20091205 All Versions_Complete File_20020228

I
I
I
I
I
I

FEB28_

Natural Resources Technical Report

!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Replacement of Bridge No. 13 on SR 1890
Over Ea~t Fork Pigeon River
Haywood County, North Carolina
Dc,l 0 '3 0 s

State Project No. 8.2942401
TIP Project No. B-2988

(-)
f'.. ..)
\)

.': j
-'",

" \"

I ,1;
v

North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

February 2002

I'
< ,

I

I
I

I
I

-I

Natural Systems Report

I

TIP No. 8-2988
SR 1890
Haywood County, North
Carolina

I

I
I

Prepared for.
North Carolina Department of

Transportation

I
I

Prepared by:
ARCADIS G&M of North Carolina, Inc.
P.O. Box 31388
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1388
2301 Rexwoods Drive - Suite 102
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607-3366
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]

I

Our Ref.:
NC601032.0000

,

Date:
February 2002

I

I

This document is intended only for the use of
the individual or entity for which it was
prepared and may contain information that is
privileged, confidentiat and exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. Any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
document is strictly prohibited.

I

I

Table of Contents

Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
'I
I
I
i,
t
I
I
I

5. Rare and Protected Species
5.1 Animals
5.2 Plants

6. References

Figures
1
2

Vicinity Map
Natural Communities and Surface Waters

Tables

Federally Protected Species Known from Haywood County, North
Carolina

2 Federal Species of Concern Known from Haywood County, North
Carolina

5-1
5-2
5-7

6-1

Table of Contents

ii

I-
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I,
'1

1. Introduction

ARCADIS G&M of North Carolina, Inc. (ARCADIS G&M) has been retained by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to prepare a Natural Systems
Technical Report for the replacement of Bridge No. 13 on SR 1890 over the East Fork
Pigeon River in Haywood County, North Carolina. The following Natural Systems
Report is submitted to assist in the preparation ofthe Categorical Exclusion for the
proposed project.

1.1 Project Description

The proposed project, TIP No. B-2988, will replace Bridge No. 13 over the East Fork
Pigeon River in Haywood County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The bridge is currently
in poor condition with numerous cracks and heavy deterioration. Rehabilitation of the
existing structure does not appear to be a feasible option due to its age and condition.
This replacement will result in a safer structure, consistent with federal and state bridge
standards.

No alternatives for the proposed project have been defined; therefore, a triangular-
shaped study area, approximately 900 feet (274 meters) long and 325 feet (99 meters)
wide, encompassing approximately 4.52 acres (1.83 hectares) was studied.
Approximately 300 linear feet (91.5 meters) of East Fork Pigeon River channel and
approximately 400 linear feet (122 meters) of Hungry Creek are contained within the
project study area. The project vicinity is defined as a larger area, approximately one-
halfmile (0.6 km) on all sides ofthe study area. The project region is the area
generally represented on a standard 7.5-minute United States Geological Survey
(USGS) topographic quadrangle map.

I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I

Since no alternatives have been identified, impacts to Waters of the United States
cannot be determined. However, bridge demolition activities will strictly follow
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal (BMPs-
BDR). As per the BMPs-BDR, all methods of demolition shall be considered and
implemented where practical, other than dropping the bridge in the water.

1.2 Purpose

The purpose of this technical report is to inventory, catalog, and describe the natural
systems within the study area. Recommendations are made for measures that will
minimize resource impacts, as well as giving preliminary determinations of permit
needs and mitigation options. These descriptions and estimates are based only on the

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Introduction

1-1

I
I;
I
t
,I
II
I
I,
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I'
I

defined study area since no preliminary concepts have been formulated. If the study
area or criteria changes, additional field investigations will be necessary.

1.3 Methodology

Qualified biologists from ARCADIS G&M conducted field investigations within the
project study area during July 2001. Pedestrian surveys were undertaken to determine
natural resource conditions and to document natural communities, wildlife, and the
presence of protected species or their habitats.

Published information regarding the project area and region was derived from a
number of resources including: USGS 7.5-Minute Topographical Quadrangle Map.
(Cruso, North Carolina), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National
Wetland Inventory (NWI) map, NCDOT aerial photomosaics of the project area
(1"=100'), and Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil maps. Water
resources information was obtained from publications ofthe North Carolina Division
of Water Quality (NCDWQ). Information concerning the occurrence of federal and
state protected species within the project area and vicinity was gathered from the
USFWS list of protected species (March 2001) and the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of rare species and unique habitats (July 2001).

Dominant plant species were identified in each strata for all natural communities
encountered. Plant community descriptions are based on those classified in Schafale
and Weakley (1990) where applicable. These communities are subsequently compared
with updated plant community descriptions in Weakley et al. (1998, draft). For the
context of this report, community classifications have been modified in some instances
to better reflect field observations. Names and descriptions of plant species generally
follow Radford et al. (1968) unless more current information is available. Animal
names and descriptions follow Martof et al. (1980), Stokes (1996), Rohde et al. (1994),
and Webster et al. (1985). Scientific nomenclature and common names (when
applicable) are provided for each plant and animal species listed. Subsequent
references to the same organism include the common name only.

During surveys, wildlife identification involved a variety of observation techniques:
active searching and capture, visual observations (both with and without the use of
binoculars), and observing the characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scats, tracks, and
burrows). Organisms captured during these searches were identified and released
without injury. Quantitative water sampling was not undertaken to support existing
data.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Introduction

1-2

I
I
I
a
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
"
I

Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed using the three-parameter
approach as prescribed in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Supplementary technical literature describing the
parameters ofhydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrological indicators was
also utilized. Wetland functions were evaluated according to the Division of Water
Quality's Rating System, 4th version (1995).

1.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigators

Investigator:
Education:

Experience:

Expertise:

Investigator:
Education:

Experience:
Expertise:

Martha M. Register, Staff Scientist

MS, Botany, North Carolina State University
BS, Food Science, The Pennsylvania State University

ARCADIS G&M, November 1997 to present

Environmental Biologist, Robert J. Goldstein & Associates,
July 1995 to November 1997

NEP A investigations, Section 7 investigations, wetland delineation

Harold M. Brady, Staff Scientist

BS, Natural Resources Ecosystems Assessment, North Carolina State
University

Undergraduate Studies in Biology, University of North Carolina at
Asheville

ARCADIS G&M of North Carolina, Inc., January 2000 to present

NEP A investigations, Section 7 investigations, wetland determination
and delineation, and stream determination and delineation

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Introduction

1-3

I
I
I
I
I
"
,
I,
I
I
1,
I,
I
I
I
I
I
"
I

2. Physical Resources

Haywood County is situated in the southwestern portion of the Mountain
physiographic province in North Carolina. The geography of the county consists
predominantly of very steep uplands, with gentler slopes in the major river valleys.
Narrow, nearly level floodplains ate along most of the streams in the region; however,
steep gorges are not uncommon. Elevations in the project area range from
approximately 3,020 feet (920 meters) above Mean Sea Level (MSL) to 3,050 feet
(930 meters) above MSL as depicted on the Cruso, North Carolina, USGS topographic
quadrangle map.

2.1 Geology

The Mountain physiographic province of North Carolina is composed of parent
material dating back 500 million to one billion years. This parent material is associated
with the Blue Ridge Belt. This complex mixture of igneous, sedimentary, and
metamorphic rock has been squeezed, fractured, faulted, and twisted into folds. The
Blue Ridge Belt is well known for its deposits of feldspar, mica, and quartz-basic
materials used in the ceramic, paint, and electronic industries. The project vicinity is
located within the Ashe Metamorphic Suite and the Tallulah Falls Formationwhich is
within the Oconee Supergroup. The study area is depicted as a formation of
muscovite-biotite gneiss which is sulfidic, and interlayered and gradational, with mica
schist, minor amphibolite, and hornblende gneiss (NCGS, 1991).

2.2 Soils

The process of soil development depends on both biotic and abiotic influences. These
influences include past geologic activities, nature of parent materials, environmental
and human influences, plant and animal activity, time, climate, and topographic
position. Coarsely mapped soil areas are referred to as soil associations. These soil
associations are defined as landscapes that exhibit distinctive proportional patterns of
soils consisting of one or more major soils and at least one minor soil. The soils within
an association generally vary in slope, depth, stoniness, drainage, and other
characteristics.

One soil association is present in the project area; the Dillsboro-Dellwood-Braddock
association. Based on information obtained from the Haywood County Soil Survey,
the Dillsboro-Dellwood-Braddock association is comprised of nearly level to
moderately steep, moderately well drained to well drained, sandy, loamy, and clayey
soils. These soils can be shallow or very deep and likely contain sand, gravel, and

Natural Systems
Report. 8-2988
Haywood County

Physical Resources

2-1

I
I
I
I
I
I
1\
Ii
I
I
a
1
I,
I
I
1/
I
II
I

cobbles. This association is found in the mountains on floodplains and high stream
terraces formed from alluvium washed from higher elevations. The minor soils within
this association include Cullowhee, Nikwasi, Rosman, Statler, and Saunook.

Two soils types are depicted within the study area, Dellwood cobbly sandy loam with a
o to 3 percent slope and Saunook loam with a 2 to 8 percent slope. Dellwood soils are
very deep, moderately well drained, with slow surface runoff, and moderately rapid
infiltrntion. The subsoil is dark yellowish brown to yellowish brown extremely
gravelly coarse sand. Dellwood soils are typically found on nearly level floodplains of
fast-flowing streams and rivers at elevations between 2,000 feet (610 meters) above
MSL to 3,000 feet (914 meters) above MSL. Saunook soils are very deep, well
drained, with medium surface runoff, and moderate infiltrntion. The subsoil is dark
yellowish brown to yellowish brown loam to cobbly sandy loam. Saunook soils are
typically found on gently sloping landscapes including coves, drainage ways, toe
slopes, and benches oflow mountains at elevations between 2,500 feet (762 meters)
above MSL to 3,500 feet (1067 meters) above MSL.

Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough
during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and
regeneration ofhydrophytic vegetation (Cowardin et al., 1979). Dellwood cobbly
sandy loam with a 0 to 3 percent slope located along floodplains within the study area
are listed as having hydric inclusions ofNikwasi soils (NRCS, 1996).

2.3 Water Resources

Streams, creeks, and tributaries within the project region are part of the French Broad
River Basin. The basin is located entirely witbinthe Southern Appalachian Mountains
region of west em North Carolina and encompasses approximately 2,842 square miles
(7,361 square kilometers). The French Broad Basin is composed oftbree separate
drainages all flowing northwestward into Tennessee; French Broad River, North Toe
River, and Pigeon River. These waters converge at Douglas Reservoir and outfall into
the Tennessee River. Waters associated with this basin eventually empty into the Gulf
of Mexico, via the Mississippi River. Approximately half of the land within the basin
is federally owned consisting predominantly of undeveloped forestland. A majority of
the remaining privately owned lands are forested lands as well.

The East Fork Pigeon River and Hungry Creek account for the surface waters in the
project area (Figure 2). The project study area is situated approximately seven miles
southeast and upstream of the confluence of the East Fork Pigeon River and the West
Fork Pigeon River to form the Pigeon River. It is located in NCDWQ

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Physical Resources

2-2

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Subbasin 04-03-05 and USGS Hydrologic Unit 06010106. This section of the East
Fork Pigeon River is identified by the NCDWQ Stream Index # 5-3-(6.5) and Hungry
Creek is identified by the Stream Index # 5-3-10. NCDWQ classifies surface waters of
the state based on their intended best uses. The East Fork Pigeon River and Hungry
Creek are classified as "WS-III Tr" waters. Most of the tributaries of the East Fork
Pigeon River from Bee Branch, located approximately 1 1'2 miles (2.4 kIn) upstream of
the study area, to the Pigeon River are classified as "WS-III Tr" waters. Class WS-III
denotes waters that supply drinking water in low to moderately developed watersheds.
General permits are allowed throughout the watershed including domestic and non-
process industrial discharges. Additionally, buffers are required along all the perennial
waters. "Tr" denotes trout waters that are suitable for natural trout propagation and ~e
maintenance of stocked trout. This additional classification affects wastewater
discharge and bridge crossings. There are no watershed development restrictions
except the stream buffer-zone requirements of the North Carolina Division of Land
Resources (NCDLR). Additional information concerning trout waters is included in
Section 2.4.

The East Fork Pigeon River and its tributaries from its source to Bee Branch are
classified as High Quality Waters (HQW). These waters begin approximately 11'2
miles (2.4 kIn) upstream of the project area and continue upstream to the source.
HQW are water bodies that have been rated as excellent by the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Management (NCDEM). There are no other HQW or
ORW in the project vicinity.

The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake, and estuarine
water quality monitoring stations strategically located for the collection of physical and
chemical water quality data. The type of water quality data or parameters collected is
determined by the water bodies ' classification and corresponding water quality
standards. The AMS determines the ''use support" status of waterbodies, meaning how
well a waterbody supports its designated uses. The waters in the project area are
currently rated as Supporting.

A benthic macroinvertebrate sampling study consisting of sixteen sites within the basin
was conducted in 1997 and included a sampling site approximately one mile
downstream of the project location on the East Fork Pigeon River. The sampling
events involved quantitatively measuring the numbers and diversity of three Orders of
macroinvertebrates, stoneflies (Order: Plecoptera), caddisflies (Order: Tricoptera), and
mayflies (Order: Ephemeroptera). The 1997 sampling event gave the East Fork Pigeon
River an "excellent" rating. No other sampling sites are in the vicinity of the project
area.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Physical Resources

2-3

I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
,:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are regulated through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Dischargers are
required by law to register for a permit. According to NCDWQ (1997), there are
twenty-two permitted NPDES dischargers in the subbasfu, all of which are minor
dischargers (<1.0 MGD). There is one NPDES regulated discharger within the East
Fork Pigeon River watershed; Royal Oaks, Inc / Springda1e.

2.4 Physical Resources Impacts

Cut and fill activities associated with bridge approaches and/or relocated road will
impact soils due to removal, relocation and compaction.

The primary sources of water-quality degradation in rural areas are agricultural
operations and construction. Precautions should be taken to minimize impacts to water
resources in the project area during constmction. Aquatic organisms are very sensitive
to discharges and inputs resulting from construction. Appropriate measures must be
taken to avoid spillage and control runoff. Potential impacts associated with
construction of the proposed project include: increased sedimentation, scouring of the
streambed, soil compaction, and loss of shading due to vegetation removal. Increased
sedimentation from lateral flows is also expected. Measures to minimize these
potential impacts include the formulation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan,
provisions for waste materials and storage, stormwater management measures, and
appropriate road maintenance measures. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
Protection of Surface Waters and Sedimentation Control guidelines should be strictly
enforced during the construction stages of the project.

Because of the classification as ''WS-ill Tr", NCDOT will strictly adhere to North
Carolina's, "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024)
throughout design and constmction of the project. Due to the potential for water
quality impacts during construction, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) suggests in-stream construction moratorium to limit the
effects on fishery resources. Scott Loftis (NCWRC, 9/25/01), indicated that the East
Fork Pigeon River currently contains trout. Brown trout (Salmo trutta) and rainbow
trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were observed during the site visit. Depending on the
species of trout present the following in-stream construction moratoriums would
apply: October 15 to March 31 for brown and brook trout, January 1 to April 15 for
rainbow trout, and October 15 to Apri115 if all three trout species are present.
NCDOT will coordinate with NCWRC regarding the presence or absence of trout
species and the application of the appropriate construction moratorium.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Physical Resources

2-4

I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I,
I

3. Biotic Resources

This section describes the existing vegetation and associated wildlife that occur within
the project area. The project area is composed of different vegetative communities
based on topography, soils, hydrology, and disturbance. These systems are interrelated
and in many aspects interdependent. Potential impacts affecting these communities are
also discussed. Scientific nomenclature and common name (when applicable) are
provided for each plant and animal species listed. Subsequent references to the same
organism include only the common name.

3.1 Plant Communities

Community boundaries are frequently ill-defined; contiguous communities generally
merge without transition zones. Distribution and composition of these communities
reflect variations in topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land uses.
Within the study area, all natural community patterns have been modified by previous
disturbances. The following community profile description reflects North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) classification scheme. Thee plant communities
are located in the project study area: montane alluvial forest; urban/disturbed land; and
agricultural/disturbed land. These communities are described in greater detail below
and presented in Figure 2.

3.1.1 Montane Alluvial Forest

Montane alluvial forests are found within stream and river floodplains at moderate to
high elevations. Vegetation within this community is dependent upon occasional
flooding. The flooding events provide added sediment and nutrient input, and cause
natural openings in the canopy and subcanopy thus creating an uneven-aged stand.
However, beavers and catastrophic flooding can cause the forest to never mature and
remain in early succession. In a mature montane alluvial forest, canopy trees typically
range between 10 and 20 inches (25.4 and 50.8 cm) diameter at breast height (DBH);
however the canopy trees within this community in the study area are considerably
smaller (approximately 4 to 10 inches (10.2 to 25.4 cm) DBH). This community is
only found within the study area along the edge of the East Fork Pigeon River.

I
I
,I,
I

Vegetation within this community typically varies quite a bit between the northern or
southern aspect. However, the project area has eastern and western aspects, thus the
vegetation typical of the northern aspect and southern aspect are mingled together. The
dominant canopy trees include sycamore (platanus occidentalis), basswood (Titia
heterophylla), eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), and yellow poplar (Liriodendron

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Biotic Resources

3-1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I

tulipifera), with red oak (Quercus rubra), red maple (Acer rubrum), sugar maple (Acer
saccharum), and black cherry (Prunus serotina) also in the canopy. Understory
species represented in this community include black locust (Robinia pseudo-acacia),
rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), musclewood (Carpinus caroliniana),
mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), willow (Salix nigra), yellow buckeye (Aesculus
jlava), witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), yellow birch (Betula lutea), and flowering
dogwood (Cornus jlorida). Groundcover and herbaceous species present include thorn
bush (Rosa rugosa), blackberry (Rubus spp.), yarrow (Achillea millefolium), and
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissis quinquefolia).

3.1.2 Urban/Disturbed Lands

This urban/disturbed lands community is characterized by human influences and
artificial surfaces related to industrial, commercial, and residential development,
roadways, parking lots, maintained yards, and other areas that have been manipulated.
Vegetation associated with this community is kept in a low state of succession by
regular mowing or maintenance. This community is present throughout much of the
eastern side of the study area along SR 1890 and the extreme southwestern comer of
the study area along US Highway 276.

The canopy within the urban and disturbed lands community is not dominated by any
one species due to the sparsely planted shade trees and maintained conditions. The
canopy trees include, sycamore, yellow poplar, red maple, and eastern hemlock. Other
trees and large shrubs occupying the subcanopy, especially along the roadside include,
willow, privet (Ligustrum sinense), mulberry (Morus rubra), and flowering dogwood.
The observed understory combining herbaceous plants and climbing vines include
sumac (Rhus sp.), trumpet vine (Campsis radicans), greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia),
blackberry, honeysuckle (Lonicerajaponica), and Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota).
Fescue (Festuca spp.) and other grasses dominate the ground layer. Other roadside
groundcover species include, but are not limited to, dandelion (Taraxacum officinale),
vetch (Vicia spp.), henbit (Lamium sp.), Indian grass (Sorghastrum nutans), chickweed
(Stellaria spp.), clover (Trifolium sp.), onion (Allium sp.), and ebony spleenwort
(Asplenium platyneuron).

3.1.3 AgriculturallDisturbed Lands

I
I
I
I

Agricultural lands represent areas used for the cultivation of row crops, and disturbed
lands are areas that are maintained to contain very little to no woody vegetation. These
communities are generally even-aged, human dominated, and have little, if any, species
diversity. Agricultural lands are harvested on a particular rotation and provide limited

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Biotic Resources

3-2

I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I

habitat diversity for wildlife. This community is found as fallow fields in the
. northwestern and southwestern portions of the study area.

The agricultural and disturbed lands within the study area are dominated by rye-grass
and Bermuda grass; however, a few individual tree and herbaceous species were
present along the edges of the fields. The tree species included yellow-poplar, yellow
birch, sycamore, basswood, and flowering dogwood. Herbaceous species observed
include sumac, blackberry, honeysuckle, thorn bush, bee-balm (Monarda spp.),
Soloman's seal (Polygonatum biflorum), pWox (Phlox spp.), spiderwort (Tradescantia
spp.), sunflower (Helianthus spp.), lady's sorrel (Oxalis spp.), stonecrop (Sedum spp.),
goldenrod (Solidago rugosa), and Robin's plantain (Erigeron pulchellus).

3.2 Terrestrial Wildlife

The alluvial forest community in conjunction with open agricultural lands, urban lands,
and other disturbed areas offer high plant diversity and water availability; thus
providing high quality wildlife habitat. These communities provide a variety of habitat
for amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Species observed during the site visit
are indicated by an asterisk (*).

The project study area likely exhibits a diverse amphibian population. Species such as
the eastern newt (Notophthalmus viridescens), and various salamanders including the
seal (Desmognathus monticola), mountain dusky (D. ochrophaeus),blackbelly (D.
quadramaculatus), two-lined (Eurycea bislineata), Jordan's (Plethodonjordani), and
red (Pseudotriton ruber) likely exist within the project study area. Newts and
salamanders forage on insects, both aquatic and terrestrial, crustaceans, worms, and
other organisms along the forest floor and in the East Fork Pigeon River and Hungry
Creek. The eastern newt spends its juvenile life in wooded areas adjacent to streams.
Once it reaches adulthood, the newt inhabits primarily streams. Salamanders can be
found in a variety of habitats, though most are associated with small streams and
seepages. Species such as the mountain dusky, Jordan's and the ravine salamander are
found primarily in terrestrial habitats under rocks, leaves, and woody debris. In
addition, other amphibians such as, spring peepers (Hyla crucifer) and pickerel frogs
(Rana palustris) are likely present. Spring peepers mainly inhabit woodlands while
pickerel frogs are found along shaded streams and wet areas.

I
I
I
I

Reptile species including snakes, lizards, and turtles are found throughout most
ecosystems, especially in forested areas near water. Snakes forage on slugs,
earthworms, insects, eggs, small mammals, fish, and amphibians depending upon the
species. Several snake species that were observed or are likely to be present within the

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Biotic Resources

3-3

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

study area include the brown snake* (Storeria dekayi), timber rattlesnake (Crotalus
horrid us), northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon), and rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta).
Lizards found within the southeastern United States feed primarily on insects and
inhabit a wide variety of habitats. "Lizard species that are likely to be observed within
the study area include the eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulaoo), five-lined skink
(Eumeeesfasciatus), and broadhead skink (E.latieeps). The most ancient of all living
reptiles are turtles, which are generally omnivorous and found in or near water. Turtle
species that are likely to be found within the study area include the snapping turtle
(Chelydra serpentina) and eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina).
I

Bird species inhabiting or migrating through the study area may include haiIy
woodpecker (Picoides villosus), downy woodpecker (P. pubescens), eastern wood-
pewee (Contopus virens), eastern phoebe (Sayornis phoebe), blue jay (Cyanocitta
cristata), bam swallow (Hirundo rustiea), Carolina chickadee (Poecile earolinensis),
tufted titmouse (Baeolop~us bicolor), white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta earolinensis),
American robin (Turdus migratorius), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia), northern
cardinal (Cardinalis eardinalis), and brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater). Game
species such as woodcock (Scolopax minor), ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) and wild
turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) may also be present. Predatory birds, such as red-tailed
hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and eastern screech owl (000 asio) are also likely to be
found in the project vicinity.

I
I
I
I

A diverse mammal population is expected in and surrounding the project study area.
Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), smokey shrew (Sorexfumeus), eastern
cottontail (Sylvilagusjloridanus), eastern chipmunk* (Tamias striatus), woodchuck
(Marmota monax), gray squirrel* (Sciurus carolinensis), eastern harvest mouse
(Reithrodontomys humulis), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), coyote (Canis latrans),
raccoon (Procyon lotor), mink (Mustela vison), eastern spotted skunk (Spilogale
putorius), and white-tailed deer (Odoeoileus virginianus) were observed or are likely
inhabitants of the project region. In addition, bats such as the little brown myotis
(Myotis lucifugus), silver-haired (Lasionyeteris noetivagans), eastern pipistrelle
(Pipistrellus subjlavus), and red (Lasiurus borealis) may be present in the project study
area.

3.3 Aquatic Habitats and Wildlife

I
I
I
I

The aquatic habitat in the East Fork Pigeon River and Hungry Creek is diverse in the
area surrounding the existing bridge due in large part to a natural mix of riftles, runs,
and pools. The project region has experienced minimal disturbance to water resources .
as a result of timber harvesting operations, land clearing, construction, and trout

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Biotic Resources

3-4

I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\1
I
I
I
I

farming. The East Fork Pigeon River surrounding the project study area is a relatively
moderate to fast-flowing, shallow river with the streambed composed primarily of
sand, gravel, and cobbles. Aquatic diversity is expected to be high through this section
of the creek.

Specialists from NCDOT will be conducting a survey for freshwater mussels.

Redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), bluegill* (Lepomismacrochiros), smallmouth
bass (Micropterus dolomieu), Hiwassee shiner (Notropis scabriceps), logperch
(Percina caprodes), blacknose dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), longnose dace (R.
cataractae), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), white sucker (Catostomus
commersoni), northern hog sucker (Hypentelium nigricans), brown trout,* rainbow
trout, * brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), and mottled sculpin (Cottus baird i) are
species that were observed or may exist near the bridge and immediately downstream.
These fish feed on a variety of living organisms and organic matter, including algae,
insects, worms, crustaceans, snails, and detritus.

During field investigations, rocks were over-turned throughout rime and run sections
within the creek immediately around the bridge area. Few and small benthic
macroinvertebrates including caddisfly* (Order: Tricoptera), cranefly* (Family:
Tipulidae), mayfly* (Order: Ephemeroptera), and stonefly* (Order: Plecoptera) larvae
were observed clinging to the undersides of these rocks. Macroinvertebrates in root
mats and organic material along the edge of the bank including dragonfly and
damselfly (Order: Odonata) larvae also likely exist. These macroinvertebrates are a
link in the aquatic food chain. They act primarily as an indicator of water quality and
are a source of food for larger organisms.

Other aquatic species likely include the several ofthe previously mentioned amphibian,
reptilian, and mammal species. Salamanders, frogs, turtles, muskrat, and mink are a
few of the species that inhabit both terrestrial and aquatic communities.

3.4 Biotic Resource Impacts

Since no preliminary concepts for demolition of the existing bridge and construction of
a new bridge over the East Fork Pigeon River have been formulated, project impacts
cannot be calculated at this time. The study area is approximately 4.52 acres (1.83
hectares). Within the study area montane alluvial forest community occupies
approximately 0.55 acres (0.22 hectares), urban/disturbed land community occupies
approximately 1.22 acres (0.49 hectares), and the agricultural/disturbed lands
communfty occupies approximately 1.56 acres (0.66 hectares). Included in the
i

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Biotic Resources

3-5

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

remaining 1.12 acres (0.45 hectares) within the study area are the two-lane
US Highway 257, SR 1890 (gravel), and the non-vegetated stream channels of the East
Fork Pigeon River and Hungry Creek.

Temporary fluctuations in population of animal species which utilize these
communities are anticipated during the course of construction. Slow-moving,
burrowing, and/or subterranean organisms will be directly impacted by construction
activities, while mobile organisms will be displaced to adjacent communities.
Competitive forces in the adapted communities will result in a redefinition of
population equilibria.

I
I

Aquatic organisms are acutely sensitive to changes in their environment and
environmental impacts from constmction activities may result in long term or
irreversible effects. Impacts usually associated with in-stream construction include
increased channelization and scouring of the streambed. In-stream construction alters
the substrate and impacts adjacent streamside vegetation. Such disturbances within the
substrate lead to increased siltation, which can clog the gills and/or feeding
mechanisms of benthic organisms, fish, and amphibian species. Siltation may also
cover benthic macroinvertebrates with excessive amounts of sediment that inhibit their
ability to obtain oxygen. These organisms are slow to recover and usually do not, once
the stream has been severely impacted.

I
I
I
I

The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material during
constmction enhances erosion and possible sedimentation. Quick revegetation of these
areas helps to reduce the impacts by supporting the underlying soils. Erosion and
sedimentation may cany soils, toxic compounds, trash, and other materials into the
aquatic communities at the construction site. As a result, bars may form at and
downstream of the site. Increased light penetration from the removal of streamside
vegetation may increase water temperatures. Warmer water contains less oxygen, thus
reducing aquatic life that depends on high oxygen concentrations.

I
I
I
I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Biotic Resources

3-6

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I

4. Waters of the United States

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires regulation of discharges into "Waters of
the United States." The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEP A) is
the principal administrative agency ofthe Clean Water Act; however, the United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has the responsibility for implementation,
permitting, and enforcement of the provisions of the Act. The USACE regulatory
program is defined in 33 CFR 320-330.

Water bodies, including lakes, rivers, and streams, are subject to jurisdictional
consideration under the Section 404 program. Wetlands are also identified as "Waters
of the United States." Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR 328.3, are those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Any action that
proposes to place :fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the USACE under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).

4.1 Surface Waters

The NCDWQ defines a perennial water body as a clearly defmed channel that contains
water for the majority of the year. These channels usually have some or all of the
following characteristics: distinctive streambed and bank, aquatic life, and
groundwater flow or discharge. The East Fork Pigeon River and Hungry Creek are
both perennial streams in the project area, and no intermittent streams were found
within the study area. At the time of the site visit, the East Fork Pigeon River had a
depth of 0.5 to 2 feet (0.2 to 0.6 meter), a bank height on to 5 feet (1.0 to 1.5 meters),
and was approximately 50 feet (15.2 meters) wide. The streambed was comprised of
parent material ranging in size from sand to boulders, and the river maintained a
moderate flow. Hungry Creek had a stream depth of 0.5 to 1 foot (0.2 to 0.3 meter), a
bank height of 4 to 7 feet (1.2 to 2.1 meters), and was approximately 5 feet (1.5 meters)
wide. The streambed was comprised of parent material ranging in size from sand to
cobbles, and the stream maintained a fast flow.

4.2 Jurisdictional Wetlands

I
I
I
I

No jurisdictional wetland areas were observed within the study area.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Waters of the United
States

4-1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

4.3 Impacts to Waters of the United States

Since ho alternatives have been selected impacts to Waters of the United States cannot
be determined. However, project construction will likely impact the East Fork Pigeon
River through bridge abutments and channel stabilization. There are no jurisdictional
wetlands in the project area, thus there are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
associated with this bridge replacement.

Bridge demolition activities will strictly follow NCDOT's Best Management Practices
for Bridge Demolition and Removal (BMPs-BDR). As per the BMPs-BDR, all
methods of demolition shall be considered and implemented where practical, other than
dismantling the bridge in the water. Information regarding the existing bridge structure
and the potential amount of fill from demolition activities is not available at this time
and will be supplied by NCDOT in the CE document for the project.

4.4 Permit Requirements

I
I

Impacts to "Waters of the United States" come under the jurisdiction of the USACE.
Permits will be required for highway encroachment into wetland communities. The
Nationwide Permit #23 (Approved Categorical Exclusions) should cover the impacts to
jurisdictional streams in the project area. Nationwide Permit No. 33 (Temporary
Construction, Access, and Dewatering) may be needed for temporary construction
access if that is not addressed in the NEP A document. A final permitting strategy
cannot be developed until a design alternative is selected.

A Section 401 General Water Quality Certification is also required for any activity
which may result in a discharge into "Waters of the United States" or for which an
issuance of a federal permit or license is issued. Certifications are administered
through the NCDWQ.

I

Final determination of permit applicability lies with the USACE. The NCDOT will
coordinate with the USACE after the completion of final design to obtain the necessary
permits.

I
I
I
I

Haywood County is listed by the NCWRC as a county with Mountain Trout Waters
(MTWs). No discharge activities will be authorized by Nationwide Permits within
MTW counties without coordination with the NCWRC and written concurrence from
the Wilmington District Engineer. Information concerning in-stream construction
moratoriums in trout waters is included in Section 2.4.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Waters of the United
States

4-2

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

4.5 Mitigation

The USACE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a
mitigation policy which embraces the concepts of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. The pmpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical,
biological, and physical integrity of "Waters of the United States," specifically
wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include:
avoidance of impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing
impacts overtime, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these
three aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be
considered in sequential order.

Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of
Agreement (MOE) between the USEP A and the USACE, in determining "appropriate
and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be
appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost,
existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project pmposes. No jurisdictional
wetlands will be impacted; however, some unavoidable impacts to surface waters will
result from project construction.

I
I
I

Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce
the adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will
be required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization
typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the
reduction of median widths, right-of-way widths, fill slopes, and/or road shoulder
widths. The following other methods are suggested to minimize adverse impacts to
Waters of the United States:

I
I
I
I

1. Strictly enforce Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sedimentation
during project construction.
2. Minimize clearing and grubbing activity.
3. Decrease or eliminate discharges into the East Fork Pigeon River.
4. Reestablish vegetation on exposed areas with judicious pesticide and herbicide
management.
5. Minimize "in-stream" activity.
6. Use responsible litter control practices.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Waters of the United
States

4-3

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to
Waters of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
possible. It is recognized that " no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not
be achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable
compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain
after all appropriate and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory
actions often include restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United
States, specifically wetlands. Such action should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or
contiguous to the discharge site.

Nationwide Permits usually do not require mitigation according to the Memorandum of
Agreement (MOE) between the USEP A and the USACE. Prior to the use of any
nationwide permit within any of the 25 designated counties of North Carolina that
contain trout waters, notification must be given to the Wilmington District Engineer
along with a written statement of compliance with all of the. conditions of the
applicable nationwide permit. This notification will include comments and
recommendations from NCWRC. A plan to provide compensatory mitigation for all
unavoidable adverse impacts to the mountain trout waters must be included in the
information sent to the NCWRC. However,:final mitigation requirements are
determined by USACE.

I
I
I
I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Waters of the United
States

4-4

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I,

I
I
I
I

5. Rare and Protected Species

Some populations of fauna and flora have been, or are, in the process of decline due to
either natural forces or their inability to coexist with humans. Federal law (under the
provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, a amended) requires
that any action likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected be
subject to review by the USFWS. Other species may receive additional protection
under separate laws. As of March 22, 2001, the USFWS identified six endangered (E)
species, two threatened (T), and one threatened species due to similarity of appearance
(T[S/ A]) as potentially occurring in Haywood County. Table 1 lists these federally
protected species and their status. Descriptions of these species and their habitats are
discussed below.

Table 1
Federally Protected Species Known from Haywood County.
North Carolina

Vertebrates
C/emmys muhlenbergii Bog turtle T(S/A) T
Felis concolor couguar Eastern cougar E E
Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus Carolina northern flying squirrel E E
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle T E
Myotis grisescens Gray bat E E
Invertebrates
Alasmidonta raveneliana Appalachian elktoe E E
Microhexura montivaga Spruce-fir moss spider E SR
Vascular Plants
Isotria medeoloides Small-whorled pogonia T E
Nonvascular Plants

Gymnoderma lineare Rock gnome lichen E T

Notes: FSC - Federal Species of Concern; E - Endangered; T - Threatened; SC - Special Concern;
C - Candidate; P - Proposed; SR = Significantly Rare; EX - Extirpated

Natural Systems
Report. 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

5-1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

5.1 Animals

Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabri nus coloratus)
Federal Status: ENDANGERED
State Status: ENDANGERED

The northern. flying squirrel is a small nocturnal mammal that inhabits the high
elevation ecotone between coniferous and northern. hardwood forest. This high
elevation habitat usually occurs above 5,500 feet (1,676 meters) above MSL. These
squirrels are 10 to 12 inches (25 to 35 centimeters) long and weigh 3 to 5 ounces (85 to
142 grams). Adults are gray with a light brown to reddish cast on their backs and light
gray to white or buff undersides. The broad tails and folds of skin between the wrist
and ankles form wing-like surfaces that enable these animals to glide downward from
tree to tree or tree to ground. These mammals eat a wide variety of foods such as
lichens, mushroom, seeds, nuts, insects and fruits. These squirrels nest in tree cavities
such as woodpecker holes and usually produce one litter in the early spring.

I
I
I
I
I
I

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Suitable habitat for the Carolina northern flying squirrel, consisting of mixed
deciduous/coniferous forests located above 5,500 feet (1,676 meters) above MSL, does
not exist within the project area. Review ofNCNHP maps indicated no known
populations of this species within one mile (1.6 km) of the project area. No impacts to
this species from project construction are anticipated.

Gray bat (Myotis grisescens)
Federal Status: ENDANGERED
State Status: ENDANGERED

The gray bat is the largest of its genus in the eastern United States. It weighs between
0.25 and 0.56 ounces (7 and 16 grams) and has a forearm that reaches from 1.6 to 1.8
inches (40 to 46 millimeters) in length. This bat can be distinguished from other
eastern. bats by its uni-colored dorsal fur and by its wing membrane that connects to the
foot at the ankle. Other eastern. species of bats have bi- or tri-colored dorsal fur and
. have a wing membrane that connects to the base of their first toe. The gray bat's fur is
dark gray for a short time after it molts in July or August and then turns to a russet
color in between molts. It is known to feed on aquatic insects, especially mayflies.

I
I
I
I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

5-2

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

This bat inhabits only caves or cave-like habitats. They are very selective about which
caves they will inhabit. The caves are usually located within 0.62 miles (1.0 kilometer)
of a river or reservoir and have a specific temperature in both the summer and the
winter.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Suitable habitat for the gray bat consisting of caves or cave-like structures does not
exist within the project study area. Review ofNCNHP maps indicated no known
populations of this species within one mile(1.6 km) of the project area. No impacts to
this species from project construction are anticipated.

Eastern cougar (Felis concolor couguar)
Federal Status: ENDANGERED
State Status: ENDANGERED

The eastern cougar is described as a large, unspotted, long-tailed cat. Its body and legs
are a uniform fulvous or tawny hue, and its belly is pale reddish or reddish white. The
inside of this cat's ears are light-colored, with a blackish color behind the ears.
Cougars feed primarily on deer, but their diet may also include small mammals, wild
turkeys, and occasionally domestic livestock, when available. Cougars begin breeding
when two or three years old and breed thereafter once every two to three years. A
typical litter size is three, with the newborn kittens weighing 8 to 16 ounces (227 to
454 grams).

The primary habitat appears to be large wilderness areas with an adequate food supply.
Cougars avoid human-developed areas and have been considered by some as extiIpated
for this reason. Male cougars typically occupy a range of25 or more square miles (65
km?), and females from 5 to 20 square miles (13 km2 to 52 km2). Sightings have been
reported in three North Carolina areas including the Nantahala National Forest, the
northern portion of the Uwharrie National Forest, and North Carolina's southeastern
counties. The remaining population of this species is extremely small, with exact
numbers unknown (USFWS, 2001).

I
I
I
I

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Suitable habitat is available in the project study area because of the close proximity to
the Nantahala National Forest's large expanse of relatively undeveloped lands.
However, cougars are not likely in the project area due to the frequency of human

Natural Systems
Report. 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

5-3

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

activity within the study area and localized development near the study area. Impacts
to potential habitat will be insignificant in relation to the large quantity of habitat in the
surrounding region. The NCNHP has no records of any known populations of the
eastern cougar within a one-mile (1.6 Ian) radius of the project area. No impacts to this
species from project construction are anticipated.

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Federal: THREATENED - proposed delisted
State: ENDANGERED

The mature bald eagle (usually 4+ years in age) can be identified by its large white
head and short white tail. The body plumage is dark-brown to chocolate-brown in
color. Bald eagles can easily be distinguished from other birds by their flat wing soar.
They are primarily associated with large bodies of water where food is plentiful. Eagle
nests are found in close proximity to water (usually within 0.5 mile (0.8 km)) with a
clear flight path to the water, in the largest living tree in an area, with an open view of
the surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause nest abandonment. The breeding
season for the bald eagle begins in December and January. Fish are the major food
source, although forage items include coots, herons, wounded ducks, and carrion. Bald
eagles are reported to occur in Baldwin, Washington and Wilkinson Counties.

As of July 6,1999, this species is currently under consideration by the USFWS for a
proposed de-listing of their threatened status. However, this raptor will still be
protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act, and populations will continue to be monitored for at least another five
years under provisions of the Endangered Species Act.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Suitable habitat for the bald eagle consisting of large bodies of water is present within
the project area. Subsequently, ARCADIS G&M conducted a survey for the presence
of any bald eagle nests within the study area. No bald eagles or their nests were
observed within study area, this is likely due to the moderate amount of human activity
and disturbance within and around the project area. Review ofNCNHP maps
indicated no known populations of this species within one mile (1.6 km) ofthe project
area. No impacts to this species from project construction are anticipated.

I
I

I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

5-4

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergil)
Federal Status: THREATENED (SIMILAR APPEARANCE)
State Status: THREATENED

Bog turtles are small (3 to 4.5-inch [7.6 to 1 lA-em]) reptiles with a weakly keeled
carapace (upper shell) that ranges in color from light brown to ebony. This species is
easily distinguished from other turtles by a large, conspicuous, bright orange to yellow
blotch on each side of its head. Bog turtles are semi-aquatic and inhabit muddy, bog-
like habitats. They can be found during the spring mating season from June to July and
at other times from April to October when the humidity is high and temperatures are in
the 70s. Bog turtle habitat consist of bogs, swamps, marshy meadows, and other wet
environments, specifically those which exhibit soft muddy bottoms.

In the November 1987, the northern population of the bog turtle (from New York south
to Maryland) was listed as federally threatened, and the southern population (from
Virginia south to Georgia) was listed as federally threatened due to similarity of
appearance. The southern populations are not protected under Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act; however, the T(S/ A) designation bans the collection and
interstate or international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern population.
In addition to its official status as T(S/ A), the USFWS considers the southern
population of the bog turtle as a FSC due to habitat loss (Russo, 2000).

This site contains no wetlands; therefore, suitable habitat for the bog turtle is not
present. No bog turtles were observed in the project vicinity. NCNHP has no records
of any known populations of the bog turtle within a one-mile (1.6 Ian) radius ofthe
project area. This species will not be impacted as a result of project construction.

Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana)
Federal Status: ENDANGERED
State Status: ENDANGERED

I
I
I
I

The Appalachian elktoe is a kidney-shaped freshwater mussel endemic to the upper
Tennessee River system in western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee. The adult
shell reaches to 3.5 inches (9 em) in length and is usually dark brown with prominent
to obscure greenish rays. This mussel inhabits relatively shallow medium-sized creeks
and rivers with moderate to fast flowing water. It is generally found in gravelly
substrates mixed with cobbles and boulders or occasionally in silt-free, coarse sandy
substrates. Reproduction is similar to that of other freshwater mussels, and the banded
sculpin (Cottus caro/inea) has been identified as a host species for developing

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

5-5

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

glochidia. Historically, this mussel was found in the French Broad River system.,
including French Broad main stem arid the Little River in Transylvania County.
Surveys conducted in the French Broad River system from 1986 through the spring of
1992 failed to locate any specimens of the Appalachian elktoe. In February 2001, the
USFWS proposed the designation of critical habitat for this mussel. In Haywood
County the proposed critical habitat includes the main stem of the West Fork Pigeon
River from the confluence with the Little East Fork Pigeon River downstream through
the main stem of the Pigeon River down to the NC Highway 215 bridge.

Biological Conclusion: Unresolved

Suitable habitat for the Appalachian elktoe consisting of shallow medium-sized creeks
with fast flowing water and clean, silt-free, gravel substrates is readily available in the
project area. Review ofNCNHP maps indicated no known populations ofthis species
within one mile of the project area. The East Fork Pigeon River is not part of the
proposed critical habitat area for this species. It is currently unknown if this mussel
inhabits the study area. Mussel surveys by qualified NCDOT biologists will be
conducted in the study area at least one year prior to the scheduled construction let
date.

Spruce-fir moss spider (MicrohexuI:a montivaga)
Federal Status: ENDANGERED
State Status: SIGNIFICANTLY RARE

It is one of the smallest members of the primitive suborder of spiders that are often
popularly referred to as ''tarantulas.'' Adults of this species measure only 0.10 to 0.15
inches (0.25 to 0.38 cm) with a yellow-brown to a darker reddish brown color. The
most reliable field identification characteristics for the spruce-fir moss spider are
chelicerae that project forward well beyond the anterior edge of the carapace, a pair of
very long posterior spinnerets, and the presence of a second pair of book lungs, which
appear as light patches posterior to the genital furrow.

The spruce-fir moss spider is known from only Fraser fir (Abies fraseri) and red spruce
(Picea rubens) forests on the highest mountain peaks, located at and above 5,400 feet
(1,626 meters) above MSL in the Southern Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina
and Tennessee. The typical habitat of this spider is found in damp, but well drained,
moss mats growing on rock outcrops and boulders in well-shaded situations within
these forests. The moss mats cannot be too dry (the species is very sensitive to
desiccation) or too wet (large drops of water can also pose a threat to the spider). The

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

5-6

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Natural Systems
Report. 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

spider constructs tube-shaped webs in the interface between the moss mat and rock
surface. The abundant springtails in the moss mats provide the most likely source of
food for the spider. Populations of the spruce-fir moss spider have declined, due in
large part to the declining numbers of stands of Fraser fir and red spruce forests
(USFWS,1998).

According to the Federal Register on July 6, 2001, critical habitat for the spruce-fir
moss spider has been designated in portions of Avery, Caldwell, Mitchell, Swain. and
Watauga counties in North Carolina and became effective on August 6, 2001. These
designated critical habitats include areas within the Great Smoky Mountains National
Park, the Pisgah National Forest, the Cherokee National Forest, and Grandfather
Mountain (managed by The Nature Conservancy). None of these locations are within
the project vicinity.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Suitable habitat for the spruce-fir moss spider is not present in the project study area
due to the lack of spruce-fir forest and the relatively low elevation of the study area.
NCNHP has no records of any known populations of the spruce-fir moss spider within
a one-mile (1.6 km) radius of the project area. Therefore, this species will not be
impacted as a result of project construction.

5.2 Plants

Rock gnome lichen (Gymnoderma Iineare)
Federal Status: ENDANGERED
State Status: TIIREATENED

Rock gnome lichen is a squamulose lichen of the reindeer moss family. This species is
the only member of its genus occurring in North America. It occurs in small (usually
less than one square yard), dense colonies of narrow, strappy, leaf-like pads. These
strap-like lobes are usually blue-gray on the upper surface and generally shiny white on
the lower surfaces. The fruiting bodies are borne at the tips of the strap-like lobes and
are black, in contrast to the red to brown fruiting bodies of other reindeer moss lichens.
These lichens fruit from July through September. The rock gnome lichen is endemic to
the southern Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee. They primarily
inhabit vertical rock faces in areas of high humidity such as river gorges or areas
frequently bathed in fog. Most populations occur above an elevation of 5,000 feet
(1515 meters).

5-7

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

. The study area lacks suitable habitat for the rock gnome lichen consisting of high
humidity environments such as deep river gorges or other seepy wet rock faces. The
highest elevation in the study area is approximately 3,050 feet (930 meters) above
MSL, well below the elevations (> 5,000 feet (1,515 meters) above MSL) preferred by
this species. Review ofNCNHP maps indicated no known populations of this species
within one mile of the project area. This species will not be affected by project
construction.

Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides)
Federal Status: THREATENED
State Status: ENDANGERED

The small whorled pogonia is a slender perennial herb approximately 4 to 10 inches
(10.2 to 25.4 em) tall, with a single, green, hollow stem. At the apex oftp.e stem is a
whorl of five or six pale, dusty green leaves with parallel veins. Flowering occurs in
May and June. The flowers are yellowish-green in color with long, thin sepals, and
rounded petals. The lip of the flower is greenish white, veined with green, and three-
lobed.

Populations of this plant are known to have extended periods of dormancy and bloom
sporadically. This small, ephemeral orchid is not observable outside of the spring
growing season. The small whorled pogonia is typically found as colonies in young or
maturing deciduous forests that have open and dry areas along streams. It also grows
in rich, mesic woods with acidic soils, typical of white pine and rhododendron stands
(Russo, 2000).

Biological Conclusion: Unresolved

Suitable habitat for the small whorled pogonia consisting of open, deciduous woods
with acid soils is not available in the project area. The NCNHP has no records of any
known populations of the small whorled pogonia within a one-mile radius of the
project area. It is currently unknown if this species inhabits the study area. Surveys for
the orchid will be conducted during the spring of 2002.

5-8

I

I
I
I
I

I

I
I
I
I

I

I

I
I

I

I
I

I

I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

Federal Species of Concern

There are 30 federal species of concern listed by the USFWS for Haywood County.
These species are not protected under the provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act. Federal species of concern area defined as species under consideration
for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing as threatened or
endangered (formerly C2 candidate species). The status of these species may be
upgraded at any time, thus they are included here for consideration. The NCNHP lists
of July 2001 included these species and identified an additional fifteen species
receiving protection under state laws. Protections afforded to species listed under state
law are not applicable to this project. Table 2 lists the federal species of concern, their
state status, and the existence of suitable habitat within the project area. A review of
NCNHP maps depicting known populations of these federal species of concern found
no populations within a one-mile (1.6-km) radius of the project study area.

Table 2
Federal Species of Concern Known from Haywood County. North Carolina

Vertebrates
Southern Appalachian Aegolius acadicus FSC SC Transition habitat between spruce-fir and No
saw-whet owl hardwood forests.
Olive-sided flycatcher C ontopus borealis FSC SC Hemlock and spruce-fir forests. No
Hellbender Cryptobranchus alleganiensis FSC
Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea FSC SR Mature dedduous trees, espedally near Yes
swampy areas and streams.
Southern Appalachian red Loxia curvirostra FSC SR Coniferous, mixed coniferous-dedduous, Yes
crossbill pine savannas, and pine-oak habitats.
Southern rock vole Microtus chrotorrhinus FSC SC Rocky habitats within high mountain Yes
carolinensis forests or open fields.
Eastern wood rat' Neotoma Horidana FSC SC Talus slopes rocky outcrops, bluffs, cliffs, No
haematoreia crevices, or caves.
Alleghany woodrat Neotoma magister FSC Rocky cliffs and talus slopes. No
Southern Appalachian Poecile atricapilla practica FSC SC Nests in holes of dead trees, near open Yes
black-capped chickadee areas..
Southern water shrew Sorex palustris punctulatus FSC SC In bogs or montane alluvial forests near Yes
stream banks.

5-9

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Rare and Protected
Species

Southem Appalachian Sphyrapicus varius FSC SR Near openings in mature fire-scarred Yes
yellow-bellied sapsucker appalachiensis deciduous forests.
Appalachian cottontail Sylvilagus transitionalis' FSC SR Thick cover of mountain laurel, rhodo., or No
blueberries in coniferous forests.
Appalachian Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii altus FSC E Thickets, brush, and open woodlands in Yes
rural or suburban areas.
Invertebrates
Tawny crescent butterfly Phyciodes batesii maconensis FSC SR Elevations above 4,000 feet above MSL No
Diana fritillary butterfly Speyeria diana FSC SC Hardwood and mixed forests, and fields. Yes
Vascular Plants
Fraserfir Abies fraseri FSC Boreal forests and balds above 4,500 No
feet
Pirate bush Buckleya distichophylla FSC E In hemlock stands on cliffs or bluffs. No
Mountain bittercress Cardamine dematitis FSC C In and along rocky streams. Yes
Tall larkspur Delphinium exaltatum FSC E-SC Rich woods in NC mountains. Yes
Glade spurge Euphorbia purpurea FSC C Low woodlands. Yes
Smoky Mountain Glyceria nubigena FSC T Seepage areas. Yes
mannagrass
Butternut Juglans cinerea FSC Well-drained soils of bottomlands and Yes
floodplains
Fraser's loosestrife Lysimachia fraseri FSC E Alluvial meadows. No
Rugel's ragwort Rugelia nudicaulis FSC T Spruce-fir forests. No
Carolina saxifrage Saxifraga caroliniana FSC C Rocky woods. No
Mountain catchfly Sllene ovata FSC C Rich woods in NC mountains. Yes
Alabama least trillium Trillium pusillum var. 1 FSC E Alluvial woods, pocosin borders, and Yes
savannahs.
Non-vascular Plants
Liverwort Plagiochila sharpii FSC C On bark of Fraser firs in spruce-fir forests. No
Liverwort Plagiochila sullivantii var. FSC C On moist rocks, spray-zones of waterfalls No
sulivantii , and in spruce-fir forests.
Liverwort Spenolobopsis pearsonii FSC E On bark of Fraser firs in spruce-fir forests. No

5-10

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I"
I
I
I
I

6. References

Allison, John B., 1997. Soil Survey of Haywood County Area, North Carolina.
Natural Resource Conservation Service, United States Department of
Agriculture.

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet and E. T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat ofthe United States. Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.

Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Miss. 100 pp. + appendices.

Horton, J. Wright and V. A. Zullo, 1991. The Geology of the Carolinas. University of
Tennessee Press, Knoxville, IN. 406 pp.

Martof, B. S., Palmer, W. M., Bailey, J. R., and J. R Harrison ill, 1980. Amphibians
and Reptiles ofthe Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina
Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 264 pp.

National Audubon Society, 1979. Field Guide to North American Reptiles and
Amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY. 743 pp.

Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1996. Hydric soils list for Haywood County,
North Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Department of Environmental Management
(NCDEM), 1997. French Broad River Basinwide Water Quality Management
Plan. Water Quality Section.

North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS), 1991. Geologic Map of North Carolina.
Reprinted 1996.

North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, 2001. Element Occurrence List for
Haywood County, North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Parks and
Recreation, Raleigh, NC.

Parmalee, Paul W., Arthur E. Bogan, 1998. The Freshwater Mussels of Tennessee.
The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, TN. 328 pp.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

References

6-1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Radford, A. E., Ables, H. E., and C. R. Bell, 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora Qfthe
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.

Rohde, F. C., R. G. Arndt, D. G. Lindquist, and 1. P. Parnell, 1994. Freshwater Fishes
of the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.

Russo, Mary, 2000. Threatened and Endangered Species jn Forests of North Carolina.
International Paper Company.

Schafale, M. P. and A. S. Weakley, 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities
of North Carolina, A Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.

Stokes, Donald and Lillian, 1996. Stokes Field Guide to Birds, Eastern Region. Little,
Brown, and Company, New York, NY. 131 pp.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 2001. Haywood County Endangered Species,
Threatened Species and Federal Species of Concern. United States
Department of Interior.

Weakley, A. S., 1998. Flora of the Carolinas and Virginia, Working Draft of
November 1, 1998. The Nature Conservancy, Southern Conservation Science
Department, Chapel Hill, NC.

Webster, W. D., Parnell, J. F., and W. C. Biggs, 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas,
Virginia, and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill,
NC. 255 pp.

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

References

6-2

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

@

."
C')
c:
:J:J
m
CJ)

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Natural Systems
Report, 8-2988
Haywood County

Figures

6-1

I

I

0.5

o

0.5 Miles

I

I
! I

I

SCALE: 1 :24,000

I

USGS 7.5 Minute To

Contour Interval: 40 Feet

~ ARCADlS G&M

of North Carolina. Inc.

Prepared For:

t'D.
~!
'$"",,,,,,'/'

VICINITY MAP

T.I.P. No. B-2988: REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE #13
ON SR 1890 OVER EAST FORK OF PIGEON RIVER

HAYWOOD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

Figure No.

I

2301 Rexwoods Drive
Post Office Box 31388, Raleigh, NC 27622-1388
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]

1

I

-

rot;jl~
:-7C/lO
1O~"'"
.....0::0
!:e~~
Cinil :E
N{)JO
0100
<.nXa.
..... C/l
~~O
W~.
""T1CD<
00 CD /I)
x -
~::o
.....00
lOiD
::::J<5'
CD ::T
N-
'2
<.nO
~N
<.n......
~
~
w
CD
CD

t:"':"
~7 ~o
,f ~
:~ ~
\ .0
'. .,i'
"'lu" . 'Co,.,.

__ S!!S Z

~
l>
~
o
o
c
o
o
c
z
~~
z
o
:;0
~
o
l>
:;0
o
c
Z
l>

~
"0
Z
o
i'\)
0<0
<~
m
:::0::0
mm
)>"'U
enS;:
---40
"T1m
Os:
:::Om
"z
0---4
"T10
"'U"T1
-00
Q:::o
m_
OO
ZG)
:::om
-~
<...100
me,.)
:::00
z
CJ)
:::0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

I)J
)>
::c
~
o
-
~
G)
Qo
s:

o
..."
;:::
o
~
::>-
o
Q)
Q.
:So
Q)
::;
~

1
Q)
ii3
Q.
'11
o
:-;

....:.
co
co
o

z
~
C
~
r
o
o
3:
S
c
z
-
:j
m
(J)
~
(J)
C
:;0
"T1
)>
o
m
~
~
m
:;0
(J)

!

.-': it.

.i :.
,

..,',
:i;

, ,

......

, .

".'If"

.',:..

.j"'

"

....
.-

v~

"

. }~. t:..-
'l(;'!"~
~,...~ '..
;~~~"r'~'~

;,...1

=,tI)
~\~~
~ .:....,71"J'
~.:~~'"
a-""
.... ~I"
V ..~'":......

': ,\'
.. .

'. .~

J.. "". '~;J

,,~':;;":};< '" '

.;.
~ ,

. ~!;' ;

":.'-.
V... .

'1 ~.

N

:!1
c.c
c
~
Cl)
z
o

--... ..-

Jl:'~~~;~ '
:""i... l
'., ~'i) ':~
.q:: !..

~