMF also identifies and evaluates the presence of disease in the new juvenile
oysters on the shell planting sites
o UNCW SPAT monitoring program is collecting spat settlement and water
temperature and salinity data from all the major subbasins along the coast
o NCSU CMAST, UNC IMS and others are conducting a series of studies on oyster
larval transport, reef development and water quality trends in estuaries containing
the project areas.
o NCCF is conducting Total Maximum Daily Load (MDL) water quality studies
and watershed restoration plans in the Lockwood Folly River and White Oak
River.
RECENED
JAN 3 0 2013
19
DCM-Mn CITY

ENAR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Beverly Eaves Perdue Braxton C. Davis Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
20 December 2012
North Carolina Coastal Federation
C/O Mrs. Lexia Weaver
3609 HWY 24
Newport, North Carolina 28570
Dear Mrs. Weaver:
Enclosed is a Major CAMA/Dredge and Fill Permit application submitted electronically
on 17 December 2012 by you on behalf of the Audubon North Carolina for the construction of a
series of patch oyster reefs for the purpose of shoreline stabilization on the west side of Beacon
Island located approximately 3 miles northwest of Ocracoke Inlet in the Pamlico Sound near
Ocracoke Village, Hyde County, North Carolina. I have reviewed the application package for
completeness and have identified several items that must be addressed prior to acceptance of the
application as complete and initiating processing of the application.
Overall
The application needs a plan view and cross section plat that contains a title block that
includes the plat title, date, scale and sheet number if there is more than one sheet comprising the
application drawings. If the plan view is not to scale then the dimensions of the oyster reef sills
should be shown as well as some geospatial reference such as a distance offshore the normal
water level (NWL) so that the sill location can be evaluated against the SAV and shellfish survey
undertaken by the NC Division of Marine Fisheries. The plan view needs a North Arrow. Water
depths as either contours or spot elevations need to be shown on the plan view. Since the water
levels in the Pamlico Sound are not influenced greatly by the daily lunar tides, please use normal
water level (NWL) in place of mean high water (MHW). If you chose to create your plan view
using color photo imagery, I will need 27 copies. Before you print the required number of
copies, please submit a copy for a preliminary review. Also, this office will be unable to make
or print copies of the color photo imagery in the project narrative.
The application package needs an agent authorization form authorizing the Coastal
Federation to operate as agent for Audubon North Carolina. A copy of the deed or other
instrument documenting ownership of the Island is needed. The application forms need to be
signed. A $400 check made out to the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources (NC
DENR) is needed to cover the cost of the application fee.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 One
Phone: 252-94M4811 FAX: [phone] Internet: mm.nccoastalmanagemenl.net NorthCarollia
/n
An Equal opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer Naturallrf

North Carolina Coastal Federation
C/O Mrs. Lexia Weaver
20 December 2012
Page 2 of 2
Items
DCM Form MP-1
4.c. N/A
4.d. Change to NWL
4.f. Add marsh toe revetment
4.k. Change to no.
7. Sign application.
DCM Form MP-2
Decimal is missing in top block when describing width.
3b. Decimal is missing in describing width, 18.0' not 180'.
3c. Change NHW to NWL.
5. Sign application.
Once you have completed the necessary changes and additions to the application package
and resubmitted the package to me, I can continue processing your application. If you have any
questions or concerns with the requested changes/additions concerning your application package
please call me [phone]. I am available to meet with you and discuss the necessary
changes described in this letter.
Sincerely,
Steve Trowell
Coastal Management Representative
Washington Regional Office
Cc: David Moye — DCM, District Manager, Washington Regional Office
Doug Huggett—DCM, Major Permits Coordinator, Morehead City
Raleigh Bland — US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Regulatory Field Office