HomeMy WebLinkAboutchapter 12 subbasin -12
Chapter 12
Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-12
Including: Rocky River, Loves Creek, Tick Creek and Bear Creek
12.1 Subbasin Overview
Subbasin 03-06-12 is in the Carolina Slate belt and is
characterized by seasonally low flowing streams. Most of
the watershed is forested, with extensive pastureland as
well. Development is occurring along the US 64 corridor
between Siler City and Pittsboro. Population is expected
to grow by 110,000 people in counties with portions or all
of their areas in this subbasin by 2020.
There are four individual NPDES wastewater discharge
permits in this subbasin with a permitted flow of 4.02
MGD (Figure 15). The largest is Siler City WWTP (4
MGD). Refer to Appendix VI and Chapter 30 for more
information on NPDES permit holders. Issues related to
compliance with NPDES permit conditions are discussed
below in Section 12.3 for Impaired waters and in Section
12.4 for other waters.
There is one registered dairy, three registered cattle
operations and one registered swine operation in this
subbasin. Issues related to agricultural activities are
discussed below in Section 12.3 for Impaired waters.
There were 12 benthic community samples and four fish
community samples (Figure 15 and Table 15) collected
during this assessment period. Data were also collected from three ambient monitoring stations
including two UCFRBA (Appendix V) stations and one DWQ ambient station. One reservoir
was also monitored. Refer to the 2003 Cape Fear River Basinwide Assessment Report at
http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html and Appendix IV for more information on monitoring.
Subbasin 03-06-12 at a Glance
Land and Water Area
Total area: 244 mi2
Land area: 243 mi2
Water area: 1 mi2
Population Statistics
2000 Est. Pop.: 20,039people
Pop. Density: 82 persons/mi2
Land Cover (percent)
Forest/Wetland: 68.9%
Surface Water: 0.6%
Urban: 1.3%
Cultivated Crop: 2.5%
Pasture/ Managed
Herbaceous: 26.8%
Counties
Alamance, Chatham and Randolph
Municipalities
Siler City
Waters in the following sections are identified by assessment unit number (AU#). This number
is used to track defined segments in the water quality assessment database, 303(d) Impaired
waters list and the various tables in this basin plan. The assessment unit number is a subset of
the DWQ index number (classification identification number). A letter attached to the end of the
AU# indicates that the assessment is smaller than the DWQ index segment. No letter indicates
that the assessment unit and the DWQ index segment are the same.
Chapter 12 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-12 122
AU Number
Description
Length/AreaClassification
CAPE FEAR 03-06-12
AL Rating REC RatingStationYear/ParameterResult % Exc
Aquatic Life Assessment
ResultStation
Recreation Assessment
Stressors Sources
SubbasinTable 15
Bear Creek
17-43-16b
From SR 2189 to SR 2187
2.0 FW MilesC S ND
BF56 /1999GF
BF56 /1999F
BF56 /2003GF
17-43-16c
From SR 2187 to Rocky River
7.3 FW MilesC NR ND
BB372 /2003NR
Habitat Degradation
Harlands Creek(Hollands Creek)
17-43-15
From source to Rocky River
10.2 FW MilesC S ND
BB166 /2003GF
Habitat Degradation
Loves Creek
17-43-10a
From source to Chatham Avenue
3.3 FW MilesC NR ND
BB221 /2003NR
BB36 /2003NR
Habitat Degradation MS4 NPDES
17-43-10b
From Chatham Avenue to Siler City WWTP
2.5 FW MilesC I ND
BB210 /2003F
BB29 /2003F
BF58 /2003GF
Habitat Degradation MS4 NPDES
17-43-10c
From Siler City WWTP to Rocky River
0.4 FW MilesC I ND
BB174 /2003F
Habitat Degradation WWTP NPDES
Habitat Degradation MS4 NPDES
Meadow Creek
17-43-12
From source to Rocky River
5.0 FW MilesC NR ND
BB206 /2003NR
CAPE FEAR Subbasin 03-06-12
AU Number
Description
Length/AreaClassification
CAPE FEAR 03-06-12
AL Rating REC RatingStationYear/ParameterResult % Exc
Aquatic Life Assessment
ResultStation
Recreation Assessment
Stressors Sources
SubbasinTable 15
Rocky River
17-43-(1)a
From source to upper Rocky River Reservoir
10.6 FW MilesWS-III S ND
BF33 /2003GF
17-43-(1)b
From upper Rocky River Reservoir to a point 0.3 mile
downstream of Lacy Creek
3.9 FW MilesWS-III S NDBL24 NCE Chlorophyll a Agriculture
Chlorophyll a Pasture
17-43-(8)a
From dam at lower supply reservoir for Siler City to
Varnal Creek
6.7 FW MilesC NR SBA373 NCE
BB442 /2003NR
BA373 NCE Turbidity Unknown
Habitat Degradation Impervious Surface
17-43-(8)b
From Varnal Creek to Deep River
21.6 FW MilesC S SBA374 NCE
BA376 NCE
BB376 /2003GF
BB376 /2002NR
BA374 NCE
BA376 NCE
Habitat Degradation Pasture
Habitat Degradation Agriculture
Habitat Degradation MS4 NPDES
Tick Creek
17-43-13a
From source to US 421
8.2 FW MilesC I ND
BF72 /2003F
17-43-13b
From US 421 to Rocky River
4.9 FW MilesC S ND
BB360 /2003GF
Habitat Degradation Agriculture
Habitat Degradation Impervious Surface
Habitat Degradation Pasture
CAPE FEAR Subbasin 03-06-12
AU Number
Description
Length/AreaClassification
CAPE FEAR 03-06-12
AL Rating REC RatingStationYear/ParameterResult % Exc
Aquatic Life Assessment
ResultStation
Recreation Assessment
Stressors Sources
SubbasinTable 15
AL - Aquatic Life BF - Fish Community Survey E - Excellent S - Supporting, I - Impaired
REC - Recreation BB - Benthic Community Survey G - Good NR - Not Rated
BA - Ambient Monitoring Site GF - Good-Fair NR*- Not Rated for Recreation (screening criteria exceeded)
BL- Lake Monitoring F - Fair ND-No Data Collected to make assessment
S- DEH RECMON P - Poor
NI - Not Impaired CE-Criteria Exceeded > 10% and more than 10 samples
Miles/Acres S- Severe Stress NCE-No Criteria Exceeded
FW- Fresh Water M-Moderate Stress
S- Salt Water N- Natural
Results
Aquatic Life Rating Summary
S 53.2 FW Milesm
NR 22.4 FW Milesm
I 11.1 FW Milesm
NR 14.9 FW Milese
ND 59.6 FW Miles
ND FW Acres
Recreation Rating Summary
28.3 FW MilesSm
132.9 FW MilesND
FW AcresND
Fish Consumption Rating Summary
161.2 FW MilesIe
FW Acres
CAPE FEAR Subbasin 03-06-12
12.2 Use Support Assessment Summary
Use support ratings were assigned for waters in subbasin 03-06-12 in the aquatic life, recreation,
fish consumption and water supply categories. All waters are Impaired on an evaluated basis in
the fish consumption category because of fish consumption advice that applies to the entire
basin. In the water supply category, all WS classified waters (42 miles) are Supporting on an
evaluated basis based on reports from DEH regional water treatment plant consultants. Refer to
Appendix X for a complete list of monitored waters and more information on Supporting
monitored waters.
There were 86.7 stream miles (51.7 percent) monitored during this assessment period in the
aquatic life category. There are 11.1 stream miles (6.6 percent) identified as Impaired in this
same category.
12.3 Status and Recommendations of Previously and Newly Impaired
Waters
The following waters were either identified as Impaired in the previous basin plan (2000) or are
newly Impaired based on recent data. If previously identified as Impaired, the water will either
remain on the state’s 303(d) list or will be delisted based on recent data showing water quality
improvements. If the water is newly Impaired, it will likely be placed on the 2006 303(d) list.
The current status and recommendations for addressing these waters are presented below, and
each is identified by an assessment unit number (AU#). Refer to the overview for more
information on AUs. Information regarding 303(d) listing and reporting methodology is
presented in Appendix VII.
12.3.1 Loves Creek [AU#17-43-10a, b and c]
2000 Recommendations
These segments of Loves Creek were recommended for resampling using the 303(d) approach.
Siler City was encouraged to develop a stormwater program and other watershed initiatives to
improve water quality in this creek.
Current Status
Loves Creek [17-43-10b and c] from Chatham Avenue to the Rocky River (2.9 miles) is
Impaired for aquatic life because of Fair benthic community ratings at sites BB29, BB174 and
BB210. The upper 3.3 miles are Not Rated because benthic community ratings could not be
assigned at sites BB221 and BB36.
A stressor study completed in the Loves Creek watershed indicated toxic chemicals in runoff
from Siler City are the main stressors to the benthic community. Streambank erosion,
sedimentation and excessive algal growth are also stressors. The WWTP was not the main
stressor, and agricultural land uses are also a source. The survey noted runoff from animal
operations in the upper watershed may be contributing nutrients and bacteria to the creek.
Chapter 12 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-12 127
2005 Recommendations
DWQ will continue to monitor the Loves Creek watershed. DWQ will work with DSWC to
evaluate if BMPs can be implemented to reduce nutrients from animal operations in the
watershed. Refer to Chapter 31 for more information and recommendations for urban streams.
All segments will remain on the 303(d) list of Impaired waters. TMDLs (Chapter 35) will be
developed for identified stressors within 8-13 years of listing.
Water Quality Initiatives
The NCEEP initiated a Local Watershed Planning that included Loves Creek. The preliminary
findings are discussed under the Rocky River in this chapter.
12.3.2 Rocky River [AU#17-43-(1)a and b and 17-43-(8)a]
2000 Recommendations
The 2000 basin plan recommended that the Rocky River be resampled and that agricultural
BMPs, including fencing cattle out of streams be implemented.
Current Status
Rocky River [17-43-(1)a] from source to upper Rocky River Reservoir (10.6 miles) is
Supporting aquatic life because of a Good-Fair fish community rating at site BF33.
Upper Rocky River Reservoir [17-43-(1)b] from upper Rocky River Reservoir to downstream of
Lacy Creek (3.9 miles) is Supporting aquatic life because no criteria were exceeded during lakes
monitoring in 2003. The reservoir is hypereutrophic. In August 2003, chlorophyll a levels were
elevated and there indications that animal operations (both cattle and horse) may be contributing
nutrients to the reservoir and downstream.
Rocky River [17-43-(8)a] from dam at Siler City water supply to Varnal Creek (6.7 miles) is Not
Rated for aquatic life because of numerous reports of nuisance periphyton growth in the river.
During summer months algal mats have been observed to cover areas down to the confluence
with the Deep River. No criteria were exceeded at site BA373; however, nutrient levels were
elevated. The Siler WWTP, as well as agriculture and residential activities, are potential sources
of nutrients.
The watershed is predominately forested, but development is increasing. Agriculture, as well as
the Loves Creek WWTP in Siler City, are likely the main sources of nutrients.
2005 Recommendations
DWQ will continue to monitor the Rocky River watershed. DWQ will work with DSWC staff to
further implement BMPs to reduce the impacts of development and agriculture in this watershed.
DWQ will work with Siler City to evaluate nutrient reduction strategies from urban areas as well
as from the WWTP.
Segment 17-43-(1)a will be removed from the 303(d) list of Impaired waters because of the
improved fish community rating.
Chapter 12 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-12 128
Water Quality Initiatives
In 2002, Liberty received a $203,000 CWMTF (Chapter 34) grant to rehabilitate 7,556 linear feet
of the wastewater collection system and rehabilitate or replace 43 manholes.
The NCEEP initiated a Local Watershed Planning project focusing on three local watersheds
comprising the upper and middle Rocky River drainage system. The study area is located
primarily in northwestern Chatham County, including Siler City and portions of Randolph and
Alamance counties. The planning area addresses the Rocky River mainstem and tributary
watersheds, including N. Prong Rocky River, Greenbriar Creek, Varnal Creek, Loves Creek,
Tick Creek, Bear Creek and others.
A technical advisory team consisting of local resource professionals and municipal staff from the
counties and towns in the planning area was formed to help guide the watershed assessment and
plan development work. This team will also help identify optimal watershed project sites with
cooperative landowners for the establishment of long-term conservation easements. Watershed
projects to be identified include traditional stream and stream buffer restoration/enhancement
sites, wetlands and buffer preservation sites, and sites for the implementation of urban
stormwater or agricultural best management practices (BMPs).
The Preliminary Findings Report was completed in February 2005. The Phase II assessment &
modeling of watershed conditions, and subsequent development of watershed restoration and
protection strategies, are slated for completion by summer of 2005. To date, over 60 potential
stream restoration sites and dozens of high-quality preservation tracts have been identified.
12.3.3 Tick Creek [AU#17-43-13a]
Current Status
This segment of Tick Creek was Fully Supporting in the 2000 plan; however, Tick Creek from
source to US 421 (8.2 miles) is currently Impaired for aquatic life because of a Fair fish
community rating at site BF72. Cattle have unrestricted access to the stream and under story
vegetation has been heavily damaged by hoof traffic. Bare dirt and severely eroded banks were
also noted at the sample site. Bonlee Elementary School (NC0039331) had significant violations
of ammonia permit limits during the last two years of the assessment period.
2005 Recommendations
DWQ will continue to monitor the Tick Creek watershed. DWQ will also contact DSWC staff to
prioritize BMP implementation in this watershed to limit cattle access to the stream. The
NPDES compliance process will be used to address the significant permit violations noted above.
This segment will be added to the 303(d) list of Impaired waters. TMDLs (Chapter 35) will be
developed for identified stressors within 8-13 years of listing.
Water Quality Initiatives
The NCEEP initiated a Local Watershed Planning that included Tick Creek. The preliminary
findings are discussed under the Rocky River in this chapter.
Chapter 12 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-12 129
12.4 Status and Recommendations for Waters with Noted Impacts
The surface waters discussed in this section are not Impaired. However, notable water quality
problems and concerns have been documented for some waters based on this assessment. While
these waters are not Impaired, attention and resources should be focused on these waters to
prevent additional degradation or facilitate water quality improvement. Waters in the following
section are identified by assessment unit number (AU#). See overview for more information on
AU#s.
12.4.1 Bear Creek [AU#17-43-16a]
Current Status and 2005 Recommendations
Bear Creek [17-43-16a] from source to SR 2189 (14.9 miles) is Not Rated on an evaluated basis
for aquatic life because Hill Forest Rest Home (NC0038849) had significant violations of
ammonia permit limits in the last two years of the assessment period that could have negatively
impacted aquatic life. The NPDES compliance process will be used to address the significant
permit violations noted above.
Water Quality Initiatives
The NCEEP initiated a Local Watershed Planning that included Bear Creek. The preliminary
findings are discussed under the Rocky River in this chapter.
Chapter 12 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-12 130