Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout47-13 Aubudon North CarolinaPermit 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 (919) 807-4650 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 (252) 946-6481 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 WGOLDER@audubon.org 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, (919) 733-2698 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: 252-808-28081 FAX: 252-247-3330 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: 252-946.64811 FAX: 252-948-0478 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 WGOLDER@audubon.org 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 lexiaw@nccoast.org, toddm@nccoast.org <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: 252-726-70211 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 (252) 264-3901. 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: 252-948-54811 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: 252-948-0478 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: 252-946-64811 FAX: 252-948-0478 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: 252-946-6481 1 FAX: 252-948-0478 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: 252-946-64811 FAX 252-948-0478 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: 252-946-6481 1 FAX: 252-948-00401Internet: 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 WGOLDER@audubon.org 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 lexiaw@nccoast.org, toddm@nccoast.org �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: 252-726-7021 1 FAX: 252-726-02541 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: 252-946-6481 e Washington, NC 27889 FAX 252-946-9215 �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: 252-946-6481 l FAX: 252-948-0478 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: 252-946-64811 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: 252-946-6481 1 FAX: 252-948-0478 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: 252-946-6481 1 FAX: 252-948-0478 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 (910) 251-4605. 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: 252-946-64811 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: 252-946-64811 FAX: 252-948-0478 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 (252)948-3854 Please publish on: 6 February 2013 RECEIVED JAN 3 0 2013 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Phone: 252-948-848i 1 FAX: 252-948-0478 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: 252-726-70211 FAX: 252-726-02541 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: 252-948-0478 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 (252) 948-3854. 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