20110984 Ver 1_Complete File_20111107

C

MAR 1 8 2002
?r AV:
Natural Resources Technical Report
Proposed Bridge Replacement
NC 11, Bridge Nos. 12 and 18 over the Cape Fear River
And Cape Fear River Overflow
Bladen County
TIP No. B-4028
State Project No. 8.1421401 S
FAP No. BRSTP-11(9) J r ' U s
0 30017
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
February 2002
r6.
Natural Resources Technical Report
Proposed Bridge Replacement
NC 11, Bridge Nos. 12 and 18 over the Cape Fear River
And Cape Fear River Overflow
Bladen County
TIP No. B-4028
State Project No. 8.1421401
FAP No. BRSTP-11(9)
Prepared for:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Issued by:
Earth Tech, Inc.
701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Earth Tech Project No. 46164
February 2002
i

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Description ........................................................................................... 1
1.2 Methodology .....................................................................................................1
1.3 Terminology and Definitions ............................................................................ 2
1.4 Qualifications of the Principal Investigators .................................................... 2
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................... 3
2.1 Regional Characteristics ................................................................................... 3
2.2 Soils .................................................................................................................. 3
2.3 Water Resources ............................................................................................... 5
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters .......................................... 5
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification ..................................................................... 5
2.3.3 Water Quality ....................................................................................... 6
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics ........................................... 6
2.3.3.2 Basin-wide Assessment Report ................................................ 6
2.3.3.3 Point Source Discharge Permits ............................................... 6
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ......................................................... 7
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 7
3.1 Terrestrial Communities ................................................................................... 8
3.1.1 Disturbed Roadside Community .......................................................... 8
3.1.2 Mixed Pine-Hardwood Community ..................................................... 8
3.1.3 Residential-Agricultural Community ................................................... 9
3.1.4 River Bluff Community ........................................................................ 9
3.1.5 Levee Forest Community ................................................................... 10
3.1.6 Bottomland Hardwood Community ................................................... 10
3.1.7 Floodplain Slough-Roadside Canal .................................................... 11
3.2 Aquatic Communities ..................................................................................... 11
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ................................................................... 12
3.3.1 Terrestrial Communities ..................................................................... 12
3.3.2 Aquatic Communities ......................................................................... 13
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS ...............................................................................13
4.1 Waters of the United States ............................................................................ 13
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters ................................ 14
4.1.2 Bridge Demolition .............................................................................. 14
4.1.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ....................................................... 15
4.1.4 Permits ................................................................................................ 15
4.1.5 Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation ................................................ 16
4.2 Rare and Protected Species ............................................................................. 16
4.2.1 Species Under Federal Protection ....................................................... 16
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Status ...................................... 22
5.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................24
February, 2002
11
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
TABLES
Table 1. Estimated Area of Impact to Terrestrial Communities .................................... 12
Table 2. Species Under Federal Protection in Bladen County ....................................... 16
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern in Bladen County ................................................. 22
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map... .................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 Natural Communities... ...................................................................................... 3
Note: Highlighted test denotes items not included in this draft that will be added later by
NICDOT personnel once alignments are developed.
February 2002
111
Natural Resources Technical Report
Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Natural Resources Technical Report is submitted to the North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) preliminary to the preparation of a Categorical Exclusion
(CE) for the proposed project. The purpose of this technical report is to inventory,
catalog, and describe the various natural resources likely to be impacted by the proposed
action. The report also attempts to identify and estimate the likely consequences of the
anticipated impacts to these resources. These descriptions and estimates are relevant only
in the context of the preliminary design concepts. It may become necessary to conduct
additional field investigations should design parameters and criteria change.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed project involves the replacement of Bridge Nos. 12 and 18 on NC 11,
which spans the Cape Fear River and Cape Fear River floodplain. The project is located
in the southeast comer of Bladen County about 5 miles (8.0 km) northwest of
Riegelwood, NC (Figure 1). Two alternatives are proposed for this project (Figure 2).
Alternate 1
(Insert description of Alternate 1 here.)
Alternate 2
(Insert description of alternate l here.)
1.2 Methodology
Published information and resources were collected prior to the field investigation.
Information sources used to prepare this report include the following:
• United States Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Kelly, 1986)
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI) Map (Kelly, 1989)
• NCDOT aerial photograph of project area (1:1200)
• Soil Survey of Bladen County (Soil Conservation Service, 1990)
• North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR)
basin-wide assessment information (NCDENR, 1996)
• USFWS list of protected and candidate species
• North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) files of rare species and unique
habitats
Water resource information was obtained from publications posted on the World Wide
Web by NCDENR Division of Water Quality (DWQ). Information concerning the
occurrence of federally protected species in the study area was obtained from the USFWS
list of protected and candidate species (March 2001), posted on the World Wide Web by
the Ecological Services branch of the USFWS office in North Carolina. Information
February= 2002
1
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
concerning species under state protection was obtained from the NHP database of rare
species and unique habitats. NHP files were reviewed On June 29, 2001 for documented
sightings of species on state or federal lists and locations of significant natural areas.
A general field survey was conducted along the proposed project route by Earth Tech
biologists on July 14, 2001. Water resources were identified and their physical
characteristics were recorded. For the purposes of this study, a brief habitat assessment
was performed within the project area of the Cape Fear River and Cape Fear River
floodplain. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified using a variety
of observation techniques, including active searching, visual observations, and identifying
characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, tracks, scats, and burrows). Terrestrial community
classifications generally follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where appropriate and plant
taxonomy follows Radford et al. (1968). Vertebrate taxonomy follows Rohde et al.
(1994), Conant et al. (1998), the American Ornithologist's Union (2001), Thorpe and
Covich (1991), and Webster et al. (1985). Vegetative communities were mapped using
aerial photography of the project site. Predictions regarding wildlife community
composition involved general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing vegetative
communities.
Jurisdictional wetlands, if present, were delineated and evaluated based on criteria
established in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACE,
1987). Wetlands were classified based on Cowardin et al. (1979).
1.3 Terminology and Definitions
For the purposes of this report, the following terms are used for describing the limits of
natural resources investigations. "Study corridor" and "project area" denote an area with a
width of 500 feet (121.9 m) along the full length of the project alignment. The "project
vicinity" is an area extending 1 mile (1.6 km) on all sides of the project area, and "project
region" is an area equivalent in size to the area represented by a 7.5-minute USGS
quadrangle map (about 61.8 sq miles or 163.3 sq km) with the project at the center. When
referring to stream banks, "left bank" and "right bank" are relative to an observer facing
downstream.
1.4 Qualifications of the Principal Investigators
Investigator: Daniel Ingram
Education B.S., Natural Resources, North Carolina State University
Experience Staff Biologist, Earth Tech 1 year
Expertise Natural resources surveys, wetland delineation, wetland restoration
Investigator: Jane Almon
Education M.S., Forestry, North Carolina State University
Experience Staff Biologist, Earth Tech 2.5 years
Expertise Natural resources surveys, wetland delineation, wetland restoration
February 2002
2
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources that occur in the project area are discussed with respect to
possible environmental concerns.
2.1 Regional Characteristics
The project area lies in the eastern portion of North Carolina within the Coastal Plain
physiographic province. Elevations in the project area are approximately 10 feet (3.0 m)
on the river floodplain to 40 feet (12.2 m) on the bluffs to the south of the Cape Fear
River (National Geodetic Vertical Datum, 1929). The topography of the project vicinity is
flat across the floodplain to nearly vertical bluffs on the south bank of the Cape Fear
River.
The proposed project is in a rural area of southeastern Bladen County. Bladen County's
major economic resources are agriculture and forestry. The population of Bladen County
in 1999 was approximately 30,000 (North Carolina Office of State Budget, Planning and
Management 2001).
2.2 Soils
Information about soils in the project area was taken from the Soil Survey of Bladen
County, North Carolina (USDA 1990). The map units in the project area are: Aycock
very fine sandy loam, 1-4 percent slopes; Dystrochrepts, steep; Congaree silt loam,
frequently flooded; Chewacla and Chastain soils, frequently flooded, Centenary sand,
Udorthents, loamy; and Leon sand, 0-3 percent slopes. The Chewacla and Chastain soils
are classified as hydric soils by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)
• Aycock very fine sandy loam, 0-4 percent slopes (AyB), is mapped at the extreme
southern end of the project area above the Cape Fear River bluffs. These well drained
soils are found on broad smooth flats on uplands. The seasonal high water table is at
a depth of 4 to 6 feet (1.2 to 1.8 m) below the surface. Aycock soil is mainly used for
cultivated crops. Some urban uses are limited due to wetness and low strength.
• Dystrochrepts, steep (DyF), is mapped on the steep north facing bluffs over the Cape
Fear River at the south end of the project area. These excessively well drained to well
drained soils are subject to mass slumping and may be nearly vertical in places. All
uses other than scenic woodland or watershed protection are excluded by the highly
erodible, steep, and unstable slopes.
• Congaree silt loam, frequently flooded (Cn), is mapped just north of the Cape Fear
River on the floodplain. These well drained to moderately well drained soils form
long narrow benches above the river. The seasonal high water table is 2.5 to 4 feet
(0.8 to 1.2 m) below the surface. The primary use of this soil is woodland. Flooding,
wetness, and low strength limit most uses of this soil. Congaree soils may have
hydric inclusions of Chastain soils in depressions and troughs.
February 2002
3
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
• Chewacla and Chastain soils, frequently flooded (Ch), are mapped in the central
portion of the project area on the Cape Fear River floodplain. They are typically
found on broad flat floodplains, narrow flats, and in floodplain troughs away from the
river. Chewacla soil is somewhat poorly drained and Chastain soil is poorly drained.
Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent and the seasonal high water table is 0.5 to 1.5 feet
(0.2 to 0.5 m) below the surface. These soils are not mapped separately because they
react similarly to most uses and management. These hydric soils are saturated,
flooded, and/or ponded for long periods of the growing season and support woody
vegetation under natural conditions. Chewacla and Chastain soils are mainly used as
woodland. Flooding, wetness, and low strength limit urban and recreational uses.
• Centenary sand (Ce) is mapped near the north end of the project area on the Cape
Fear River floodplain. This moderately well drained soil is found on smooth upland
flats and stream terraces. The seasonal high water table is 3.5 to 5 feet (1.1 to 1.5 m)
below the surface. Centenary soil is mainly used as woodland but can also be used as
cropland or pasture. Seepage, wetness, and thick sandy layers limit urban and
recreational use of this soil. Centenary soils may have hydric inclusions of Leon soils
in lower positions.
• Udorthents, loamy (Ud), is mapped in a small area to the east of NC 11 near the
north end of the project area. This is a shallow borrow pit, that was formerly
Centenary and Leon soils, from which the overlying sand has been removed. The
borrow pit is no longer in use and is a vegetated wetland.
• Leon sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes (LeA), is mapped at the extreme north end of the
project area. This poorly drained soil is on flats and in depressions. The seasonal
high water table is at or near the surface. Leon is a hydric soil that is saturated for a
significant portion of the growing season and supports woody vegetation under
natural conditions. Areas of Leon soil are used mainly as woodland but blueberries,
pasture, or other crops may be grown. Urban and recreational uses are limited by
wetness and poor on-site sewage filtering capacity.
Site index is a measure of soil quality and productivity. The index is the average height,
in feet, that dominant and co-dominant trees of a given species attain in a specified
number of years (typically 50). The site index applies to fully stocked, even-aged,
unmanaged stands. The soils in the project area have the following site indices:
• Aycock soils have site indices of 89 for loblolly pine (Pines taeda), 75 for longleaf
pine (Pinus palustris), and 80 for southern red oak (Quercus falcata).
• No site indices are given for Dystrochrept soils.
• Congaree soils have site indices of 100 for sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), 107
for tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), 107 for cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda),
and 90 for loblolly pine.
• Chewacla soils have site indices of 96 for loblolly pine, 100 for tulip poplar, 97 for
sweetgum, and 86 for water oak.
• Chastain soils have a site index of 95 for sweetgum.
• Centenary soils have site indices of 72 for longleaf pine and 85 for loblolly pine.
Februan° 2002
4
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
• No site indices are given for Udorthent soils.
• Leon soils have a site index of 65 for longleaf pine.
2.3 Water Resources
This section contains information concerning water resources likely to be impacted by the
proposed project. Water resources assessments include the physical characteristics likely
to be impacted by the proposed project (determined by field survey), best usage
classifications, and water quality aspects of the water resources. Probable impacts to
surface waters are also discussed, as well as means to minimize impacts.
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
The project is located in the Cape Fear River basin (CFR 17 subbasin, HUC 0303005).
The Cape Fear River originates at the confluence of the Haw River and Deep River 100
miles (160.9 km) northwest of the project area. From the project area, the river meanders
in a southeast direction about 38 miles (61.2 km) to the Atlantic Ocean.
The Cape Fear River is approximately 300 feet (91.4 m) wide in the study area. The river
flows in an easterly direction within the project area. Substrate is likely organics, silts
and sands. The water was tannin stained the day of the site visit. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers maintains a project depth of 8 feet (2.4 m) at low water on this portion of the
Cape Fear River. The actual depth is most likely significantly deeper than 8 feet (2.4 m).
The right bank is a nearly vertical bluff 40 feet (12.2 m) high. The bluff is stabilized by
vegetation but some areas have slumped into the river. The left bank is 10 feet (3.0 m)
high and is moderately steep. The left bank is well vegetated by trees and shrubs. Both
banks are well shaded by intact forests but the river is almost entirely open to sunlight
because of its width.
The Cape Fear River is the only surface water feature in the project area.
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification
Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a classification by the DWQ that is
designed to maintain, protect, and enhance water quality within the state. The Cape Fear
River [Index # 18-(59)] is classified as a WS-IV Sw water body (NCDENR, 1999). WS-IV
Sw water resources are waters used as sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or
food processing purposes for those users where a WS-I, II or III classification is not
feasible. WS-IV waters are generally in moderately to highly developed watersheds or
Protected Areas.
The supplemental Sw classification recognizes those swamp waters that generally have
naturally occurring very low velocities, low pH and low dissolved oxygen.
Februan, 2002
5
0
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
No waters classified as High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-1 or WS-
II) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 miles (1.6 km) of the
project study area.
2.3.3 Water Quality
This section describes the quality of the water resources within the project area. Potential
impacts to water quality from point and non-point sources are evaluated. Water quality
assessments are based upon published resource information and field study observations.
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics
The project area is in a moderately developed watershed. No disturbances to the
landscape were observed in the immediate vicinity, and the area is largely unsuitable for
most agricultural, residential, or industrial uses. Potential threats to water quality in this
area are forestry operations that would result in increased soil erosion.
2.3.3.2 Basin-wide Assessment Report
Basin-wide water quality assessments are conducted by the Environmental Sciences
Branch, Water Quality Section of the DWQ. The program has established monitoring
stations for sampling selected benthic macroinvertebrates, which are known to have
varying levels of tolerance to water pollution. An index of water quality can be derived
from the number of taxa present and the ratio of tolerant to intolerant taxa. Streams can
then be given a bioclassification ranging from Poor to Excellent.
There are two monitoring stations on the Cape Fear River near the project area. One
station is located at Elwell's Ferry, about 8 miles (12.9 km) upstream of the project area.
It was classified as Fair in 1993 and Good-Fair in 1998. A second monitoring station is
located just above the Federal Paper plant in Riegelwood, about 4 miles (6.4 km)
downstream of the project area. It was classified as Good-Fair in 1993 and Excellent in
1998.
2.3.3.3 Point Source Discharge Permits
Point source discharges in North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All
dischargers are required to obtain a permit to discharge.
There are four permits issued to discharge into the Cape Fear River in the project region.
The Bladen County School System East Arcadia Elementary of Elizabethtown holds
Permit N00032913 to discharge about 3.8 miles (6.1 km) upstream of the project area.
This is a Minor Non-Municipal permit classified as "Domestic - Schools". Federal Paper
Company of Riegelwood holds Permit N00003298 to discharge about 5 miles (8.0 km)
downstream of the project area. This is a Major Non-Municipal permit classified as
February= 2002
6
'r
Natural Resources Technical Report
' Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
"Pulp and Paper" and "Domestic - Industrial/Commercial". Holtrachem Manufacturing
Company, LLC, of Riegelwood holds Permit N00023639 to discharge about 5 miles (8.0
km) downstream of the project area. This is a Minor Non-Municipal permit classified as
"Non-contact cooling water/condensate" and "Boiler Blowdown". Wright Corporation of
Riegelwood holds Permit N00003395 to discharge about 5 miles (8.0 km) downstream of
the project area. This is a Minor Non-Municipal permit classified as "Organic chemical
manufacturing", "Non-contact cooling water/condensate", and "Boiler Blowdown".
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Any action that affects water quality can adversely affect aquatic organisms. Temporary
impacts during the construction phases may result in long-term impacts to the aquatic
community. In general, replacing an existing structure in the same location with an off-
site detour is the preferred environmental approach. Bridge replacement at a new location
results in more severe impacts, and physical impacts are incurred at the point of bridge
replacement.
Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface water resources:
• Increased sediment loading and siltation as a consequence of watershed vegetation
removal, erosion, and/or construction.
• Decreased light penetration/water clarity from increased sedimentation.
• Changes in water temperature with vegetation removal.
• Changes in the amount of available organic matter with vegetation removal.
• Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction
activities and construction equipment, and spills from construction equipment.
• Alteration of water levels and flows as a result of interruptions and/or additions to
surface and groundwater flow from construction.
Construction impacts may not be restricted to the communities in which the construction
activity occurs, but may also affect downstream communities. Efforts will be made to
ensure that no sediment leaves the construction site. NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be implemented, as applicable, during
the construction phase of the project to ensure that no sediment leaves the construction
site.
The removal of the existing bridge has the potential to impact surface waters. NCDOT
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be adhered to
during the removal process. Further information concerning bridge demolition is found in
Section 4.1.2.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
Terrestrial and aquatic communities are included in the description of biotic resources.
Living systems described in the following sections include communities of associated
February 2002
7
Natural Resources Technical Report
' Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
plants and animals. These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in each
community and the relationships of these biotic components. Descriptions of the
terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications. These
classifications follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible. They are also cross-
referenced to The Nature Conservancy International Classification of Ecological
Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the Southeastern United States (Weakley et al.,
1998), which has recently been adopted as the standard land cover classification by the
Federal Geographic Data Committee. Representative animal species that are likely to
occur in these habitats (based on published range distributions) are also cited. Scientific
nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are used for the plant and animal
species described. Subsequent references to the same species are by the common name
only.
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Seven terrestrial communities were identified within the project area: disturbed roadside,
mixed pine-hardwood forest, residential-agricultural, river bluff, levee forest, bottomland
hardwood, and floodplain slough-roadside canal (Figure 2). Dominant faunal
components associated with these terrestrial areas will be discussed in each community
description. Many species are adapted to the entire range of habitats found along the
project alignment, but may not be mentioned separately in each community description.
3.1.1 Disturbed Roadside Community
The disturbed roadside community covers the area along the road shoulders and the fill
slopes throughout the project area. The community is mowed on a regular basis and is
maintained in an herbaceous dominant state. Species include fescue grasses (Festuca
sp.), horseweed (Erigeron canadensis), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), and
pokeweed (Phytolacca americana). Vine and shrub species present include greenbriar
(Smilax laurifolia), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans), mimosa (Albizia julibrissin), sweetgum saplings (Liquidambar styraciflua),
and winged sumac (Rhus copallina).
The animal species present in these disturbed habitats are opportunistic and capable of
surviving on a variety of resources, ranging from vegetation to both living and dead
faunal components. American crow (Corvus brachyrynchos), European starling (Sturnus
vulgaris), and American robin (Turdus migratorius) are common birds that use these
habitats. The area may also be used by the Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana),
various species of mice (Peromyscus sp.), eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and
southern toad (Bufo terrestris).
3.1.2 Mixed Pine-Hardwood Community
The mixed pine-hardwood community occurs at the south end of the project area on the
east side of NC 11. This community had marginal hydric soils and some hydrophytic
February 2002
8
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
vegetation but appeared to lack the necessary hydrology to be classified as jurisdictional
wetlands. Dominant tree species include loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sweetgum, red
maple (Acer rubrum), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). Subcanopy and shrub
species present include sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), ironwood (Carpinus
caroliniana), and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera). Vine and herbaceous species present
include Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), poison ivy, greenbriar, and cinnamon
fern (Osmunda cinnamomea).
Bird species expected in this community include eastern towhee (Pipilo
erythrophthalmus), common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas), pine warbler (Dendroica
pinus), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), and downy woodpecker (Picoides
pubescens). Herpetofauna including southern ringneck snake (Diadophis punctatus
punctatus), black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta), oak toad (Bufo quercicus), and
marbled salamander (Ambystoma opacum) are also likely to occur. Mammal species that
may be found include eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus
floridanus), gray fox (Urocyron cinereoargenteus), and southeastern shrew (Sorex
longirostris).
3.1.3 Residential-Agricultural Community
The residential-agricultural community occurs south of the Cape Fear River on both sides
of NC 11. To the east of NC 11 is a residential and small commercial area, and a large
goat enclosure. A field of row crops is located to the west of NC 11. Vegetation in this
community is restricted to grasses, weeds, scattered shade trees, and row crops.
The faunal species present in the residential-agricultural community would be similar to
those found in the disturbed roadside community.
3.1.4 River Bluff Community
The river bluff community is present on the south bank of the Cape Fear River on both
sides of NC 11 in the project area. This steep vegetated slope rises about 35 feet (10.7 m)
from the Cape Fear River. Some slumping into the river is occurring at the base of the
slope. A small draw is present on the west side of NC 11 and a goat enclosure occupies
the upper portion of the east bluff, reducing shrub and herbaceous vegetation: Tree and
shrub species include tulip poplar, American beech (Fagus grandifolia), white oak
(Quercus alba), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), sweetleaf (Symplocos tinctoria), and
wax myrtle. Vine and herbaceous species include greenbriar, Virginia creeper
(Parthenocissus quinquefolia), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), rattan-vine (Berchemia
scandens), christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), sensitive fern (Onoclea
sensibilis), and false-nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica). This community is an example of a
steep Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest as described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). The
TNC classification is most likely I.B.2.N.a.160 Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba Forest
Alliance.
February 2002
9
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
Bird species expected in this community include northern flicker (Colaptes auratus),
belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon), bank swallow (Riparia riparia), northern parula
warbler (Parula americana), black and white warbler (Mniotilta varia), and summer
tanager (Piranga ruba). Herpetofauna including eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina
carolina), eastern kingsnake (Lampropeltis getula getula), and eastern spadefoot toad
(Scaphiopus holbrookii holbrookii) are also likely to occur. Mammal species that may be
found include white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), gray squirrel (Sciurus niger),
raccoon (Procyon lotor), southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans), and woodland vole
(Microtus pinetorum).
3.1.5 Levee Forest Community
The levee forest community is present along the north bank of the Cape Fear River on
both sides of NC 11 in the project area. This upland community occupies a slightly
elevated strip of land, formed by alluvial deposition, between the Cape Fear River and the
bottomland hardwood community. Tree and shrub species present include sycamore,
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), river birch (Betula nigra), sweetgum, ironwood, and
privet (Ligustrum sinense). Vine and herbaceous species present include poison ivy,
muscadine, false-nettle, and river oats (Chasmanthium latifolia). This community is an
example of a Coastal Plain Levee Forest (Brownwater Subtype) as described by Schafale
and Weakley (1990). The TNC classification is most likely I.B.2.N.d.050 Betula Nigra -
(Platanus Occidentalis) Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance.
The faunal species assemblage would be similar to that of the river bluff community and
the bottomland hardwood community below. The linear nature of the levee forest
community leads to many fauna from outside communities being present. .
3.1.6 Bottomland Hardwood Community
The bottomland hardwood community is present on the Cape Fear River floodplain on
both sides of NC 11. This community is almost entirely wetland with only small upland
areas associated with roads and spoil piles. The vegetative cover is mostly tree
dominated but some areas of scrub-shrub are present. Tree and shrub species present
include sweetgum, water oak (Quercus nigra), green ash, loblolly pine, American holly
(Ilex opaca), privet, and ironwood. Vine and herbaceous species present include poison
ivy, rattan-vine, greenbriar, false-nettle, and giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea). This
community is an example of a Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Brownwater
Subtype) as described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). The TNC classification is most
likely I.B.2.N.d.110 Fraxinus Pennsylvanica - Ulmus americana - Celtis (occidentalis,
Laevigata) Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance.
Bird species expected in this community include barred owl (Strix varia), red-shouldered
hawk (Buteo lineatus), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), prothonotary warbler
(Protonotaria citrea), Louisiana waterthrush (Seiurus motacilla), Swainson's warbler
(Limnothlypis swainsonii), and white-eyed vireo (Vireo griseus). Herpetofauna that may
February 2002
10
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
l
be encountered here include eastern cottonmouth (Agkistrodon piscivorus piscivorus),
redbelly water snake (Nerodia erythrogaster erythrogaster), snapping turtle (Chelydra
serpentina), yellowbelly slider (Trachemys scripta scripta), Florida cooter (Pseudemys
floridana floridana) and southern dusky salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus).
Mammal species such as Virginia opossum, raccoon, bobcat (Felis rufus), southern short-
tailed shrew (Blarina carolinensis), and hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus) may be
found in this community.
3.1.7 Floodplain Slough-Roadside Canal
The floodplain slough-roadside canal community is located on both sides of NC 11 on the
Cape Fear River floodplain. This wetland community consists of natural sloughs in old
stream channels (east-west orientation) and excavated canals beside NC 11 (north-south
orientation). A powerline right-of-way is maintained on the west side of NC 11 and many
of these canals are periodically maintained for this reason. Water depth in these areas
ranged from saturated soil to 1.5 feet (0.5 m). Trees and shrubs are present on the
margins and shallow areas while only herbs and submerged aquatic vegetation are present
in the deeper areas. Tree and shrub species present include bald cypress (Taxodium
distichum), water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica), cottonwood (Populus deltoides), black willow
(Salix nigra), and red maple. Vines and herbaceous species present include poison ivy,
false-nettle, lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), knotweed (Polygonum punctatum),
duckweed (Lemna perpusilla), and cat-tail (Typha latifolia). This community is a
marginal example of a Cypress-Gum Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) as described by
Schafale and Weakley (1990). The TNC classification is most likely I.B.2.N.f.030 Nyssa
aquatica - (Taxodium distichum) Semipermanently Flooded Forest Alliance.
The faunal species assemblage present in this community would be similar to that of the
bottomland hardwood community.
3.2 Aquatic Communities
Within the project area, the Cape Fear River is a large, low-gradient river. The bed
material likely consists of silt and organic matter. On the day of the site visit, the water
was clear with no suspended sediment. The riparian community is mostly deciduous trees
and shrubs, and is described in Sections 3.1.5 and 3.1.6. There was no aquatic vegetation
present in the river channel.
According to a communication from Keith Ashley, District 4 Fishery Biologist for the
NCWRC, the Cape Fear River supports populations of largemouth bass (Micropterus
salmoides), spotted bass (Micropterus punctulatus), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritis),
spotted sucker (Minytrema melanops), creek chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus), chain
pickerel (Esox niger), bowfin (Amia calva), American eel (Anguilla rostrata), flathead
catfish (Pylodictus olivaris), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), and various other
sunfish, suckers, minnows, and catfish. This section of the Cape Fear River also supports
anadromous species such as striped bass (Morone saxitilis) and American shad (Alosa
11
February 2002
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
sapidissima). According to the NCWRC biologist, no in-stream work should occur
between January 15 and June 1 to accommodate anadromous spawning runs.
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Project construction will have various impacts to the previously described terrestrial and
aquatic communities. Any construction activities in or near these resources have the
potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies potential
impacts to the natural communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted
and the plants and animals affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered
here along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
3.3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Terrestrial communities in the project area will be impacted permanently by project
construction from clearing and paving. Estimated impacts are based on the length of the
alternate and the entire study corridor width. Table 1 describes the potential impacts to
terrestrial communities by habitat type. Because impacts are based on the entire study
corridor width, the actual loss of habitat will likely be less than the estimate. Insert
Alternate diiuensions here. Table 1 should be completed following, project design.
Table 1. Estimated Area of Impact to Terrestrial Communities
Area of Impact in Acres (Hectares)
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Community Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent
Disturbed roadside
Mixed pine-hardwood forest
Residential-agricultural
River bluffs
Levee forest
Bottomland hardwood
Floodplain slough/roadside
canal
Total Impact
Destruction of natural communities along the project alignment will result in the loss of
foraging and breeding habitats for the various animal species that utilize the area. Animal
species will be displaced into surrounding communities. Adult birds, mammals, and some
reptiles are mobile enough to avoid mortality during construction. Young animals and
less mobile species, such as many amphibians, may suffer direct loss during construction.
The plants and animals that are found in the upland communities are generally common
throughout southeastern North Carolina.
February 2002
12
e
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
Impacts to terrestrial communities, particularly in locations having steep to moderate
slopes, can result in the aquatic community receiving heavy sediment loads as a
consequence of erosion. Construction impacts may not be restricted to the communities in
which the construction activity occurs, but may also affect downstream communities.
Efforts should be made to ensure that no sediment leaves the construction site.
3.3.2 Aquatic Communities
Impacts to aquatic communities include fluctuations in water temperatures as a result of
the loss of riparian vegetation. Shelter and food resources, both in the aquatic and
terrestrial portions of these organisms' life cycles, will be affected by losses in the
terrestrial communities. The loss of aquatic plants and animals will affect terrestrial fauna
which rely on them as a food source.
Temporary and permanent impacts to aquatic organisms may result from increased
sedimentation. Aquatic invertebrates may drift downstream during construction and
recolonize the disturbed area once it has been stabilized. Sediments have the potential to
affect fish and other aquatic life in several ways, including the clogging and abrading of
gills and other respiratory surfaces, affecting the habitat by scouring and filling of pools
and riffles, altering water chemistry, and smothering different life stages. Increased
sedimentation may cause decreased light penetration through an increase in turbidity.
Wet concrete should not come into contact with surface water during bridge construction,
as it is toxic to wildlife. Potential adverse effects can be minimized through the
implementation of NCDOT Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface
Waters. Because the river in the proposed project area is designated as a WS-IV water,
erosion control methods for high quality waters will be implemented as included in
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and Erosion and
Sediment Control Guidelines.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses for two federal and state regulatory
issues: "Waters of the United States" and rare and protected species.
4.1 Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States" as defined in 33 CFR § 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). These waters are regulated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE). Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material
into surface waters or wetlands falls under these provisions.
February 2002
13

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Jurisdictional wetlands occur within the project area and will be impacted by project
construction. Wetlands are present on both sides of NC 11 on the Cape Fear River
floodplain within the study corridor (Figure 2). These bottomland hardwood and
floodplain slough-roadside canal wetlands are described in Sections 3.1.6 and 3.1.7. The
Cape Fear River meets the definition of surface waters, and is therefore classified as
Waters of the United States. The channel is approximately 300 feet (91.4 m) wide within
the project area.
4.1.2 Bridge Demolition
Demolition and removal of a highway bridge over Waters of the United States requires a
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers if dropping components of the bridge into
the water is the only practical means of demolition. Effective 9/20/99, this permit is
included with the permit for bridge reconstruction. The permit application henceforth
will require disclosure of demolition methods and potential impacts to the body of water
in the planning document for the bridge reconstruction.
Section 402-2 "Removal of Existing Structures" of NCDOT's Standard Specifications for
Roads and Structures stipulates that "excavated materials shall not be deposited.... in
rivers, streams, or impoundments," and "the dropping of parts or components of
structures into any body of water will not be permitted unless there is no other practical
method of removal. The removal from the water of any part or component of a structure
shall be done so as to keep any resulting siltation to a minimum." To meet these
specifications, NCDOT shall adhere to Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters, as supplemented with Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition
and Removal.
In addition, all in-stream work shall be classified into one of three categories as follows:
Case 1) In-water work is limited to an absolute minimum, due to the presence of
Outstanding Resource Waters or threatened and/or endangered species, except for the
removal of the portion of the sub-structure below the water. The work is carefully
coordinated with the responsible agency to protect the Outstanding Resource Water or
T&E species.
Case 2) No work at all in the water during moratorium periods associated with fish
migration, spawning, and larval recruitment into nursery areas.
Case 3) No special restrictions other than those outlined in Best Management Practices
for Protection of Surface Waters and supplements added by the Bridge Demolition
document, dated 9/20/99.
Februanv 2002
14
Natural Resources Technical Report
Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
The Cape Fear River in the vicinity of the proposed project is Class WS-IV water, which
is not considered High Quality Water. It is however, potential shortnose sturgeon habitat,
a federally listed endangered species, and anadromous fish species are known to be
present. Therefore, Cases 1 and 2 apply to the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 12
over The Cape Fear River.
Add information regarding; superstructure and'fill here.
4.1.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Project construction will have various impacts to the previously described terrestrial and
aquatic communities. Any construction activities in or near these resources have the
potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies potential
impacts to the natural communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted
and the plants and animals affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered
here along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
Project construction cannot be accomplished without infringing on wetlands and surface
waters. An extensive bottomland hardwood forest wetland was identified within the
project area. Add information regarding wetland impacts here.: Anticipated surface water
impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE and the DWQ. Add information
regarding-stream impacts here.
4.1.4 Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project. Permits
and certifications from various state and federal agencies may be required prior to
construction activities.
Construction is likely to be authorized by Nationwide Permit (NWT) No. 23, as
promulgated under 61 FR 65874, 65916; December 13, 1996. This permit authorizes
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or financed in whole or in
part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department has
determined that, pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for
Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
• the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which
neither individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment; and
• the Office of the Chief Engineer has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
February 2002
15

Natural Resources Technical Report
Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification or waiver thereof, from
the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) prior to issuance of the
NWP 23. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state issue or deny water
certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that results in a discharge into
Waters of the U.S. Final permit decision rests with the USACE.
4.1.5 Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
Because this project will likely be authorized under a Nationwide Permit, mitigation for
impacts to surface waters may or may not be required by the USACE. In accordance with
the Division of Water Quality Wetland Rules [15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h)] "Fill or
alteration of more than one acre of wetlands will require compensatory mitigation; and
fill or alteration of more than 150 linear feet of streams may require compensatory
mitigation." Insert information regarding wetland and stream impacts here. If the final
length of stream impact is greater than 150 linear feet (45.6 m), compensatory mitigation
may be required.
4.2 Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals are declining either as a result of natural forces
or their difficulty competing with humans for resources. Rare and protected species listed
for Bladen County, and any likely impacts to these species as a result of the proposed
project construction, are discussed in the following sections.
4.2.1 Species Under Federal Protection
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.
The USFWS lists 6 species under federal protection for Bladen County as of March 2001
(USFWS 2001). These species are listed in Table 2.
Table 2. Species Under Federal Protection in Bladen County
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status
Vertebrates
American alligator Alligator mississippiensis T (S1A)
Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis E
Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum E
Vascular Plants
American chaffseed Schwalbea americana E
Rou h-leaved loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia E
16
February 2002
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
,Y
Common Name
Scientific Name Federal Status
Southern spicebush Lindera melissifolia E
Notes: E - Endangered-A species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range.
T - Threatened-A species that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
SA - Similarity of Appearance-A species that is listed as threatened due to similarity of
appearance with other rare species.
A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements of each species follows,
along with a conclusion regarding potential project impact.
Alligator mississippiensis (American alligator) Threatened (Similar Appearance)
Family: Alligatoridae
Federally Listed: 1967
The American alligator is a conservation success story. This species was nearly
extirpated from their range as a result of market hunting and loss of habitat by the
1960's. It was listed as Endangered in 1967. Alligators responded well to
management practices and were delisted in 1987. Although this species is secure
some related crocodiles and caimans are still in trouble. For this reason alone, the
USFWS still regulates the trade of alligator skins or any products made from them
in an effort to protect those endangered animals whose skin has a similar
appearance, but that is illegal on the commercial market.
Male alligators may reach lengths of 15 feet (4.5 m) while females tend to only
reach 6 feet (1.8 m). These animals have a large, slightly rounded body with thick
limbs, a broad head, and a very powerful tail used for propulsion in the water as
well as for defense.
These reptiles frequent wetland areas and are the top predator of the food chain.
Alligators will eat just about anything but prefer fish, turtles, and snails. Small
mammals that venture to the water's edge may also be eaten. Young alligators
mostly feed on insects, crustaceans, snails, and fish.
The alligator's greatest value to the wetland is the "gator holes" created by adults
as a resting area. After removing vegetation with its mouth an adult gator will
thrash about in the depression to create a hole that will trap and retain water
during rain events. These holes serve as refuges and watering areas for fish, birds,
turtles, snakes and many other animals. Alligators may expand their holes by
digging underneath an overhanging bank up to 20 feet away from the water body.
These areas are then expanded and used by the animals to survive dry seasons and
winters.
February, 2002
17
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
Y
A search of the NHP database revealed a recorded occurrence of American
alligator within the project vicinity. On May 19, 2001 an American alligator was
observed in a ditch on the west side Of NC 11 just north of the Cape Fear River
bridge. However, this species is listed only due to its similarity of appearance to
crocodiles and caimans. Impacts to American alligators or American alligator
habitat are not subject to USFWS regulations.
Picoides borealis (Red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
Vertebrate Family: Picidae
Federally Listed: 1970
The red-cockaded woodpecker is federally listed as Endangered. It is a small to
medium sized bird about 8 inches (20.32 centimeters [cm]) long, with a wingspan
of 13.8 to 14.96 inches (35 to 38 cm). The back and top of the head are black.
The cheek is white. Numerous small white spots arranged in horizontal rows give
a ladder-back appearance. The chest is dull white with small black spots on the
side. Males and females look alike except males have a small red streak above the
cheek.
Among woodpeckers, the red-cockaded has an advanced social system. They live
in a group termed a clan. The clan may have from two to nine birds, but never
more than one breeding pair. The other adults are usually males and are called
helpers. The helpers are usually the sons of the breeding male and can be from 1
to 3 years old. The helpers assist in incubating eggs, feeding young, making new
cavities, and defending the clans' area from other red-cockaded woodpeckers.
Roosting cavities are excavated in living pines, and usually in those that are
infected with a fungus producing red-heart disease. A clan nests and roosts in a
group of cavity trees called a colony. The colony may have one or two cavity
trees to more than 12, but only one clan uses a cavity. In most colonies, all the
cavity trees are within a circle about 1,500 feet (457.2 m) wide. Open stands of
pines with a minimum age of 80 to 120 years provides suitable nesting habitat.
Longleaf pines are the most commonly used, but other species of southern pine
are also acceptable. Dense stands of pines, or stands that have a dense hardwood
understory are avoided. Foraging habitat is provided in pine and pine hardwood
stands 30 years or older with foraging preference for pine trees 10 inches or larger
in diameter. The woodpeckers diet consists mainly of insects, which includes
ants, beetles, wood-boring insects, and caterpillars.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
A search of the NHP files found no occurrences of the red-cockaded woodpecker
in the project vicinity. A field survey of the project area did not reveal any mature
Februan_ ? 2002
18
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
pine habitat necessary for this species. It can be concluded that the project will
not impact this endangered species.
Acipenser brevirostrum (Shortnose sturgeon) Endangered
Vertebrate Family: Acipenseridae
Federally Listed: 1967
The shortnose sturgeon is a medium-sized [17 to 35 inches (43.2 to 88.9 cm)]
fish, with a relatively short snout and a wide mouth. Its body is somewhat
elongate and pentagonal in cross section and armored with five bony plates
(scutes) and dorsal and anal fins far back on the body.
The range of shortnose sturgeons extend from large freshwater rivers to the sea,
and their distribution is related to the migration of adults between spawning,
feeding, and wintering areas. Typically upriver migrations to spawning grounds
occur in spring or fall. During the fall and winter, an unknown portion of the
population appears to leave the estuaries and move short distances into the
Atlantic Ocean, but different patterns of movement have been found for different
populations. Adults are found in deep water [33 to 66 feet (10.1 to 20.1 m)] in the
winter and shallow water [6 to 33 feet (1.8 to 10.1 m)] in summer. Juveniles are
nonmigratory and typically inhabit deep channels of swiftly flowing rivers above
the salt wedge. This species is anadromous, spawning in freshwater at a
temperature of 48° to 54° F from February to mid-May. Spawning sites are either
in swift water with gravel and rubble substrate or freshwater swamps. Shortnose
sturgeon are benthic forgers and prefer areas with soft substrate and vegetated
bottoms. Juveniles feed on small crustaceans and insect larvae. Adults in
freshwater feed mostly on crustaceans, insect larvae, and mollusks; in estuaries
they mainly eat polychaete worms, crustaceans, and mollusks.
Biological Conclusion: . Unresolved
A search of the NHP files revealed several occurrences of shortnose sturgeon in
the project area. First observed in 1987, several individuals were tracked in 1993
from the southern tip of Eagle Island, near Wilmington, as far upstream as Lock
and Dam 1, just upriver of the study area. All work should be coordinated to
minimize impacts to this endangered species. Informal consultation with the
National Marine Fisheries Service is recommended to discuss potential impacts to
shortnose sturgeon and possible minimization of the impacts.
Schwalbea americana (American chaffseed)
Plant Family: Scrophulariaceae
Federally Listed: 1992
Endangered
American chaffseed is an erect perennial herb with unbranched stems. The large,
purplish-yellow tubular flowers are borne singly on short stalks in the axils of the
February 2002
19

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
Y
uppermost, reduced leaves. The leaves are alternate, lance-shaped to elliptic,
stalkless, 0.78 to 1.9 inches (2 to 5 cm long), and entire. The entire plant is
densely but minutely hairy throughout, including the flowers. Flowering occurs
from April to June, with the fruits maturing in early summer.
American chaffseed occurs in sandy (sandy peat, sandy loam), acidic, seasonally
moist to dry soils. It is generally found in habitats described as open, moist pine
flatwoods, fire-maintained savannas, ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and
xeric sandy soils, and other open grass/sedge systems. Chaffseed is dependant
upon factors such as fire, mowing, or fluctuating water tables to maintain the open
to partly open conditions that it requires. Historically, the species existed on
savannas and pinelands throughout the coastal plain and on sandstone knobs and
plains inland where frequent, naturally occurring fires maintained these sub-
climax communities. The American chaffseed is hemiparasitic (partially
dependant upon another plant as host). However, it is not host-specific, requiring
a specialized host, and can use a variety of other plant species as a host.
Fifty populations of American chaffseed are known from New Jersey, South
Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. Only one population is known in North Carolina.
Although never a common species, the population has significantly declined
because of loss of habitat to development or fire suppression.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
A search of the NHP files found no occurrences of American chaffseed in the
project vicinity. A field survey of the project area did not reveal any American
chaffseed or suitable habitat, such as open fire maintained areas for this species.
It can be concluded that the project will not impact this endangered species.
Lysimachia asperulaefolia (Rough-leaved loosestrife) Endangered
Plant Family: Primulacae
Federally Listed: 1987
The rough-leaved loosestrife is a perennial rhizomatous herb, with erect stems 12
to 24 in (30 to 60 cm) in height. Leaves are unusually sessile, occurring in whorls
of 3 or 4. They are broadest at the base [0.3 to 0.8 in (0.8 to 2 cm) wide], entire,
and have three prominent veins. The yellow, bisexual flowers are borne on a
loose, terminal raceme. The inflorescence usually has five petals with ragged
margins near the apex and with dots or steaks. Flowering occurs from late May to
early June, and seeds are formed by August. Despite winter dormancy, the plant
is easy to recognize in the fall because of the reddish color and distinctive leaf
patterns.
The habitat for the rough-leaved loosestrife is generally the ecotone between
longleaf pine or oak savannas and wetter, shrubby areas, where moist, sandy, or
Februan, 2002
20
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
peaty soils occur and where low vegetation allows abundant sunlight into the herb
layer. Fire is the main factor for the suppression of taller vegetation. The rough-
leaved loosestrife is associated with six natural community types: low pocosin,
high pocosin, wet pine flatwoods, pine savannah, streamwood pocosin, and
sandhill seep.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
A search of the NHP files found no occurrences of Rough-leaved loosestrife in the
project vicinity. A field survey of the project area did not reveal any rough-leaved
loosestrife or suitable habitat such as ecotonal areas for this species. It can be
concluded that the project will not impact this endangered species.
Lindera melissifolia (Southern spicebush)
Plant Family:Lauraceae
Federally Listed: 1986
Endangered
Southern spicebush (also known as pondberry) is a deciduous shrub that grows to
approximately 6 feet (2 meters) tall, and spreads vegetatively by stolons. Pale
yellow flowers appear in the spring before the leaves emerge. The bright red
fruits are oval shaped, half and inch (12 millimeters) long, and appear in the fall.
Southern spicebush is distinguished from the two other North American members
of the genus (Lindera benzoin and Lindera subcoriacea) by its drooping, thin,
membranaceous, and ovate to elliptically shaped leaves. The leaves of southern
spicebush have a strong, sassafras-like odor when crushed.
Vegetative reproduction is accomplished via stolons. The plants grow in clones
of 2 to 3 years of age, but appear to live for only a few years. New stems that
emerge from rootstock continually replace dead stems. The plants are dioecious
and bloom around March. Mature fruits can be found in October.
Southern spicebush is most frequently associated with wetland habitats such as
bottomland hardwoods in inland areas, and the margins of sinks, ponds, and other
depressions in coastal places. This species prefers shaded areas but can also grow
in full sun.
In North Carolina, only one population of southern spicebush is known to still
exist. This location is in Bladen County.
Biological Conclusion: Unresolved
A search of the NHP files found no occurrences of southern spicebush in the
project vicinity. A field survey of the project area did not reveal any specimens
but potential southern spicebush habitat was found. This habitat within the study
area consists of edges of canals and sloughs. The optimal survey window for
Februarv 2002
21

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
southern spicebush is February-March, when the flowers are most apparent. Until
a survey is conducted in this optimal window the impact to this species is
unresolved.
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Status
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species
Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Table 3 includes FSC species
listed for Bladen County and their state classifications. Organisms that are listed as
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) on the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded state protection
under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979. However, the level of protection given to state-listed species
does not apply to NCDOT activities.
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern in Bladen County
Common Name Scientific Name State
Status Habitat
resent
Vertebrates
Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis SC No
Carolina gopher frog Rana capito capito SC No
Mimic glass lizard Ophisaurus mimicus SC No
Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii SC No
Southern hognose snake* Heterodon simus SR No
Invertebrates
Atlantic pigtoe Fusconaia masoni T Yes
Belle's sand dragon Progomphus bellei SR No
Venus flytrap cutworm moth Hemipachnobia subporphyrea subporphyrea SR No
Yellow lampmussel Lampsilis cariosa T No
Vascular Plants
Awned meadowbeuty Rhexia aristosa T No
Boykin's lobelia Lobelia boykinii C No
Carolina asphodel* Tofieldia glabra C No
Carolina bogmint Macbridea caroliniana T Yes
Carolina grass-of-parnassus Parnassia caroliniana E No
Carolina spleenwort Asplenium heteroresiliens E No
Chapman's sedge Carex chapmanii C No
Pineland plantain Plantago sparsiflora E No
Pondspice Litsea aestivalis C Yes
February 2002
22
Natural Resources Technical Report
r Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
Common Name Scientific Name State
Status Habitat
resent
Resinous boneset Eupatorium resinosum T-SC Yes
Sandhills milkvetch Astragalus michauxii T No
Savannah indigo-bush Amorpha georgiana var. confusa T No
Spiked medusa** Pteroglossaspis ecristata E No
Spring-flowering goldenrod Solidago verna T No
Venus flytrap Dionaea muscipula C-SC No
Wavyleaf wild quinine Parthenium radfordii ---
White wicky Kalmia cuneata E-SC No
Sources: Amoroso, ed., 1997; LeGrand and Hall, eds., 1997
Key: T = Threatened, E = Endangered, SC = Special Concern, C = Candidate, SR =
Significantly Rare
*=Historic record. The species was last observed in the county more than 50 years
ago.
**=Obscure record. The date and/or location of observation is uncertain.
No other FSC species were observed during the site visit, and none are recorded at NHP
as occurring within 2 miles (3.2 km) of the project area. Habitat does exist within the
project area for Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), Carolina bogmint (Macbridea
caroliniana), pondspice (Litsea aestivalis), and resinous boneset (Eupatorium
resinosum).
Februanv2002
23
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
_i
5.0 REFERENCES
American Ornithologists' Union. "The A.O.U. Check-list of North American Birds,
Seventh Edition." http://www.aou.oriz/aou/birdlist.html#tina (9 July 2001).
Amoroso, J.L., ed. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of
North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
Conant, Roger and Joseph T. Collins. 1998. A Guide to the Reptiles and Amphibians of
Eastern and Central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, New York.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands
and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of
Biological Services, FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. and S.P. Hall, eds. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare
Animal Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 1999.
Basin-Wide Assessment Report of the Cape Fear River Basin. Environmental Sciences
Branch, Water Quality Section, Division of Water Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina.
NCDENR. "Permits Database on Mainframe Computer." Water Quality Section, Division
of Water Quality (25 June 2001).
NCDENR. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water
Quality Section. http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wghome.html (25 June 2001).
North Carolina Office of State Budget, Planning, and Management. "State
Demographics." http://www.ospl.state.nc.us/demo(24 June 2001).
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife
Program. "North Carolina Freshwater Mussels"
hqp://www.ncwildlife.org/pa07 WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg7bla.htm (30 July 2001).
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Febman_ ° 2002
24
Natural Resources Technical Report
Cape Fear River, Bladen County, North Carolina
Rohde, F.C., R.B. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
Thorpe, James H. and Alan P. Covich. 1991. Ecology and Classification of North
American Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, Inc. San Diego, California.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1990. Soil Survey of
Bladen County, North Carolina. Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. "Endangered Species/ Section 7 Program in
North Carolina." North Carolina Ecological Services.
http://nc-es.fws.gov/es/Countyfr.html (22 March 2001 and 21 August 2001).
Weakley A.S., K.D. Patterson, S. Landaal, M. Pyne and others, compilers. 1998.
International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the
Southeastern United States. The Nature Conservancy, Southeast Regional Office,
Southern Conservation Science Department: Chapel Hill, NC.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas,
Virginia, and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina.
February 2002
25

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
B-4028
Daniel Ingram
Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No _
the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No X
the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No X
;If needed, explain in remarks.)
Date: 712412001
County: Bladen
State: NC
Community ID: Bottomland Hrdwd
Transect ID:
Plot ID:
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Li uidambar s raci ua Canopy FAC+ Arundinaria i antea Herb FACW
Quercus ni ra Canopy FAC Bohemeria lindrica Herb FACW+
Fraxinus Pennsylvanica Canopy FACW
Ilex o aca Shrub FAC-
Li ustrum sinense Shrub FAC
Ca inus caroliniana Shrub FAC
Toxicodendron radicans Vine FAC
Berchemia scandens Vine FACW
Smilax rotundi olia Vine FAC
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks:)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in.
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 8 (in.) X FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Community ID: Bottomland Hrdwd
TransectID:
Plot ID:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla and Chastain, frequently flooded

Taxonomy Subgroup: thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrochrepts, thermic Ty Drainage Class: poor, somewhat poor
Confirm Mapped Type?
Yes
pic Fluvaquents No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-10 10YR 211 loam
10-18 10YR 412 clay loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
X Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? X Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? X Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? X Yes No
Remarks:
w
i
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: B-4028 Date: 7/24/2001
Applicant/Owner: County: Bladen
Investigator: Daniel Ingram State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID: Flood lain Slou h
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes X No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No X Plot ID:
(If needed, explain in remarks.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Taxodium distichum Canopy OBL
N ssa a uatica Canopy OBL
Populus deltoides Sub-Canopy FAC+
Salix ni ra Sub-Canopy OBL
Acer rubrum Sub-Canopy FAC
Toxicodendron radicans Vine FAC
Bohemeria c lindrica Herb FACW+
Saururus cernuus Herb OR[,
Lemna a usilla Herb OBL
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks:)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
X Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 6 (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 in.
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.) X Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) X FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
w
Community ID: Floodplain Slough
Transect 1D:
Plot 1D:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla and Chastain, frequently flooded

Taxonomy Subgroup: thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrochrepts, thermic Ty Drainage Class: poor, somewhat poor
Confirm Mapped Type?
Yes
pic Fluvaquents No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 10YR 211 loam
6-18 10YR 411 clay loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
X Aquic Moisture Regime
X Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? X Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? X Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? X Yes No
Remarks:

?? : ??p ??
? Vf l1? Y