HomeMy WebLinkAboutExecutive SummaryRoanoke River Basin - Executive Summary
Basinwide water quality planning is a watershed-based approach to restoring and protecting the quality of North Carolina’s surface waters. Basinwide water quality plans are prepared by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) for each of the 17 major river basins in the state. Each basinwide plan is revised at five-year intervals. While these plans are prepared by DWQ, their implementation and the protection of water quality entail the coordinated efforts of many agencies, local governments and stakeholders throughout the state. The goals of basinwide planning are to:
identify water quality problems and restore full use to Impaired waters,
identify and protect high value resource waters, and
protect unimpaired waters while allowing for reasonable economic development. DWQ accomplishes these goals through the following objectives:
collaborate with regional and local agencies to develop appropriate management strategies (This includes providing agencies information related to financial and funding opportunities.),
assure equitable distribution of waste assimilative capacity,
evaluate cumulative effects of pollution,
improve public awareness and involvement, and
regulate point and nonpoint sources of pollution where other approaches are not successful. This document is the third five-year update of the Roanoke River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. The first basinwide plan for the Roanoke River basin was completed in 1996 and the second in 2001. The format of this third plan was revised in response to comments received during the first and second planning cycles. DWQ replaced much of the general information in the first two plans with more detailed information specific to the Roanoke River basin. For this plan, a greater emphasis is placed on watershed level information in order to facilitate protection and restoration efforts. DWQ considered comments from local resource agency staff and citizens during draft plan development. This input will help guide continuing water quality management activities in the basin over the next five years. Basin Overview The Roanoke River begins in the Blue Ridge Mountains of northwestern Virginia and flows in a generally southeastern direction for 400 miles before emptying into the Albemarle Sound in eastern North Carolina (Figure i). By the time it reaches the fall line near Roanoke Rapids, it has captured water from nearly 8,000 square miles of land. From Roanoke Rapids to the coast, the river drains another 2,000 square miles, carrying more water than any other river in North
Executive Summary xiii
Carolina. The North Carolina portion of the basin (roughly 36 percent of the entire watershed) is
composed of two major drainages: the Dan River and its tributaries in the western section; and
the Roanoke River from Virginia to the Albemarle Sound in the eastern section (Figure ii and
iii). The Roanoke River enters North Carolina through John H. Kerr Reservoir and then flows
into Lake Gaston and Roanoke Rapids Lake before regaining its riverine form.
The upper Dan River is classified as trout waters and part of the area is also designated a State
Water Trail by the NC Division of Parks and Recreation. The lower portion of the basin also
includes large tracts of bottomland hardwood forests owned by the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission, the US Fish and Wildlife Services, and The Nature Conservancy. The NC Wildlife
Resources Commission has designated a portion of the river as an Inland Primary Nursery Area
due to its great importance as spawning habitat for anadromous fish and world-class recreational
fisheries for striped bass and hickory shad. Anadromous fish spawned in the Roanoke River
migrate into the Atlantic Ocean, so the importance of the Roanoke River as a spawning and
nursery area for these fish has wide reaching implications. This area is also an important habitat
for black bear, bobcat, large populations of wild turkey, 14 species of waterfowl, as well as an
additional 220 bird species.
There are 11 major reservoirs in the North Carolina portion of the basin. Most of them are
located in the upper portion of the basin on tributaries of the Dan and Roanoke Rivers (notably
Belews Lake, Hyco Lake and Mayo Reservoir). Three reservoirs, Kerr, Gaston and Roanoke
Rapids, are impoundments of the Roanoke River mainstem. They are managed by Dominion
and the US Army Corps of Engineers for electrical energy production and flood control. Flow
from these reservoirs directly influences the quality of water in the lower Roanoke River.
Information presented in this basinwide water quality plan is based on data collected from
September 1999 to August 2004. Maps of each subbasin are included in each of the subbasin
chapters. Each subbasin has its own characteristics and water quality concerns. These are
discussed in Chapters 1 through 10.
DWQ identifies the stressors of water quality impact as specifically as possible depending on the
amount of information available in a watershed. Most often, the source of the stressor is based
on the predominant land use in a watershed. In the Roanoke River basin, new
development/construction activities, land clearing, agriculture, municipal and industrial point
source and impoundments were all identified as possible stressors. These are discussed in detail
in Chapter 13. Water quality decline can often be attributed to a combination of many stressors
that lead to habitat and water quality degradation. In some way, every person, industry,
landowner and municipality in the basin impacts water quality. Therefore, every resident of the
basin should play a role in management strategies designed to protect and restore the streams,
lakes and rivers of the basin.
Population Growth and Changes in Land Use
The Roanoke River basin encompasses all or portions of 15 counties and 42 municipalities. In
2000, the overall population in the basin (based on the percent of the county land area in the
basin) was 344,638. The most populated areas are located north of the Winston-
Salem/Greensboro area and around the larger municipalities in the basin, such as Roanoke
Rapids, Eden, Williamston and Plymouth.
xiv Executive Summary
Population in Forsyth, Granville, Persons and Stokes counties is projected to increase 20-30
percent from 2000 to 2020. Between 1990 and 2000, the fastest growing county was Granville,
which had an increase of 20.9 percent and is expected to grow by another 29.3 percent by 2020
for an estimated total population of 68,600 people. Population growth trends and the
accompanying impacts to water quality are discussed in Chapters 12 and 13.
Expanding populations are typically characterized by a loss of natural areas and an increase in
impervious surfaces. Based on the most current land cover information provided by the National
Resources Inventory (USDA-NRCS, 2001), there was a 136 percent increase in Urban and Built-
up areas adding 74,700 acres to this land cover category in the Roanoke River basin from 1982
to 1997. Uncultivated cropland also increased by 22,200
acres (89.5 percent), while cultivated croplands decreased
by 97,000 acres (20.4 percent). Forest and pastureland
cover significantly decreased by 7,000 (0.5 percent) and
24,000 (21.5 percent) acres, respectively. Most land
cover change is accounted for in the lower Roanoke
River. Land cover tables and statistics are included in
Appendix III.
Growing populations not only require more water, but
they also lead to the discharge and runoff of greater
quantities of waste and pollutants into the state’s streams
and groundwater. The impacts on rivers, lakes and
streams can be significant and permanent if stormwater
runoff is not controlled. Just as demand and use
increases, some of the potential water supply is also lost
(Orr and Stuart, 2000).
Water Quality Standards and Classifications
All surface waters in the state are assigned a primary
classification that is appropriate to the best uses of that
water. In addition to primary classifications, surface
waters may be assigned a supplemental classification.
Each primary and supplemental classification is assigned
a set of water quality standards that establish the level of
water quality that must be maintained in the waterbody to
support the uses associated with each classification. The
Primary classifications and best uses in the Roanoke
River basin are; Class C, aquatic life
propagation/protection and secondary recreation; Class B,
primary recreation and all Class C uses; and WS I-V,
water supply (the classification is based on specific land
use characteristics). Chapter 11 further describes the
water quality standards and classifications and includes a
map showing the designated Water Supply (WS) watersheds, and the supplemental
classifications of High Quality Waters (HQW) and Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) (Figure
16).
Roanoke River Basin Statistics
(North Carolina Portion)
Total Area: 3,503 sq. miles
Freshwater Stream Miles: 2,213
No. of Counties: 15
No. of Municipalities: 42
No. of Subbasins: 10
Population (2000): 344,638
Pop. Density (2000): 98
persons/sq. mile*
Water Quality Statistics
Aquatic Life
Monitored Streams: 37.8%
Supporting: 30.0%
Impaired: 5.7%
Not Rated: 4.2%
Recreation
Monitored Streams: 10.5%
Supporting: 8.1%
Impaired: 2.0%
Not Rated: 4.3%
Identified Water Quality Stressors
Habitat Degradation: 223 miles
Fecal Coliform Bacteria: 87.4 miles
Low Dissolved Oxygen: 70.4 miles
Turbidity: 58.6 miles
Toxic Impacts: 25.5 miles
* Estimated based on % of county land
area that is partially or entirely within the
basin, not the entire county population.
Executive Summary xv
HQW and ORW are supplemental classifications to the primary freshwater classification placed
on a waterbody. Special management strategies are often associated with the supplemental
HQW and ORW classification and are intended to prevent degradation of water quality below
present levels from point and nonpoint sources of pollution. Two creeks in subbasin 03-02-01
(Archies Creek and Peters Creek) received an excellent aquatic life use support rating which
make them eligible for reclassification to HQW or ORW. In the Roanoke River basin, there are
currently only two small segments making up a total of 1.6 stream miles in subbasin 03-02-01
that are classified as ORW.
Use Support Summary
Use support assessments based on surface water classifications form the foundation of this
basinwide plan. Surface waters are classified according to their best-intended use. Determining
how well a waterbody supports its use (use support rating) is an important method of interpreting
water quality data and assessing water quality.
Use support methods were developed to assess ecosystem health and human health risk through
the development of use support ratings for five categories: aquatic life; fish consumption;
recreation; shellfish harvesting; and water supply. These categories are tied to the uses
associated with the primary classifications applied to North Carolina rivers, streams and lakes
discussed in the previous section. There are no shellfish harvesting waters located in the
Roanoke River basin.
Biological, chemical and physical monitoring data collected between September 1999 and
August 2004 were used to assign use support ratings in the Roanoke River basin. A total of
832.4 stream miles for aquatic life, 230.6 stream miles for recreation and 49.4 stream miles for
fish consumption were monitored within the Roanoke River basin. Of these, 124, 43 and 49
stream miles were impaired respectively. Table i presents the totals of all the streams, lakes and
sound monitored and gives a summary of those Impaired and Supporting. Table ii lists all of the
monitored Impaired waters in the Roanoke River basin. Use support summary tables, which also
identify potential stressors and their sources as well as maps showing the current ratings, are
presented in each subbasin chapter (Chapters 1-10). Current status and recommendations for
restoration of water quality for each Impaired segment is also discussed in each subbasin chapter.
Use support methodology has changed significantly since the 2001 revision of the Roanoke River
Basinwide Water Quality Plan. The 2002 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment
Report Guidance issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requests that states
no longer subdivide the Impaired category. In agreement with this guidance, North Carolina
currently rates waters as Supporting (S), Impaired (I), Not Rated (NR) or No Data (ND). NR is
used to identify those waters that had inconclusive data. These ratings refer to whether the
classified uses of the water (e.g., water supply, aquatic life, primary/secondary recreation) are
being met. Detailed information on use support methodology is provided in Appendix IX.
Water Quality Stressors
Water quality stressors are identified when impacts have been noted to biological (fish and
benthic) communities or water quality standards have been violated. Whenever possible, water
quality stressors are identified for Impaired waters as well as waters with notable impacts.
xvi Executive Summary
Stressors identified during this assessment are briefly discussed below and in more detail in
Chapter 13 as well as in each subbasin chapter (Chapters 1-10).
Certain stressors are associated with specific use support categories. For example, in the
recreation category, violations of the fecal coliform bacteria standard are the reason for
impairment; therefore, fecal coliform bacteria is the stressor for Impaired waters in this category.
In the aquatic life category, Impaired waters result from violations of one or more numerical
water quality standards or because a biological community sample (fish or benthic) did not meet
use support criteria. Stressors to aquatic life can be numerical water quality standards that are
violated, or a host of aquatic habitat quality indicators such as excessive sediment or lack of
organic habitat. The following discussion summarizes stressors identified during this assessment
period and possible sources of the stressors.
Table i – Summary of Monitored Waters in the Roanoke River Basin
Use Support
Category Units
Total
Monitored
Waters
Total
Impaired
Waters
Total
Supporting
Waters
Total
Not Rated
Monitored &
Evaluated
Total
No Data
Miles/
Acres
Miles/
Acres % Miles/
Acres % Miles/
Acres
Miles/
Acres
Aquatic Life
Freshwater acres
(impoundments) 36,485 0 0 3162 8.4 33,323 1058
Aquatic Life
Freshwater miles
(streams) 834.4 124.7 5.7 661 30 91.4 1327
Aquatic Life Estuarine acres 0 0 0 0 0 0 1476
Recreation
Freshwater acres
(impoundments) 0 0 0 0 0 0 37543
Recreation
Freshwater miles
(streams) 230.6 43 2 179 8.1 96 1886
Recreation Estuarine acres 0 0 0 0 0 0 1476
*Fish
Consumption
Freshwater acres
(impoundments) 0 0 0 0 0 0 37543
*Fish
Consumption
Freshwater miles
(streams) 49.4 49.4 2.2 0 0 0 2155
*Fish
Consumption Estuarine acres 1476 1476 100 0 0 0 0
* Fish Consumption data is for Dioxin only. All waters within the Roanoke River basin are Impaired on an evaluated
basis for mercury (37,543 freshwater acres, 2,204 freshwater stream miles and 1,476 saltwater acres).
DWQ identifies the source of a stressor as specifically as possible depending on the amount of
information available in a watershed. Most often the source is based on the predominant land
use in a watershed. Stressor sources identified in the Roanoke River basin during this
assessment period include urban or impervious surface areas, construction sites, land clearing,
agriculture and water impoundments. Because land disturbance is one of the main stressor
sources, there has been increased funding to the Division of Land Resources to help address
these source. Point source discharges are also a water quality stressor sources in the Roanoke
River basin.
Executive Summary xvii
Habitat Degradation
One of the most noted water quality stressors is instream habitat degradation. Instream habitat
degradation is identified where there is a notable reduction in habitat diversity or a negative
change in habitat. Sedimentation, streambank erosion, channelization, lack of riparian
vegetation, loss of pools or riffles, loss of woody habitat, and streambed scour are all associated
with habitat degradation. These stressors are typically a result of increased flow of stormwater
runoff due to land use changes or to sediment runoff from land-disturbing activities. In the
Roanoke River basin, 60 streams miles are Impaired and another 163 stream miles were
negatively impacted where at least one form of habitat degradation is the suspected stressor.
Streams with noted habitat degradation are discussed in the subbasin chapters (Chapters 1-10).
To assess instream habitat degradation requires extensive technical and monetary resources.
Although DWQ and other agencies are starting to address this issue, local efforts are needed to
prevent further instream habitat degradation and to restore streams that have been impacted by
activities that caused habitat degradation. As discharges become less of a source of water quality
impairment, nonpoint sources that pollute water and cause habitat degradation need to be
addressed to further improve water quality in North Carolina’s streams and rivers.
DWQ recommends the use of careful planning to maintain riparian buffers and the use of good
land use management practices during all land disturbing activities to prevent habitat
degradation. In addition, watersheds that are being developed need to maintain management
practices for long periods to prevent excessive runoff that is the ultimate source of the habitat
degradation noted above.
Low Dissolved Oxygen
Maintaining an adequate amount of dissolved oxygen (DO) is critical to the survival of aquatic
life and to the general health of surface waters. A number of factors influence DO
concentrations including water temperature, depth and turbulence. Additionally, in the Roanoke
River basin, a large swampy floodplain drainage system and flow management from upstream
impoundments also influences DO. Oxygen-consuming wastes such as decomposing organic
matter and some chemicals can reduce DO levels in surface water through biological activity and
chemical reactions. NPDES permits for wastewater discharges set limits on certain parameters
in order to control the effects that oxygen depletion can have in receiving waters.
In the Roanoke River basin during this assessment period, there were over 20 stream miles
Impaired because of dissolved oxygen (DO) standards violations. This includes a portion of the
Lower Roanoke River (Chapter 9 and 13). There were also over 18 stream miles where
dissolved oxygen levels were low enough to be of concern, although this area has a supplemental
classification of swamp waters (Sw) where low DO levels are possibly due to natural conditions.
Turbidity
In the Roanoke River basin during this assessment period, there were 55 stream miles Impaired
because of turbidity standards violations. All of the turbidity violations occurred in the western
portion of the basin. Almost the entire North Carolina portion of the Dan River and the entire
5.1 stream mile portion of the Smith River are Impaired due to noted turbidity violations. In this
same region of the basin, elevated turbidity levels were also seen in the Mayo River. These are
discussed in detail in each of the subbasin chapters (Chapters 1-4). Only 14.2 stream miles of
xviii Executive Summary
the Dan River were impaired for turbidity during the last basin cycle. The turbidity violations
during this assessment period were mostly associated with unknown nonpoint source pollution as
well as with land clearing activities.
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Water quality standards for fecal coliform bacteria are intended to ensure safe use of waters for
recreational uses, therefore only class B waters are intensively sampled to assess the standard. In
the Roanoke River basin there were 43 stream miles where the fecal coliform bacteria standard
was violated, these waters are Impaired for recreation. As with turbidity, almost the entire North
Carolina portion of the Dan River and the entire portion of the Smith River are Impaired due to
fecal coliform bacteria violations. These are discussed in detail in each of the subbasin chapters
(Chapters 1-4). These violations were mostly associated with unknown nonpoint source
pollution.
Dioxin
The 36.1 mile stretch of the Roanoke River from Highway 17 bridge in Martin County to the
Albemarle Sound, as well as 1,476 saltwater acres of the Albemarle Sound/Batchelor Bay are
Impaired for fish consumption based on a dioxin advisory from the NC Department of Health
and Human Services’ (DHHS) for carp and catfish. This advisory also includes all of Welch
Creek (13.3 miles) that flows into this section of the Roanoke River. This is discussed in
Chapter 9.
The fish consumption Impairments are due to the NC DHHS fish consumption advisory posted
in October 2001 for carp and catfish. It is advised that carp and catfish from these waters may
contain low levels of dioxins. Swimming, boating, and other recreational activities present no
health risks and are not affected by this advisory. For more information regarding fish
consumption advisories, call (919) 707-5900 or visit the NC DHHS Division of Public Health
website at http://www.schs.state.nc.us/epi/fish/current.html.
Mercury in Fish Tissue
The presence and accumulation of mercury in North Carolina’s aquatic environment are similar
to contamination observed throughout the country. Mercury has a complex life in the
environment, moving from the atmosphere to soil, to surface water and into biological
organisms. A dominant pathway of mercury in the environment is through the atmosphere.
Mercury that has been emitted from industrial and municipal stacks into the ambient air can
circulate across the globe. At any point, mercury may then be deposited onto land and water.
Once in the water, mercury can accumulate in fish tissue and humans. Mercury is also
commonly found in wastewater.
All waters within the Roanoke River basin are Impaired on an evaluated basis in the fish
consumption category. This is based on a fish consumption advise from the NC Department of
Health and Human Services. For more information on fish consumption advisories and advice,
contact NC DHHS (see contact information above or see discussion in Chapter 13).
Agriculture and Water Quality
Excess nutrient loading, pesticide and/or herbicide contamination, bacterial contamination and
sedimentation are often associated with agricultural activities, and all can impact water quality.
Executive Summary xix
Chapter 16 provides information related to the impacts of agriculture on water quality. Impacts
to water quality from agricultural sources may decrease over the next basin cycle due to
substantial increases in urban/built-up areas throughout the river basin.
DWQ will identify streams where agricultural activities may be impacting water quality and
aquatic habitat. This information will be related to local Division of Soil and Water
Conservation (DSWC) and Natural Resources Conservation Service staff to investigate impacts
in these watersheds and to reduce these impacts. The DSWC Ag Cost Share Program has spent
over $3 million on various management practices in the Roanoke River basin. DWQ
recommends that funding and technical support for agricultural BMPs be continued and
increased. Refer to Chapter 16 for specific BMP information and Appendix VIII for agricultural
nonpoint source agency contact information.
Forestry and Water Quality
Based on land cover information provided by the North Carolina Corporate Geographic Database
(CGIA) and the USDA-NRCS, 73 percent of land in the Roanoke River Basin consists of
forest/wetland. Several stream miles were potentially identified as being impacted by stressors
associated with forestry activities. Where forest harvesting is identified as a potential source of
water quality impact, DWQ will notify the Division of Forest Resources (DFR) to investigate
potential violations and the enforcement of management strategies. Chapter 17 presents more
information related to the impacts of forestry on water quality.
Wastewater Treatment and Disposal
Currently, there are 77 permitted wastewater discharges in the Roanoke River basin with a
permitted flow of approximately 188 MGD. Chapter 14 provides summary information (by type
and subbasin) about the discharges. This chapter also provides guidance for permitting in
various watersheds that may be water quality limited and also contains general information
related to wastewater treatment disposal associated with registered animal operations. Maps of
permitted facilities are provided in each subbasin chapter. For a complete listing of permitted
facilities in the basin, refer to Appendix VI. The majority of NPDES permitted wastewater
discharges into the waters of the Roanoke River basin are from major municipal wastewater
treatment plants. Nonmunicipal discharges also contribute substantial wastewater into the
Roanoke River basin.
There are 155 stream miles noted throughout this plan where point sources may have negatively
impacted the water quality. Facilities, large or small, where recent data show problems with a
discharge are discussed in each subbasin chapter. DWQ will determine if any violations are
ongoing and address them using the NPDES permitting process. Many watersheds are adversely
impacted by the cumulative effects of discharges and nonpoint source runoff.
Impacts from Stormwater Runoff
Stormwater runoff is rainfall or snowmelt that runs off the ground or impervious surface (e.g.,
buildings, roads, parking lots, etc.) instead of absorbing into the soil. In some cases, stormwater
runoff drains directly into streams, rivers, lakes and oceans. In other cases, particularly
urbanized areas, stormwater drains into streets and manmade drainage systems consisting of
inlets and underground pipes, commonly referred to as a storm sewer system. Stormwater runoff
is a primary carrier of nonpoint source pollution in both urbanized and rural areas. The impact of
xx Executive Summary
stormwater runoff is particularly severe in developing areas where recently graded lands are
highly susceptible to erosion. Water quality impacts are also evident in urbanized areas where
stormwater runoff is increased by impervious surfaces and is rapidly channeled through ditches
or curb and gutter systems into nearby streams. For more information on stormwater as it relates
to growth and development, refer to Chapter 12.
There are many different stormwater programs administered by DWQ. One or more of these
programs affect many communities in the Roanoke River basin. The goal of the DWQ
stormwater discharge permitting regulations and programs is to prevent pollution from entering
the waters of the state via stormwater runoff. These programs try to accomplish this goal by
controlling the source(s) of pollutants. These programs include NPDES Phase I and II, coastal
county stormwater requirements, HQW/ORW stormwater requirements, and requirements
associated with the Water Supply Watershed Program. Chapter 14 includes more information on
the statewide stormwater programs and a list of Local governments that are or may be affected
by these programs.
Water Resources
Chapter 18 presents information related to minimum streamflow requirements, interbasin
transfers, water quality during drought conditions, and source water protection. The chapter also
includes the federal cataloging units (commonly referred to as hydrologic units) as they relate to
the state subbasin boundaries.
Significant Ecological Resources and Endangered Species
The Roanoke River basin is ecologically significant and diverse in numerous ways, and contains
habitat for over 140 rare plant and animal species. The character of the basin as it enters North
Carolina, contains some natural communities often associated with mountains. The Roanoke
then flows about 100 miles through the Piedmont and the Coastal Plain. The Piedmont provides
habitat for a number of rare fish and mussels, as well as small-anthered bittercress (Cardamine
micranthera), a species only known to Stokes County and adjacent Hentry County, Virginia.
This endemic plant requires small or intermittent streams and seepage areas, and is found in the
wet soil and rocks along small stream banks in hardwood forest with intact forest cover. This
species was presumed extinct, however it was rediscovered in 1985, nearly 30 years after it had
last been seen. The Coastal Plain section of the Roanoke River contains high-quality examples
of wetland communities such as Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods and Cypress-Gum
Swamps. Some of these natural communities are extensive, and the large blocks of habitat are
excellent for wildlife. Finally, the Roanoke River is the major contributor of freshwater to
Albemarle Sound.
The Natural Heritage Program has identified over 145 individual natural areas in the Roanoke
River basin. Several of these areas are discussed in Chapter 19. A table of rare animals
associated with aquatic habitats in the Roanoke River basin is also provided. There are 11 rare
mollusks, five rare insects, one rare crustacean, and nine rare fish in the basin. The James
Spinymussle is a federally listed endangered species found in the Roanoke River subbasins 03-
02-01 and 03-02-02. Some of these rare species are also noted in the individual subbasin
chapters.
Executive Summary xxi
Water Quality Initiatives
Local organizations and agencies are able to combine professional expertise and local knowledge
not present at the state and federal level. This allows groups to holistically understand the
challenges and opportunities of local water quality concerns. Involving a wide array of people in
water quality projects also brings together a wide range of knowledge and interests and
encourages others to become involved and invested in these projects. Working in cooperation
across jurisdictional boundaries and agency lines opens the door to additional funding
opportunities and eases the difficulty of generating matching or leveraged funds. This could
potentially allow local entities to do more work and be involved in more activities because
funding sources are diversified. The most important aspect of these local endeavors is that the
more localized the project, the better the chances for success.
The collaboration of local efforts is key to water quality improvements, and DWQ applauds the
foresight and proactive response by locally based organizations and agencies to protect water
quality. There are many excellent examples of local agencies and groups using these cooperative
strategies throughout the state. Several local watershed projects are highlighted throughout the
subbasin chapters (Chapters 1-10). Chapter 20 also summarizes monies spent by federal and
state programs to help implement water quality improvement projects. Over $48,000 was
granted by the Clean Water Act Section 319 program for one project in this basin and over $13
million was made available over the last several years through the Clean Water Management
Trust Fund. This chapter also contains information about the Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Waters on the North Carolina 303(d) List
For the next several years, addressing water quality impairment in waters that are on the state’s
303(d) list will be a DWQ priority (Table i). Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act
requires states to develop a list of waters not meeting water quality standards or which have
Impaired uses. The waters in the Roanoke River basin that are on this list are discussed in the
individual subbasin chapters (Chapters 1-10). States are also required to develop Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) or management strategies for 303(d) listed waters to address
impairment. EPA issued guidance in August 1997 that called for states to develop schedules for
developing TMDLs for all waters on the 303(d) list within 8 to 13 years. Information regarding
303(d) listing and reporting methodology can be found in Appendix VII.
The rigorous and demanding task of developing TMDLs for each listed water during a 13-year
time frame will require the focus of many resources. It will be a priority for North Carolina’s
water quality programs over the next several years to develop TMDLs for 303(d) listed waters.
Roanoke River Basin TMDLs are discussed in the individual subbasin chapters. There are many
new impaired segments in the Roanoke River basin. These are likely to be placed on the 2008
303(d) list and will require TMDL development for the next several years.
Challenges Related to Achieving Water Quality Improvements
To achieve the goal of restoring Impaired waters throughout the basin, DWQ will need to work
closely with other state agencies and stakeholders to identify and control pollutants. The costs of
restoration can be high, but several programs exist to provide funding for restoration efforts.
These programs include the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF), the NC
xxii Executive Summary
Agricultural Cost Share Program (NCACSP) and the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(NCEEP).
Balancing economic development and water quality protection will be a tremendous challenge.
Point source impacts on surface waters can be measured and addressed through the basinwide
planning process. Nonpoint source pollution can be identified through the basinwide plan, but
actions to address these impacts must be taken at the local level. Such actions should include:
development and enforcement of local erosion control ordinances; requirement of stormwater
BMPs for existing and new development; development and enforcement of buffer ordinances;
and land use planning that assesses impacts on natural resources. This basinwide plan presents
many water quality initiatives and accomplishments that are underway throughout the Roanoke
River basin. These actions provide a foundation on which future initiatives can be built.
Executive Summary xxiii
D a n R i v e r Hyco Lake
MayoCreek
Kerr
Reservoir
Belews Lake
M
a
y
o
R
i
v
e
r
C o u n tr y L i n e
C r e e k
Smith Mountain Lake
D a n R i v e r
Lake Gaston
Roanoke River
R
oa
n
oke Riv
er
Cashie River
Albermarle Sound®
Planning Section
Basinwide Planning Unit
May 30, 2006
0 20 40 60 8010
Miles
Figure i General Map of the Entire Roanoke River Basin
M
a
y
o
R
i
v
e
r
Dan
R
i
v
e
r
Kerr
Reservoir
Hyco
Lake
Belews
Lake
Winston-Salem
Eden
Reidsville
Roxboro
Madison Henderson
King
Yanceyville
Walnut Cove
Rural Hall
Stoneville
Danbury
Stovall
Kernersville
Milton
Middleburg
STOKES
PERSON GRANVILLE
CASWELL
FORSYTH
ROCKINGHAM
VANCE
03-02-01 03-02-03 03-02-05 03-02-0603-02-0403-02-02
®
Planning Section
Basinwide Planning Unit
April 7, 2006
0 102030405
Miles
Figure ii General Map of Western Portion
of the Roanoke River Basin in North Carolina
Muncipalities
Legend
Counties
Subbasin Boundary
Hydrography
Albemarle
Sound
Lake Gaston
R
o
a
n
o
k
e
R
i
v
e
r
CashieRiver
Gaston
Roanoke
Rapids
Weldon
Aulander
Roxobel
Jackson
Williamston
Hobgood
Norlina
Kelford
Littleton
Rich Square
Askewville
Jamesville
Oak City
Scotland Neck
Macon
Hamilton
Halifax
Lewiston-
Woodville
Hassell
g
Windsor
Plymouth
03-02-09
03-02-08
03-02-10
03-02-07
BERTIE
HALIFAX
MARTIN
WARREN
NORTHAMPTON
WASHINGTON®
Planning Section
Basinwide Planning Unit
April 7, 2006
0 9 18 27 364.5
Miles
Figure iii General Map of Eastern Portion
of the Roanoke River Basin in North Carolina
Muncipalities
Legend
Counties
Subbasin Boundary
Hydrography
Monitored Impaired Waters in Roanoke River Basin
Subbasin Stream Name AU Number Length/Area Reason for Impairment
03-02-01 DAN RIVER (North Carolina portion)22-(1)b 11.6 FW Miles High Turbidity
03-02-02 DAN RIVER 22-(31.5)a 4.8 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-03 DAN RIVER 22-(31.5)b 9.4 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-03 DAN RIVER 22-(38.5) 0.6 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-03 DAN RIVER (North Carolina portion)22-(39)a 13.8 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-03 Smith River 22-40-(3) 1.8 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-03 Smith River 22-40-(1) 2.8 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-03 Smith River 22-40-(2.5) 0.5 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-04 DAN RIVER (North Carolina portion)22-(39)b 9.6 FW Miles High Turbidity
High Fecal Coliform Bacteria
03-02-05 Hyco Creek (North Hyco Creek)22-58-1 16.8 FW Miles Fish Community Impaired
03-02-05 Marlowe Creek 22-58-12-6a 6.6 FW Miles Benthic Community Impaired
03-02-06 Little Island Creek (Vance County)23-4-3 11.8 FW Miles Fish Community Impaired
03-02-06 Nutbush Creek (Including Nutbush Creek Arm
of John H. Kerr Reservoir below normal pool
elevation)
23-8-(1)b 1.6 FW Miles Benthic Community Impaired
Fish Community Impaired
03-02-07 Newmans Creek (Little Deep Creek)23-10-2 6.1 FW Miles Benthic Community Impaired
03-02-07 Smith Creek 23-10a 6.1 FW Miles Benthic Community Impaired
03-02-07 Smith Creek 23-10c 3.0 FW Miles Fish Community Impaired
Benthic Community Impaired
Low Dissolved Oxygen
03-02-09 ALBEMARLE SOUND (Batchelor Bay)24 1,475.5 S Acres Fish Consumption Advisory Dioxin
03-02-09 ROANOKE RIVER 23-(26)b3 17.8 FW Miles Low Dissolved Oxygen
03-02-09 ROANOKE RIVER 23-(53) 18.3 FW Miles Fish Consumption Advisory Dioxin
03-02-09 Welch Creek 23-55 13.3 FW Miles Fish Consumption Advisory Dioxin
Roanoke River Basin Executive Summary