CPF Chapter B-4

Section B: Chapter 4 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-04 132
Chapter 4 -
Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-04
Includes Cane Creek, Collins Creek and the Haw River
4.1 Water Quality Overview
This subbasin contains the lower reaches of the Haw
River in Alamance, Orange and Chatham counties. This
section of the Haw River is approximately 25-river miles
in length and is completely within the Carolina Slate Belt.
Tributary streams within this subbasin are strongly
influenced by geology and characteristically have large
boulder and/or rubble riffle areas. Therefore, many of the
tributary streams in this subbasin are prone to extremely
low flow conditions during summer months. A map of
the subbasin, including water quality sampling locations,
is presented in Figure B-4.
Biological ratings for these sample locations are presented
in Table B-4. The current sampling resulted in impaired
ratings for two streams and one lake in this subbasin.
Refer to Appendix III for a complete listing of monitored
waters and use support ratings. See Section A, Chapter 3,
Table A-31 for a summary of lakes and reservoirs use
support data.
Much of the land use within this subbasin is forest,
although pasture, cultivated crops and urban land uses
also account for significant portions of the subbasin. All
three counties within this subbasin have large numbers of
registered livestock and animal operations, particularly
cattle and poultry operations in Chatham County.
There are 7 permitted dischargers in this subbasin. Only
Pittsboro WWTP (Robeson Creek) has a permitted flow
of more than 0.5 MGD.
Ambient water quality data are collected from three locations in this subbasin: two mainstem
locations on the Haw River (US 15-501 near Bynum and below B. Everett Jordan dam near
Moncure) and Robeson Creek at SR 1939 near Seaforth. These data have indicated good water
quality with few violations in water quality criteria. Additionally, data from the two Haw River
locations in this subbasin indicate an improvement in water quality compared to conditions
recorded from ambient monitoring sites in the Haw River at Haw River and Saxapahaw.
Subbasin 03-06-04 at a Glance
Land and Water Area (sq. mi.)
Total area: 331
Land area: 327
Water area: 4
Population Statistics
1990 Est. Pop.: 20,213 people
Pop. Density: 62 persons/mi
2
Land Cover (%)
Forest/Wetland: 73.0
Surface Water: 1.7
Urban: 0.3
Cultivated Cropland: 3.0
Pasture/
Managed Herbaceous: 22.0
Use Support Ratings
Freshwater streams:
Fully Supporting: 207.1 mi.
Partially Supporting: 15.9 mi.
Not Supporting: 0.0 mi.
Not Rated: 18.3 mi.
Lakes:
Cane Creek Reservoir - Fully
Supporting
Pittsboro Lake - Not Supporting

Section B: Chapter 4 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-04 134
Table B-4 Biological Assessment Sites in Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-04
BENTHOS Bioclassification
Site # Stream County Location 1993 1998
B-2 Haw River Alamance SR 1005 Good-Fair (s) Good-Fair (s)
B-3 Marys Creek Alamance SR 2174 Not Sampled Fair (w)
B-4 Cane Creek Orange SR 1114 Good (w) Good & Excellent (w)
Good-Fair (s) Good (s)
B-11 Collins Creek Chatham SR 1539 no sample Good-Fair (w)
B-14 Terrells Creek Chatham NC 87 Good (w) Good-Fair (s)
B-16 Dry Creek Chatham SR 1520 Good (w) Good-Fair (w)
B-17 Haw River Chatham US 64 Good (s) Good (s)
B-18 Pokeberry Creek Chatham SR 1711 Good-Fair (w) Good (w)
FISH Bioclassification
Site # Stream County Location 1994 1998
F-2 Collins Creek Chatham SR 1539 no sample Poor
F-3 Terrells Creek Chatham NC 87 Fair Fair
F-4 Ferrels Creek Chatham SR 1525 no sample Good-Fair
(w) Winter collection, (s) Summer collection
Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been collected from two Haw River locations since
1984, including two basinwide surveys in 1993 and 1998. These data indicate that water quality
conditions improve downstream near the Haw River arm of Jordan Lake (Good
bioclassifications, US 64) compared to upstream reaches at Saxapahaw (Good-Fair
bioclassifications, SR 1005). A benthos sample also was collected from the Saxapahaw location
in November 1998 during extremely low flow conditions. Although the bioclassification did not
change from summer data, taxa richness values were much lower. These data may reflect the
effects of greater instream waste concentrations from upstream sources during extremely low
flow conditions.
For more detailed information on water quality in this subbasin, refer to Basinwide Assessment
Report – Cape Fear River Basin – June 1999, available from DWQ Environmental Sciences
Branch at [phone].
4.2 Impaired Waters
Portions of Robeson Creek were identified as impaired in the 1996 Cape Fear River Basinwide
Water Quality Plan. Portions of Robeson Creek, Marys Creek and Pittsboro Lake are currently
rated impaired according to recent DWQ monitoring. Current status of each stream is discussed
below. Prior recommendations, future recommendations and projects aimed at improving water
quality for these waters are also discussed when applicable. 303(d) listed waters are summarized
in Part 4.3, and waters with other issues, recommendations or projects are discussed in Part 4.4.
Section B: Chapter 4 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-04 135
Robeson Creek
1996 Recommendations
Robeson Creek was not supporting (NS) in the upper segment and partially supporting (PS) in
the lower segment. A reconnaissance study was recommended to determine the source of low
dissolved oxygen (DO) upstream of the Pittsboro WWTP discharge and to evaluate
improvements to the facility. A follow-up benthic survey was also recommended.
Current Status
A special study to assess the effects of an oil spill into a small tributary of Robeson Creek was
conducted in 1997. No aquatic life was found in the tributary, and the spill may have affected
waters further downstream in the Robeson Creek watershed. Robeson Creek (6.2 miles from 0.7
miles downstream of SR 2159 to the Haw River) is currently partially supporting (PS) according
to recent DWQ monitoring. There have been chlorophyll a violations in the lower segment and
impaired biological communities in both segments. Instream habitat degradation associated with
urban nonpoint sources and a discharge from the City of Pittsboro WWTP is a possible cause of
impairment. A new highway bypass and other construction around Pittsboro are adding to
nonpoint source problems. The City of Pittsboro has upgraded the WWTP, but has occasional
violations including exceeding permitted limits for total phosphorus. A chicken processing plant
has had spills from its spray line into an unnamed tributary of Robeson Creek that may
contribute to nutrient problems in the lower segment.
2000 Recommendations
Local initiatives are needed to improve water quality in Robeson Creek. DWQ encourages
development of a land use plan that protects water quality in this watershed. The 303(d) list
approach will be to resample for biological and chemical data to attempt to determine potential
problem parameters and develop a TMDL to address nutrients causing high chlorophyll a levels.
The Haw River Assembly was awarded funds to initiate a watershed awareness campaign in the
Robeson Creek watershed including Pittsboro. The Haw River Assembly will seek cooperation
from city and county agencies, the Triangle J Council of Governments, Cooperative Extension
Service, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to coordinate development of a broader
restoration initiative. This funding will provide for landowner outreach and education and
initiate broader opportunities for conservation and restoration.
Marys Creek
Current Status
Marys Creek (9.7 miles from source to Haw River) is currently partially supporting (PS)
according to recent DWQ monitoring because of an impaired biological community. Instream
habitat degradation associated with agricultural nonpoint sources may be a cause of impairment.
Indications of nutrient enrichment were also noted. Holding ponds have been installed at
milking parlors on dairy farms in the watershed. Fencing cattle out of streams has also been
Section B: Chapter 4 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-04 136
implemented by some of the dairy operations on a voluntary basis. Marys Creek is on the state’s
year 2000 303(d) list (not yet EPA approved).
2000 Recommendations
DWQ encourages groups interested in watershed projects to work with DWQ and other agencies
to identify sources of impairment to this stream and to implement best management practices to
reduce agricultural nonpoint source impacts (see nonpoint source agency contacts in Appendix
V). The 303(d) list approach will be to resample for biological and chemical data to attempt to
determine potential problem parameters.
Pittsboro Lake
Current Status
Pittsboro Lake (38 acres, SW of Pittsboro) is currently not supporting (NS) according to recent
DWQ monitoring. The lake is impacted by urban and rural nonpoint source pollution. The lake
is also affected by algal blooms stimulated by excessive nutrient input from the watershed.
Pittsboro Lake is a small impoundment located just outside of, and owned by, the Town of
Pittsboro in Chatham County. The lake, which is a retired water supply, is actually a system of
two separate ponds connected by a canal that becomes dry during periods of low precipitation.
The drainage area for Pittsboro Lake is composed of forested, urban and agricultural areas.
Pittsboro Lake is currently part of a town park.
When sampled by DWQ in 1993, this lake had a significant macrophyte infestation problem.
Field observations in 1998 continued to identify a problem with excessive macrophyte growth in
the lake. There has been no dredging or macrophyte control actions (either mechanical or
chemical) to reduce the plant growth in the lake. Hurricane Fran (1996) did remove a great deal
of the plant material and algae observed in the lake in 1993 by DWQ. The lake is also affected
by algal blooms and nutrient loading.
2000 Recommendations
Local initiatives are needed to improve water quality in Pittsboro Lake. DWQ encourages
development of a land use plan that protects water quality in the lake. A stormwater program
with an educational component would help to reduce nutrient input into Pittsboro Lake. The
303(d) list approach will be to develop TMDL to address nutrients causing high chlorophyll a
levels.
4.3 303(d) Listed Waters
There are two streams (15.9 stream miles) and one lake in the subbasin rated as impaired and on
the state year 2000 303(d) list (not yet EPA approved). Robeson Creek, Marys Creek and
Pittsboro Lake are discussed above. For information on 303(d) listing requirements and
approaches, refer to Appendix IV.
Section B: Chapter 4 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-04 137
4.4 Other Issues, Recommendations and Projects
The following surface water segments are rated as fully supporting using recent DWQ
monitoring data. However, these data revealed some impacts to water quality. Although no
action is required for these surface waters, continued monitoring is recommended. Enforcement
of sediment and erosion control laws will help to reduce impacts on these streams and lakes.
DWQ encourages the use of voluntary measures to prevent water quality degradation. Education
on local water quality issues is always a useful tool to prevent water quality problems and to
promote restoration efforts. For information on water quality education programs, workshops
and nonpoint source agency contacts, see Appendix V.
Cane Creek South, Collins Creek, Terrells Creek South, Terrells Creek North, Dry Creek and the
Haw River mainstem are in agricultural watersheds and subject to streambank erosion and
habitat degradation. Implementation of agricultural BMPs would reduce potential impacts to the
smaller streams and reduce the potential for impacts to the mainstem.
Approximately 8% of the waters in this subbasin are impaired by nonpoint source pollution
(mostly urban). All the waters of the subbasin are affected by nonpoint sources. DENR, other
state agencies and environmental groups have programs and initiatives underway to address
water quality problems associated with nonpoint sources. DWQ will notify local agencies of
water quality concerns in this subbasin and work with these various agencies to conduct further
monitoring, as well as assist agency personnel with locating sources of funding for water quality
protection.
Upper Cape Fear River Basin Association
The Upper Cape Fear River Basin Association (UCFRBA) is starting to sample 45 sites in the
upper Deep and Haw River watersheds. The data will be analyzed to support various studies and
will be used with DWQ data to develop use support ratings for waters in the Cape Fear River
basin during the upcoming basinwide cycle.
Cane Creek Reservoir
Algal bloom samples were collected from Cane Creek Reservoir in July and August 1998.
Chlorophyll a above the state water quality standard was reported in June and August 1998. The
North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund awarded OWASA a one million-dollar
grant to help acquire land and conservation easements in the Cane Creek Reservoir watershed.
See Section C, Chapter 1, Part 1.5.1 for a complete description of the project.