20000408 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20000228

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James H. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Mary Beth Nickolich
P.O. Box 1391
New Bern, NC 28563-1391
??
Subject: Neuse and Tar/Pam Buffer Strategy
2/24/00 Site visits
Beaufort and Craven County
Dear Mary Beth:
0?)rj 4() 8
On February 24, 2000, Paula Moon-Butzin and I conducted field surveys to determine
compliance with the Neuse and Tar/Pam Buffer Rules. We visited ten (10) different sites and
made stream determinations. The following is a brief summary of each site with associated maps
and pictures:
1. Tributary of Chocowiruty Creek - two features examined. The feature within the
thinning practice was determined to be exempt, where as the downstream feature
outside the tract, above the railroad track, was determined to be subject.
I Tributary ofChocowinity Creek - two features examined. The feature on the east
side of the tract was determined to be subject, however the feature on the west
side of the tract was exempt.
Tributary to Cyndi Edwards Branch - one feature examined. The feature was
determined to be exempt, except for the downstream portion, which empties into
Cyndi Edwards Branch. The line for the necessary buffer was five (5) chains (330
feet) upstream of Cyndi Edwards Branch.
4. Tributary to Chocowinity Creek - two features examined. Both of the mapped
features were not found on the ground, therefore exempt.
Tributary to Blounts Creek - two features examined. Both of the mapped features
were not found on the ground, therefore exempt.
LY??WA
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
February 25, 2000 -
6. Tributary to Little Swift Creek - one feature examined. The feature was
determined to be a historical canal dug for drainage, therefore not subject co the
buffer rules.
Tributary to Little Swift Creek - one feature examined. The feature was
determined to be a historical canal dug for drainage, therefore not subject to the
buffer rules.
8. Tributary to Little Swift Creek - one feature examined. The feature was visible on
the soil maps but not the USGS. There was a tributary on the ground but it
eventually fanned out into the tract and did not connect to any downstream surface
waters. This feature was determined to be exempt from the buffer rules. There was
a system found within the tract, which had stream characteristics, but did not show
up on any map.
9. Tributary to Morgan Swamp - one feature examined. The feature in question was
rated and found not have the necessary components to be classified a stream. (11.
points) The system was found to be exempt.
10. Tributary to Beaverdam Swamp - one feature examined. The feature was found
not to have the necessary components to be a classified stream. The system was
found to be exempt.
All of the tracts examined were part of Weyerhaeuser's timberlands management strategy.
The sites are scheduled to have first and second thinnings in the 2000 calendar year.
If you have any comments or questions please call me at 252-946-6481.
Sincerely,
le? F J?.,
Brad Shaver
Environmental Specialist II
cc: WaRO
401 Wetlands Group
01,1; ::=-hi'mm-r. ; ar,; ,;,:,;I. Washington. North Carolina 27,889
Te1ef.hane (252; Q46-6481 FAX(M)946-9215
An &pwl (lntx,rtnmin n11-rm1[.e Gmplover 50'. rec"ded '" Jolt- -,Ill urr paper
? fifi lG
I
/ 'IFS {F
fifi
k
,\ eY
I
'? ycc '- Ik
Co k-
146
i" /
4 / /
_2n_d Thin -- 1999 1999 Pruned 2nd Thin _
MGT Unit: 310200 Acs: 46.4 Thin acs: 46 Target: 85 TPA , - Par _ _ ,
Birthyear:1975 SI: 74 AvgD: 9.70 AvgH: 67 BA/ac: 102 TPA: 200 Map: J - 12 12 - 13
Exam type: 4 year: 96 Pruned: 1989 Painted: PU Lift: 18 feet Comp: Beau 57
Seasonality: 2 - Sensitivity:- No Sensitivity Coded - - - GRD: 1998 L District: Ne -
Edwar
,? = _•- _ ti. Cam, -
1 34
APA.
1 r i.
40
(
1 i
?- _ S'ite` ures.o ¢ gr?Gnd
?. M
s ? r ? ??v F•. `? '
-Z' 44 , Haw ]EIhnch ,
)
Name: HACKNEY f°y y Location: 035° 25'57.2" N 077° 04' 15.6" W
Date: 2/25/100zA Caption: Beaufort County
Scale: 1 inch equals 1000 feet Site #4
Features were not in the ground
Copvripht (C) 1997, Maptech, Inc
TI: