Sec A Ch 2 Overview

Section A - Chapter 2
Catawba River Basin Overview
⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆⊆

2.1 General Overview

The Catawba River basin, along with the Broad River basin, forms the headwaters of the Santee-
Cooper River system, which flows through South Carolina to the Atlantic Ocean (Figure A-3).
The Catawba River begins on the eastern slopes of the Blue Ridge Mountains in Avery, Burke,
Caldwell and McDowell counties and flows southeast to the North Carolina-South Carolina
border near Charlotte (Figure A-4).

Many of these streams have Good to Excellent
water quality and are classified as trout waters.
The basin contains the Linville River, one of only
four rivers in the state designated as a Natural and
Scenic River. The Linville River flows through
the Pisgah National Forest Wilderness area and
into Lake James. In 2002, Wilson Creek gained
designation as a National Wild and Scenic River.

As the basin enters the piedmont from the
mountains, land use shifts from forest to
agricultural and urban uses. Nonpoint runoff from
agricultural operations and urban areas has caused nutrient enrichment and habitat degradation in
the streams, rivers and lakes of the area. Though urban areas are not numerous in the upper
portions of the basin, the lower Catawba region contains many cities, including the growing
Charlotte-Mecklenburg metropolitan area. In this region, urban growth has affected the water
quality of the lakes, streams and rivers.
Catawba River Basin Statistics

Total Area: 3,285 sq. miles
Freshwater Stream Miles: 3,048
Freshwater Lakes Acres: 50,764
No. of Counties: 11
No. of Municipalities: 61
No. of Subbasins: 9
Population (2000): 1,170,512 *
Pop. Density (2000): 356 persons/sq. mi.*

* Estimated based on % of county land area that
is partially or entirely within the basin.

The mainstem of the Catawba River in North Carolina is regulated by a series of seven
hydroelectric dams. The reservoirs formed by these dams are commonly referred to as the
Catawba River Chain Lakes. All are owned by Duke Power and were created to generate
electricity. The lakes begin with Lake James, located at the foot of the Blue Ridge Mountains,
followed by Lake Rhodhiss, Lake Hickory, Lookout Shoals Lake, Lake Norman, Mountain
Island Lake and Lake Wylie.

Population growth for the basin as a whole from 1990 to 2000 is estimated at 18.5 percent, and
estimated population density is 356 persons/square mile. The statewide population density is
163 persons/square mile, demonstrating the population concentration within the Catawba River
basin.

Over the 15-year period from 1982 to 1997, urban and built-up land cover increased by 183,000
acres or about 52 percent. Uncultivated cropland increased by 7,000 acres while pastureland
decreased by 13,000 acres. Forest and cultivated cropland cover significantly decreased by
104,000 and 75,000 acres, respectively (USDA-NRCS, NRI, updated June 2001).
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 7

2.2 Surface Water Hydrology

2.2.1 Watershed Descriptions

DWQ has a two-tiered system in which the state is divided into 17 major river basins with each
basin further subdivided into subbasins. The Catawba River basin is divided into nine subbasins
(6-digit DWQ subbasins) (Figure A-4). Maps of each subbasin are included in Section B. DWQ
and many other state agencies in North Carolina use this two-tiered system to identify
watersheds for many different programs. Most federal government agencies, including the US
Geological Survey (USGS) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), use a
different system of defining watersheds.

Under the federal system, the Catawba River basin is made up of hydrologic areas referred to as
hydrologic units (USGS 8-digit hydrologic units). The Catawba River basin is made up of three
hydrologic units: the Upper Catawba, South Fork Catawba and Lower Catawba. Hydrologic
units are further divided into smaller watershed units (14-digit hydrologic units) that are used for
smaller scale planning like that done by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (Section C,
Chapter 1, Part 1.3.2). There are 94 14-digit hydrologic units in the Catawba River basin. Table
A-3 compares the three systems.

Table A-3 Hydrologic Subdivisions in the Catawba River Basin

Major
Waterbody Name
USGS 8-Digit
Hydrologic Units
DWQ 6-Digit
Subbasin Codes
Upper Catawba 03050101 03-08-30, 03-08-31, 03-08-32,
03-08-33, 03-08-34, 03-08-37
South Fork Catawba 03050102 03-08-35, 03-08-36
Lower Catawba 03050103 03-08-34, 03-08-38

2.2.2 Hydrologic Features

The Catawba River begins in mountainous western North Carolina near Grandfather Mountain
and flows easterly and southerly through the piedmont into South Carolina, where it joins Big
Wateree Creek to form the Wateree River. The hydrologic landscape is dominated by the
presence of Duke Power’s Catawba-Wateree Hydroelectric Project. The Catawba-Wateree
Project is comprised of 13 hydropower plants and 11 reservoirs, including the James
(Bridgewater), Rhodhiss, Hickory (Oxford), Lookout Shoals, Norman (Cowan's Ford), Mountain
Island, Wylie, Fishing Creek, Great Falls, Rocky Creek, and Wateree reservoirs. Seven of these
reservoirs, from Lake James to Lake Wylie, are at least partially located within the boundaries of
North Carolina.

In addition to the mainstem lakes and river, the Catawba River basin includes the federally
recognized Wild and Scenic Linville River and the South Fork Catawba River. The Linville
River rushes through the high mountain wilderness areas of Burke County and into Lake James.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 10

The South Fork Catawba River flows through the agricultural and industrial corridor along US
Highway 321 and joins the mainstem Catawba River at Lake Wylie.

There are 3,048 stream miles and 50,764 freshwater acres (lakes) in the North Carolina portion
of the Catawba River basin.

2.2.3 Minimum Streamflow

One of the purposes of the Dam Safety Law is to ensure maintenance of minimum streamflows
below dams. Conditions may be placed on dam operations specifying mandatory minimum
releases in order to maintain adequate quantity and quality of water in the length of a stream
affected by an impoundment. The Division of Water Resources, in conjunction with the Wildlife
Resources Commission, recommends conditions relating to release of flows to satisfy minimum
instream flow requirements. The Division of Land Resources issues the permits (Table A-4).

2.2.4 Water Withdrawals and Water Supply

Prior to 1999, North Carolina required water users to register their water withdrawals with the
Division of Water Resources (DWR) only if the amount was 1,000,000 gallons or more of
surface water or groundwater per day. In 1999, the registration threshold for all water users
except agriculture was lowered to 100,000 gallons per day.

There are 235 registered water withdrawals in the Catawba River basin. The US Geological
Survey’s (USGS) 1995 summary estimated total water use in the basin at 279 MGD. Eighty-six
percent was withdrawn from surface water sources. Overall, public water systems supplied 152
MGD of surface water and 4 MGD of groundwater for both residential and nonresidential uses.
The remaining residential water demand was met by 17 MGD of self-supplied groundwater. In
addition, there was 87 MGD of self-supplied surface water withdrawn for nonresidential water
uses not including electric power generation (NCDENR-DWR, January 2001). For more
information on water withdrawals, visit the website at http://www.ncwater.org/ or call DWR at (919)
733-4064.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 11

Table A-4 Minimum Streamflow Projects in the Catawba River Basin

Site Waterbody Drainage Area
(sq. mi.)
Minimum Release
(cfs)
Hydropower Dams
Catawba-Wateree Project (FERC#2232)a Catawaba River
Lake James (Bridgewater Dam) Catawaba River 380 25 (66b)
Lake Rhodhiss Catawaba River 1,088 40 (225b)
Lake Hickory (Oxford Dam) Catawaba River 1,310 40 (261)
Lookout Shoals Lake Catawaba River 1,449 60 (278b)
Lake Norman (Cowan’s Ford Dam) Catawaba River 1,770 80 (311b)
Mountain Island Lake Catawaba River 1,860 80 (314b)
Long Shoals (FERC#7742) South Fork Catawba River 470 92
High Shoals (FERC#4827) South Fork Catawba River 510 Nonec
Hardins (FERC#6492) South Fork Catawba River 512 43.5
Spencer Mountain (FERC#2607) South Fork Catawba River 622 76
McAdenville (FERC#4186) South Fork Catawba River 632 Nonec
Brushy Mountain (Millersville)
(Non-Jurisdictional) Lower Little River 80.7 2
Non-Hydropower Dams
Lake Tahomad Buck Creek 23.1 Nonee
Henry Riverf Henry Fork 81 24.5
Loch Dornie Linville River 3.5 1.9
Land Harbor Lake Linville River 19 6.6
West Fork Linville River Linville Ridge 0.3 0.1
Anchor’s Landing Silver Creek 3.77 3.9
Ben Webber Lake UT Long Creek 2.3 0.2
Miscellaneous Dams
Blue Ridge Country Club Laurel Branch 1.05 0.39
Duke Power Lincoln
Combustion Turbine Station Killian Creek 36 2.28
a The license issued for the Catawba-Wateree Project by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will
expire on 8/31/08. The flow requirements from each dam will be examined during the relicensing process. b Minimum average daily flow that may be requested for a specified period of time by the state to maintain water
quality standards. Flow requirements may be provided by power generation, spillage and/or leakage. c Even though there is no minimum flow, the project must still operate in a run-of-river mode; i.e., instantaneous
inflow equals instantaneous outflow. A noncompliant project can alter noticeably the streamflow. d The dam is a former hydropower facility (FERC#4021). The dam owners have surrendered the license to operate,
and the dam will have a minimum flow requirement determined in accordance with the NC Dam Safety Law. e Even though there is no minimum flow yet, the dam provides a run-of-river flow; i.e., instantaneous inflow equals
instantaneous outflow. f The site is a former, non-jurisdictional hydropower facility.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 12

2.2.5 Interbasin Transfers

"Interbasin Transfer" is the term used to describe the withdrawal, diversion or pumping of
surface water from one river basin and the use or discharge of all or any part of the water in a
basin different from the basin of origin. Water users in North Carolina are required to register
surface water interbasin transfers with the Division of Water Resources if the amount is 100,000
gallons per day or more. In addition, persons wishing to transfer 2 MGD or more, or increase an
existing transfer by 25 percent or more, must first obtain a certificate from the Environmental
Management Commission (G.S. 143-215.22I). The river basin boundaries that apply to these
requirements are designated on a map entitled Major River Basins and Sub-Basins in North
Carolina, on file in the Office of the Secretary of State. These boundaries differ from the 17
major river basins delineated by DWQ. The 8-digit hydrologic unit boundaries (Figure A-7)
correspond to these basins within the Catawba River basin. Table A-5 summarizes IBTs
involving the Catawba River basin.

In determining whether a certificate should be issued, the state must determine that the overall
benefits of a transfer outweigh the potential impacts. Factors used to determine whether a
certificate should be issued include:

• the necessity, reasonableness and beneficial effects of the transfer;
• the detrimental effects on the source and receiving basins, including effects on water supply
needs, wastewater assimilation, water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, hydroelectric power
generation, navigation and recreation;
• the cumulative effect of existing transfers or water uses in the source basin;
• reasonable alternatives to the proposed transfer; and
• any other facts and circumstances necessary to evaluate the transfer request.

A provision of the interbasin transfer law requires that an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement be prepared in accordance with the State Environmental Policy
Act as supporting documentation for a transfer petition. For more information on water
withdrawals, visit the website at http://www.ncwater.org or call DWR at [phone].
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 13

Table A-5 Estimated Interbasin Transfers in the Catawba River Basin (1997)

Supplying
System
Receiving
System
Source
Subbasin
Receiving
Subbasin
Estimated
Transfer (MGD) 1
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Charlotte-Mecklenburg Catawba Rocky 5.1
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Union County Catawba Rocky 0.22
Burlington Industries Burlington Industries Catawba Rocky 3.84
Gastonia Gastonia Catawba South Fork Catawba 5.25
Gastonia Cramerton Catawba South Fork Catawba 0.33
Gastonia Lowell Catawba South Fork Catawba 0.45
Gastonia McAdenville Catawba South Fork Catawba 0.42
Mooresville Mooresville Catawba Rocky 2.6
Valdese Burke County Catawba South Fork Catawba 0.08
Hickory Hickory Catawba South Fork Catawba 5.1
Hickory Newton Catawba South Fork Catawba Emergency
Hickory Conover Catawba South Fork Catawba 0.05
Hickory Brookford Catawba South Fork Catawba 0.06
Belmont Belmont Catawba South Fork Catawba Unknown
Belmont Cramerton Catawba South Fork Catawba Emergency
Long View Long View Catawba South Fork Catawba 1.3
Mount Holly Stanley Catawba South Fork Catawba Unknown
Lincoln County Lincolnton Catawba South Fork Catawba 0.01
Lenoir Caldwell County SE Catawba Yadkin Unknown
Lenoir Caldwell County N Catawba Yadkin Unknown
Mooresville Mooresville Catawba South Yadkin 0.28
Kings Mountain Kings Mountain Broad Catawba 1.47
Blowing Rock Blowing Rock New Catawba Unknown
Anson County Union County Yadkin Catawba 1.44
Alexander County Taylorsville South Yadkin Catawba 0.41
Alexander County Alexander County South Yadkin Catawba Unknown
Alexander County West Iredell South Yadkin Catawba 0.15
Statesville Troutman South Yadkin Catawba 0.07
Monroe Union County Rocky Catawba Unknown
Newton Newton South Fork Catawba Catawba Unknown
Newton Catawba South Fork Catawba Catawba 0.09
Dallas Gastonia South Fork Catawba Catawba Emergency
Bessemer City Gastonia South Fork Catawba Catawba Emergency
Bessemer City Bessemer City South Fork Catawba Catawba 1.51
Ranlo Gastonia South Fork Catawba Catawba Emergency
Stanley Stanley South Fork Catawba Catawba Unknown
Lincolnton Lincoln County South Fork Catawba Catawba Unknown
Cherryville Cherryville South Fork Catawba Broad Unknown
Kings Mountain Bessemer City Broad South Fork Catawba Emergency
1 All transfer amounts are based on average daily water use reported in 1997 Local Water Supply Plans, and the 1999
Water Withdrawal and Transfer Registration Database. "Unknown" refers to undocumented consumptive use.
"Emergency" refers to connections that are designated as for emergency use.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 14

2.3 Population and Growth Trends

In the following sections are three different ways of presenting population data for the Catawba
River basin. The Office of State Budget and Management projects population growth by county
using 2000 Census data as a starting point. This information is important in determining areas
that expect significant population changes in the future. Data presented by municipality
summarizes information on past growth of large urban areas in the basin. While the municipal
data are not projected into the future, it is possible to locate areas where past growth may have
impacted water quality. These two measures are based on political boundaries and not on
watersheds areas. Population data were also presented by subbasin to gain insight into
population densities within the basin. While the three different sets of information cannot be
directly compared because the areas and time periods are different, general conclusions are
apparent by looking at the information. Counties with the highest expected growth are
associated with the largest municipal areas and the most densely populated subbasins in the
Catawba River basin.

2.3.1 County Population and Growth Trends

Table A-6 shows the projected population for 2020 and the change in growth between 1990 and
2020 for counties that are wholly or partly contained within the basin. Since river basin
boundaries do not coincide with county boundaries, these numbers are not directly applicable to
the Catawba River basin. This information is intended to present an estimate of expected
population growth in counties that have some land area in the Catawba River basin.

Table A-6 Past and Projected Population (1990, 2000, 2020) and Population Change by
County

County
Percent of
County in
Basin ♦
1990 2000
Projected %
Growth
1990-2000
Projected
Population
2020
Projected %
Growth
2000-2020
Alexander 68 27,544 33,603 18.0 45,168 25.6
Avery 35 14,867 17,167 13.4 19,976 14.1
Burke 100 75,740 89,148 15.0 113,367 21.4
Caldwell 75 70,709 77,415 8.7 86,577 10.6
Catawba 100 118,412 141,685 16.4 186,058 23.8
Gaston 97 174,769 190,365 8.2 215,587 11.7
Iredell 22 93,205 122,660 24.0 182,758 32.9
Lincoln 93 50,319 63,780 21.1 90,778 29.7
McDowell 86 35,681 42,151 15.3 53,170 20.7
Mecklenburg 74 511,211 695,454 26.5 1,089,258 36.2
Union 25 84,210 123,677 31.9 210,738 41.3
Subtotals 1,256,667 1,597,105 21.3 2,293,435 30.4
♦ Source: North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Note: The numbers reported reflect county population; however, these counties are not entirely within the basin.
The intent is to demonstrate growth for counties located wholly or partially within the basin.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 15

Populations of counties wholly or partly contained within the basin increased by 340,438 people
between 1990 and 2000. Figure A-5 presents projected population growth by county (2000-
2020) for the Catawba River basin. Mecklenburg and Union counties are growing the fastest in
the lower basin, with Iredell, Alexander and Catawba counties growing the fastest in the upper
basin. The county populations are expected to grow by more than 696,000 by 2020. Along with
the increased population there will be increased drinking water demands and wastewater
discharges. There will also be loss of natural areas and increases in impervious surfaces
associated with construction of new homes, businesses and transportation infrastructure. These
side effects of population growth often have a negative impact on water quality if not carefully
managed. A detailed discussion of these impacts can be found in Section A, Chapter 4, Parts
4.11-4.13.

For more information on past, current and projected population estimates, contact the Office of
State Budget and Management at [phone] or visit the North Carolina State Demographics
website at http://demog.state.nc.us/.

2.3.2 Population, Growth Trends, and Population Density

Table A-7 presents population data from the Office of State Planning for municipalities with
populations greater than 2,000 persons, located wholly or partly within the basin. The highest
percentage of urban population growth has occurred in the lower basin around Cornelius,
Huntersville and Indian Trail. Mooresville, Waxhaw and Wesley Chapel have also increased in
population substantially over the last ten years.

Most population data are collected from within county or municipal boundaries. It is difficult to
evaluate population and population density within watersheds using this information. Both
county and municipal boundaries may extend beyond basin boundaries.

Information on population density at a watershed scale is useful in determining what streams are
likely to have the most impacts as a result of population growth. This information is also useful
in identifying stream segments that have good opportunities for preservation or restoration. This
information is presented to estimate population and population density by each subbasin and for
the entire basin. Assuming county populations are distributed evenly throughout each county,
subbasins that are within counties with large urban areas may overestimate the actual population
in that portion of the basin. The overall population of the Catawba River basin is 1,170,512,
with approximately 356 persons/square mile for counties that are partially or entirely in the
basin. Population density estimated by subbasin is presented in Figure A-6.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 16

Table A-7 Population (1980, 1990, 2000) and Population Change for Municipalities Greater
Than 2,000 Located Wholly or Partly in the Catawba River Basin

Municipality County Apr-80 Apr-90 Apr-2000 Percent Change
(1980-90)
Percent Change
(1990-2000)
Belmont Gaston 4,607 8,434 8,705 83.1 3.2
Bessemer City Gaston 4,787 4,698 5,119 -1.9 9.0
Cajah Mountain Caldwell 1,884 2,429 2,683 28.9 10.5
Charlotte • Mecklenburg 315,474 395,934 540,828 25.5 36.6
Cherryville • Gaston 4,844 4,756 5,361 -1.8 12.7
Conover Catawba 4,245 5,465 6,604 28.7 20.8
Cornelius • Mecklenburg 1,460 2,581 11,969 76.8 363.7
Cramerton Gaston 1,869 2,371 2,976 26.9 25.5
Dallas Gaston 3,340 3,012 3,402 -9.8 12.9
Davidson • Iredell,
Mecklenburg
3,241 4,046 7,139 24.8 76.4
Gamewell Caldwell 2,910 3,357 3,644 15.4 8.5
Gastonia Gaston 47,218 54,725 66,277 15.9 21.1
Granite Falls Caldwell 2,580 3,253 4,612 26.1 41.8
Hickory Burke, Caldwell,
Catawba
20,757 28,474 37,222 37.2 30.7
Hudson Caldwell 2,888 2,819 3,078 -2.4 9.2
Huntersville • Mecklenburg 1,294 3,023 24,960 133.6 725.7
Indian Trail • Union 811 1,942 11,905 139.5 513.0
Kings Mountain • Cleveland, Gaston 9,080 8,763 9,693 -3.5 10.6
Lenoir Caldwell 13,748 14,192 16,793 3.2 18.3
Lincolnton Lincoln 4,879 6,955 9,965 42.5 43.3
Long View Burke, Catawba 3,587 3,353 4,722 -6.5 40.8
Lowell Gaston 2,917 2,710 2,662 -7.1 -1.8
Maiden Catawba, Lincoln 2,574 2,470 3,282 -4.0 32.9
Marion McDowell 3,684 4,765 4,943 29.3 3.7
Matthews • Mecklenburg 1,648 13,651 22,127 728.3 62.1
Mint Hill • Mecklenburg 7,915 11,615 14,922 46.7 28.5
Mooresville • Iredell 8,575 9,317 18,823 8.7 102.0
Morganton Burke 13,763 15,085 17,310 9.6 14.7
Mount Holly Gaston 4,530 7,710 9,618 70.2 24.7
Newton Catawba 7,624 9,077 12,560 19.1 38.4
Pineville Mecklenburg 1,525 2,970 3,449 94.8 16.1
Ranlo Gaston 1,774 1,650 2,198 -7.0 33.2
Sawmills Caldwell 3,706 4,088 4,921 10.3 20.4
Stallings • Union 1,826 2,152 3,189 17.9 48.2
Stanley Gaston 2,341 2,897 3,053 23.8 5.4
Valdese Burke 3,364 3,914 4,485 16.3 14.6
Waxhaw Union 1,208 1,294 2,625 7.1 102.9
Weddington ♦ Union 848 3,803 6,696 348.5 76.1
Wesley Chapel Union ----- 1,018 2,549 ----- 150.4
• The numbers reported reflect municipality population; however, these municipalities are not entirely within the basin.
The intent is to demonstrate growth for municipalities located wholly or partially within the basin.
♦ Note: Weddington is listed in Mecklenburg and Union counties in the 2001 NC League of Municipalities Directory. It is
also listed in Mecklenburg and Union counties on the Office of State Planning website for the April 2001 municipality
population data even though there are no population figures listed for Mecklenburg County. However, on the 2000 GIS data
layer, Weddington is only listed in Union County.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 18

2.4 Local Governments and Planning Jurisdictions in the Basin

The Catawba River basin encompasses all or portions of 11 counties and 61 municipalities.
Table A-8 provides a listing of these municipalities, along with the regional planning jurisdiction
(Council of Governments). Fifteen municipalities are located in more than one major river basin.

Table A-8 Local Governments and Planning Units within the Catawba River Basin

County Region Municipalities
Alexander E Taylorsville ♦
Avery D Crossnore, Grandfather Village, Sugar Mountain ♦
Burke E Connelly Springs, Drexel, Glen Alpine, Hickory *, Hildebran, Long View *,
Morganton, Rhodhiss *, Rutherford College, Valdese
Caldwell E Blowing Rock * ♦, Cajah Mountain, Cedar Rock, Gamewell, Granite Falls, Hickory *,
Hudson, Lenoir, Rhodhiss *, Sawmills
Catawba E Brookford, Catawba, Claremont, Conover, Hickory *, Long View *, Maiden *, Newton
Cleveland C Kings Mountain * ♦
Gaston F Belmont, Bessemer City, Cherryville ♦, Cramerton, Dallas, Gastonia, High Shoals *,
Kings Mountain * ♦, Lowell, McAdenville, Mount Holly, Ranlo, Spencer Mountain,
Stanley
Iredell F Davidson * ♦, Mooresville ♦, Troutman ♦
Lincoln F High Shoals *, Lincolnton, Maiden *
McDowell C Marion, Old Fort
Mecklenburg F Charlotte ♦, Cornelius ♦, Davidson * ♦, Huntersville ♦, Matthews ♦, Mint Hill ♦,
Pineville
Union F Indian Trail ♦, Marvin, Mineral Springs, Stallings ♦, Waxhaw, Weddington,
Wesley Chapel
Watauga D Blowing Rock * ♦
* Located in more than one county.
♦ Located in more than one major river basin.
Note: Counties adjacent to and sharing a border with a river basin are not included as part of that basin if only a trace amount of
the county (<2 percent) is located in that basin, unless a municipality is located in that county. (Note: Cleveland County
is included only because of the municipality, Kings Mountain; and Watauga County is included only because of the
municipality, Blowing Rock.)
Note: Gastonia has a minute portion located in the Broad River basin; however, it will only be included in the Catawba River
basin at this time. Monroe has a minute portion located in the Catawba River basin; however, it will only be included in
the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin at this time.
Region Name Location
C Isothermal Planning and Development Commission Rutherfordton
D Region D Council of Governments Boone
E Western Piedmont Council of Governments Hickory
F Centralina Council of Governments Charlotte

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 20

2.5 Land Cover

Land cover can be an important way to evaluate the effects of land use changes on water quality.
Unfortunately, the tools and database to do this on a watershed scale are not yet available. Parts
2.5.1 and 2.5.2 below describe two different ways of presenting land cover in the Catawba River
basin. The CGIA land cover information is useful in providing a snapshot of land cover in the
basin from 1993 to 1995. This information is also available in a GIS format so it can be
manipulated to present amounts of the different land covers by subbasin or at the watershed
scale. The National Resources Inventory (NRI 1982-1997) land cover information is presented
only at a larger scale (8-digit hydrologic unit), but the collection methods allow for between-year
comparisons. The two datasets cannot be compared to evaluate land cover data. This
information is presented to provide a picture of the different land covers and some idea of change
in land cover over time. In the future, it is hoped that land cover information like the GIS
formatted dataset will be developed to make more meaningful assessments of the effects of land
use changes on water quality. This dataset would also be useful in providing reliable and small-
scale information on land cover changes that can be used in water quality monitoring, modeling
and restoration efforts.

2.5.1 CGIA Land Cover

The North Carolina Corporate Geographic Database contains land cover information for the
Catawba River basin based on satellite imagery from 1993-1995. The state’s Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA) developed 24 categories of statewide land cover
information. For the purposes of this report, those categories have been condensed into five
broader categories as described in Table A-9. Figure A-7 provides an illustration of the relative
amount of land area that falls into each major cover type for the Catawba River basin. Section B
of this plan provides land cover data specific to each subbasin based on this information.

Table A-9 Description of Major CGIA Land Cover Categories

Land Cover Type Land Cover Description
Urban Greater than 50 percent coverage by synthetic land cover (built-upon area)
and municipal areas.
Cultivated Cropland Areas that are covered by crops that are cultivated in a distinguishable pattern.
Pasture/Managed Herbaceous Areas used for the production of grass and other forage crops and other
managed areas such as golf courses and cemeteries. Also includes upland
herbaceous areas not characteristic of riverine and estuarine environments.
Forest/Wetland Includes salt and freshwater marshes, hardwood swamps, shrublands and all
kinds of forested areas (such as needleleaf evergreens, deciduous hardwoods).
Water Areas of open surface water, areas of exposed rock, and areas of sand or silt
adjacent to tidal waters and lakes.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 21

Catawba River Basin Land Cover (1993-1995)
Cultivated Cropland
2%
Urban
6%
Forest/wetland
67%
Pasture/managed
herbaceous
22%
Water
3%

Figure A-7 Percentages within Major CGIA Land Cover Categories in the Catawba River
Basin

2.5.2 NRI Land Cover Trends

Land cover information in this section is from the most current NRI, as developed by the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS, NRI, updated June 2001). The NRI is a
statistically based longitudinal survey that has been designed and implemented to assess
conditions and trends of soil, water and related resources on the Nation’s nonfederal rural lands.
The NRI provides results that are nationally and temporally consistent for four points in time --
1982, 1987, 1992 and 1997.

In general, NRI protocols and definitions remain fixed for each inventory year. However, part of
the inventory process is that the previously recorded data are carefully reviewed as
determinations are made for the new inventory year. For those cases where a protocol or
definition needs to be modified, all historical data must be edited and reviewed on a point-by-
point basis to make sure that data for all years are consistent and properly calibrated. The
following excerpt from the Summary Report: 1997 National Resources Inventory provides
guidance for use and interpretation of current NRI data.

"The 1997 NRI database has been designed for use in detecting significant changes in
resource conditions relative to the years 1982, 1987, 1992 and 1997. All comparisons
for two points in time should be made using the new 1997 NRI database. Comparisons
made using data previously published for the 1982, 1987 or 1992 NRI may provide
erroneous results because of changes in statistical estimation protocols, and because all
data collected prior to 1997 were simultaneously reviewed (edited) as 1997 NRI data
were collected."

Table A-10 summarizes acreage and percentage of land cover from the 1997 NRI for the major
watersheds within the basin, as defined by the USGS 8-digit hydrologic units, and compares the
coverages to 1982 land cover. Definitions of the different land cover types are presented in
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 22

Table A-11. Figure A-6 also shows the relationship between the 8-digit hydrologic units and
DWQ subbasin. These data can be used to evaluate changes in land cover over the large area
represented by the 8-digit hydrologic units and should not be assumed to represent land cover
changes at smaller scales in specific watersheds. In the Catawba River basin, the 8-digit
hydrologic units extend into South Carolina, and thus, are partially contained in North Carolina.
Data from 1982 are also provided for a comparison of change over 15 years. During this period,
urban and built-up land cover increased by 183,000 acres or about 52 percent. Uncultivated
cropland increased by 7,000 acres while pastureland decreased by 13,000 acres. Forest and
cultivated cropland cover significantly decreased by 104,000 and 75,000 acres, respectively.
Most land cover change is occurring in the upper Catawba River basin hydrologic unit that
includes the rapidly growing areas in Catawba and Iredell counties, and in the lower Catawba
River basin hydrologic unit in Mecklenburg and Union counties. Figure A-8 presents changes in
land cover between 1982 and 1997.

Table A-10 Land Cover in the Catawba River Basin by Major Watersheds – 1982 vs. 1997
(Source: USDA-NRCS, NRI, updated June 2001)
MAJOR WATERSHED AREAS

Upper South Fork Lower 1997 1982 %
Catawba Catawba Catawba TOTALS TOTALS change
Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres % of % of since
LAND COVER (1000s) % (1000s) % (1000s) % (1000s) TOTAL (1000s) TOTAL 1982
Cult. Crop 3.7 39.9 10.2 20.8 8.0 114.2 5.4 188.8 8.9 -39.5
Uncult. Crop 49.4 3.4 12.9 3.3 3.2 1.2 65.5 3.1 58.2 2.8 12.5
Pasture 72.2 4.9 60.4 15.5 17.2 6.7 149.8 7.1 162.8 7.7 -8.0
Forest 674.1 46.2 170.1 43.5 81.2 31.4 925.4 43.9 1029.6 48.7 -10.1
Urban & Built-Up 316.4 21.7 89.7 22.9 128.8 49.8 534.9 25.4 352.0 16.7 52.0
Federal 190.5 13.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 190.5 9.0 188.7 8.9 1.0
Other 102.7 7.0 17.9 4.6 7.4 2.9 128.0 6.1 133.6 6.3 -4.2
Totals 1458.8 100.0 390.9 100.0 258.6 100.0 2108.3 100.0 2113.7 100.0
% of Total Basin 69.2 18.5 12.3 100.0
SUBBASINS 03-08-30 03-08-31 03-08-35 03-08-34
03-08-32 03-08-33 03-08-36 03-08-38
03-08-34 03-08-37
8-Digit
Hydraulic Units 03050101 03050102 03050103
* = Watershed areas as defined by the 8-Digit Hydrologic Units do not necessarily coincide with subbasin titles used by DWQ.
Source: USDA, Soil Conservation Service - 1982 and 1997 NRI
53.5

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 23

Table A-11 Description of Land Cover Types
(Source: USDA-NRCS, NRI, updated June 2001)

Type Description
Cultivated Cropland Harvestable crops including row crops, small-grain and hay crops, nursery and orchard
crops, and other specialty crops.
Uncultivated Cropland Summer fallow or other cropland not planted.
Pastureland Includes land that has a vegetative cover of grasses, legumes and/or forbs, regardless of
whether or not it is being grazed by livestock.
Forestland At least 10 percent stocked (a canopy cover of leaves and branches of 25 percent or
greater) by single-stemmed trees of any size which will be at least 4 meters at maturity,
and land bearing evidence of natural regeneration of tree cover. The minimum area for
classification of forestland is 1 acre, and the area must be at least 1,000 feet wide.
Urban and
Built-up Areas
Includes airports, playgrounds with permanent structures, cemeteries, public
administration sites, commercial sites, railroad yards, construction sites, residences, golf
courses, sanitary landfills, industrial sites, sewage treatment plants, institutional sites,
water control structure spillways and parking lots. Includes highways, railroads and
other transportation facilities if surrounded by other urban and built-up areas. Tracts of
less than 10 acres that are completely surrounded by urban and built-up lands.
Other Rural Transportation: Consists of all highways, roads, railroads and associated rights-
of-way outside urban and built-up areas; private roads to farmsteads; logging roads; and
other private roads (but not field lanes).
Small Water Areas: Waterbodies less than 40 acres; streams less than 0.5 miles wide.
Census Water: Large waterbodies consisting of lakes and estuaries greater than 40
acres and rivers greater than 0.5 miles in width.
Minor Land: Lands that do not fall into one of the other categories.

1.8%
-4.2%
52.0%
-10.1%
-8.0%
12.5%
-39.5%
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
Cult. Crop
U ncult.Crop
Pasture
Forest
Urban & Built-Up
Federal
Other
Land Cover Type
Ch
a
n
g
e
s

i
n

A
c
r
es

(
10
0
0
s
)

Figure A-8 Land Cover Changes from 1982 to 1997 for the Catawba River Basin
(Source: USDA-NRCS, NRI, updated June 2001)

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 24

2.6 NPDES Permits Summary

Discharges that enter surface waters through a pipe,
ditch or other well-defined point of discharge are
broadly referred to as ‘point sources’. Wastewater
point source discharges include municipal (city and
county) and industrial wastewater treatment plants and
small domestic wastewater treatment systems serving
schools, commercial offices, residential subdivisions
and individual homes. Stormwater point source
discharges include stormwater collection systems for
municipalities that serve populations greater than 100,000 and stormwater discharges associated
with certain industrial activities. Point source dischargers in North Carolina must apply for and
obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Discharge permits
are issued under the NPDES program, which is delegated to DWQ by the Environmental
Protection Agency.
The primary pollutants associated
with point source discharges are:

* oxygen-consuming wastes,
* nutrients,
* color, and
* toxic substances including chlorine,
ammonia and metals.

2.6.1 Permitted Wastewater Discharges

Currently, there are 204 permitted
wastewater discharges in the Catawba
River basin. Table A-12 provides
summary information (by type and
subbasin) about the discharges. Various
types of dischargers listed in the table are
described in the inset box. A list of all
facilities can be found in Appendix I.
Facilities are mapped in each subbasin
chapter in Section B. A location key to the
facilities is provided at the beginning of
Appendix I. Because the GIS data have
not been updated as recently as the
NPDES database, refer to Appendix I to
determine the most current status of
individual NPDES permit holders.

The majority of NPDES permitted
wastewater flow into the waters of the
Catawba River basin is from major
municipal wastewater treatment plants.
Nonmunicipal discharges also contribute
substantial wastewater flow into the
Catawba River basin. Facilities, large or small, where recent data show problems with a
discharge are listed and discussed in each subbasin chapter in Section B.
Types of Wastewater Discharges

Major Facilities: wastewater treatment plants with
flows ≥1 MGD (million gallons per day); and some
industrial facilities (depending on flow and
potential impacts to public health and water
quality).
Minor Facilities: Facilities not defined as Major.
100% Domestic Waste: Facilities that only treat
domestic-type waste (from toilets, sinks, washers).
Municipal Facilities: Public facilities that serve a
municipality. Can treat waste from homes and
industries.
Nonmunicipal Facilities: Non-public facilities that
provide treatment for domestic, industrial or
commercial wastewater. This category includes
wastewater from industrial processes such as
textiles, mining, seafood processing, glass-making
and power generation, and other facilities such as
schools, subdivisions, nursing homes, groundwater
remediation projects, water treatment plants and
non-process industrial wastewater.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 25

Table A-12 Summary of NPDES Dischargers and Permitted Flows for the Catawba River
Basin (as of 06/16/03)

Catawba River Subbasin
Facility Categories 03-08-30 03-08-31 03-08-32 03-08-33 03-08-34 03-08-35 03-08-36 03-08-37 03-08-38 TOTAL
Total Facilities 29 14 52 10 44 24 14 15 2 204
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 8.62 24.69 14.51 10.99 119.67 27.33 24.08 7.26 2.51 239.66
Major Discharges 4 4 7 3 6 6 4 2 1 37
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 7.4 24.58 10.53 10.0 117.9 26.5 21.4 6.62 2.5 227.43
Minor Discharges 25 10 45 7 38 18 10 13 1 167
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 1.22 0.11 3.98 0.99 1.77 0.83 2.68 0.65 0.01 12.24
100% Domestic Waste 19 7 28 3 11 7 2 4 1 82
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 0.87 0.10 0.79 0.05 0.73 0.16 0.09 0.07 0.01 2.87
Municipal Facilities 4 3 11 3 5 8 6 1 1 42
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 4.52 24.58 12.65 10.75 104.03 26.03 21.38 6.0 2.5 212.44
Nonmunicipal Facilities 25 11 41 7 39 16 8 14 1 162
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 4.10 0.11 1.85 0.24 15.64 1.29 2.70 1.26 0.01 27.20

2.6.2 Other NPDES Permits

Stormwater permits are granted in the form of general permits (which cover a wide variety of
more common activities) or individual permits. Excluding construction stormwater general
permits, there are 565 general stormwater permits and 38 individual stormwater permits (see
Appendix I for a listing). Refer to Section A, Chapter 4, Part 4.12 for more information on
stormwater programs and permits.

2.7 Animal Operations

In 1992, the Environmental Management Commission adopted a rule modification (15A NCAC
2H.0217) establishing procedures for managing and reusing animal wastes from intensive
livestock operations. The rule applies to new, expanding or existing feedlots with animal waste
management systems designed to serve animal populations of at least the following size: 100
head of cattle, 75 horses, 250 swine, 1,000 sheep or 30,000 birds (chickens and turkeys) with a
liquid waste system. Figure A-9 displays general locations of animal operations in the Catawba
River basin.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 26

Key Animal Operation Legislation (1995-2003)

1995 Senate Bill 974 requires owners of swine facilities with 250 or more animals to hire a certified operator.
Operators are required to attend a six-hour training course and pass an examination for certification.
Senate Bill 1080 established buffer requirements for swine houses, lagoons and land application areas
for farms sited after October 1, 1995.

1996 Senate Bill 1217 required all facilities (above threshold populations) to obtain coverage under a general
permit, beginning in January 1997, for all new and expanding facilities. DWQ was directed to conduct
annual inspections of all animal waste management facilities. Poultry facilities with 30,000+ birds and
a liquid waste management system were required to hire a certified operator by January 1997, and
facilities with dry litter animal waste management systems were required to develop an animal waste
management plan by January 1998. The plan must address three specific items: 1) periodic testing of
soils where waste is applied; 2) development of waste utilization plans; and 3) completion and
maintenance of records on-site for three years. Additionally, anyone wishing to construct a new, or
expand an existing, swine farm must notify all adjoining property owners.

1997 House Bill 515 placed a moratorium on new or existing swine farm operations and allows counties to
adopt zoning ordinances for swine farms with a design capacity of 600,000 pounds (SSLW) or more. In
addition, owners of potential new and expanding operations are required to notify the county (manager
or chair of commission) and local health department, as well as adjoining landowners. NCDENR was
required to develop and adopt economically feasible odor control standards by March 1, 1999.

1998 House Bill 1480 extended the moratorium on construction or expansion of swine farms. The bill also
requires owners of swine operations to register with DWQ any contractual relationship with an
integrator.

1999 House Bill 1160 extended (again) the moratorium on new construction or expansion of swine farms,
required NCDENR to develop an inventory of inactive lagoons. The Bill requires owners/operators of
an animal waste treatment system to notify the public in the event of a discharge to surface waters of the
state of 1,000 gallons or more of untreated wastewater.

2000 Attorney General Easley reached a landmark agreement with Smithfield Foods, Inc. to phase out hog
lagoons and implement new technologies that will substantially reduce pollutants from hog farms. The
agreement commits Smithfield to phase out all anaerobic lagoon systems on 276 company-owned
farms. Legislation will be required to phase out the remaining systems statewide within a 5-year period
(State of Environment Report 2000).

2001 House Bill 1216 extended (again) the moratorium on new construction or expansion of swine farms.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 27

Table A-13 summarizes, by subbasin, the number of registered livestock operations, total
number of animals, number of facilities, and total steady state live weight as of July 2003. These
numbers reflect only operations required by law to be registered, and therefore, do not represent
the total number of animals in each subbasin. There are no registered poultry operations in the
Catawba River basin.

Table A-13 Registered Animal Operations in the Catawba River Basin (as of 07/03/03)

Cattle Swine
Total Total
Subbasin No. of No. of Steady State No. of No. of Steady State
Facilities Animals Live Weight Facilities Animals Live Weight
03-08-30 2 360 504,000 0
03-08-31 0 0
03-08-32 8 3,288 4,603,200 1 2,600 368,420
03-08-33 1 175 245,000 0
03-08-34 0 0
03-08-35 8 3,121 4,369,400 0
03-08-36 2 794 1,111,600 0
03-08-37 0 0
03-08-38 1 700 980,000 0
Totals 22 8,438 11,813,200 1 2,600 368,420
* Steady State Live Weight (SSLW) is in pounds, after a conversion factor has been applied to the number of swine,
cattle or poultry on a farm. Conversion factors come from the US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource
Conservation Service guidelines. Since the amount of waste produced varies by hog size, this is the best way to
compare the sizes of the farms.

Between 1994 and 1998, there was a 20 percent increase in poultry capacity in the basin. There
was a 22 percent decrease in dairy operations and a minimal increase in swine capacity.
Information on animal capacity by subbasin (Table A-14) was provided by the USDA.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 29

Table A-14 Estimated Populations of Swine, Dairy and Poultry in the Catawba River Basin
(1998 and 1994)

Subbasin
Total Swine
Capacity
Swine
Change
Total Dairy
Capacity
Dairy
Change
Poultry
Capacity
Poultry
Change
1998 1994 94-98 (%)1998 1994 94-98 (%)1998 1994 94-98 (%)
03-08-30 292 391 -25 295 737 -60 550,507 431,907 27
03-08-31 3,921 3,477 13 743 747 -1 1,836,300 1,730,400 6
03-08-32 3,628 4,578 -21 4,203 5,485 -23 3,942,879 3,175,448 24
03-08-33 2,717 1,802 51 1,448 1,448 0 62,084 11,822 425
03-08-34 428 274 56 45 45 0 538 538 0
03-08-35 1,355 1,814 -25 4,896 6,757 -28 2,133,378 1,767,550 21
03-08-36 107 101 6 1,793 2,138 -16 100,352 352 28,409
03-08-37 236 236 0 223 223 0 276 250 10
03-08-38 1,838 1,280 44 192 237 -19 2,179,920 1,869,620 17
TOTALS 14,522 13,953 4 13,838 17,817 -22 10,806,234 8,987,887 20
% of State Total <1% <1% 14% 13% 5% 5%

2.8 Natural Resources

2.8.1 Catawba River Chain Lakes

One of the most prominent hydrologic features of the Catawba River basin is the series of
hydropower impoundments along the river's length that are widely referred to as the Catawba
River Chain Lakes (Figure A-4). The discharge from the upstream reservoir, as well as inputs
from the surrounding watershed and discharges to the lakes, influences the water quality of each
impoundment. The most upstream impoundment, Lake James, has the best water quality of all
of the lakes in the Catawba River chain.

The next three impoundments are Lake Rhodhiss, Lake Hickory and Lookout Shoals Lake.
Enriched conditions found at these reservoirs are caused by nutrient loading from agricultural
runoff, urban stormwater and municipal dischargers. Although nutrient concentrations in these
reservoirs are sufficient to support substantial algal populations, short water retention times and
limited light availability historically kept algae from reaching higher levels (NCDEHNR-DEM,
1992). During the last basin cycle, retention times increased due to drought, and the potential for
intense algal growth was realized in Lake Rhodhiss and Lake Hickory. Refer to Section A,
Chapter 4, Part 4.7 for more information on these lakes.

Lake Norman is located on the Catawba River below Lookout Shoals Lake and has historically
exhibited good water quality. Water released from Lake Norman forms Mountain Island Lake,
which is moderately productive. The final impoundment on the Catawba River in North
Carolina is Lake Wylie. Lake Wylie is experiencing localized sedimentation and nutrient
enrichment problems in the Crowders Creek and Catawba Creek arms of the lake.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 30

All seven of the Catawba River Chain Lakes (Catawba-Wateree Project) are owned by Duke
Power Company and were created to generate electricity. All of the chain lakes were completed
between 1904 and 1928 with the exception of Lake Norman, which was completed in 1963. In
addition to power generation, the lakes are popular recreational areas, and some are used for
water supply purposes and for waterfront home development (Table A-15).

Part I of the Federal Power Act (FPA) requires Duke Power’s Catawba-Wateree Project to have
a license in order to operate. Relicensing is the process for obtaining a new license for a
hydropower project after the existing license expires. Duke Power’s current license for the
project was issued in 1958 and will expire in 2008. Please refer to Section A, Chapter 4, Part
4.7.1 for a discussion on the relicensing process.

More detailed information on each of the lakes can be found in Section B.

Table A-15 Statistics on Major Lakes in the Catawba River Basin

Mean
Surface Mean Shore Retention Watershed
Area Depth Length Time Trophic Area Major
Lake (Acres) (Feet) (Miles) (Days) Level (Sq. Mi.) Uses *

Catawba River Chain Lakes (Upstream to downstream order)

Lake James 6,510 46 145 208 Oligotrophic 380 Hydro, Rec
Rhodhiss Lake 3,515 20 90 21 Mesotrophic 1,090 Hydro, Rec
Lake Hickory 4,100 33 105 33 Oligotrophic 1,310 Hydro, Rec, WS
Lookout Shoals 1,270 30 39 7 Oligotrophic 1,449 Hydro, Rec
Lake Norman 32,510 33 520 239 Oligotrophic 1,790 Hydro, Rec, WS
Mt. Island Lake 3,234 16 61 12 Oligotrophic 1,859 Hydro, Rec, WS
Lake Wylie 12,450 23 327 39 Eutrophic 3,020 Hydro, Rec

Other Major Lakes (Not on Catawba River)

Lake Tahoma 161 Oligotrophic Rec (was Hydro)
Little River Dam 162 Eutrophic 25 Rec (was Hydro)
Maiden Lake 14 Eutrophic 20 WS
Bessemer City 15 Mesotrophic 0.4 WS
Newton City Lake 17 Oligotrophic WS
* Hydro = Hydropower; Rec = Recreation; WS = Water Supply

The five other lakes in the Catawba River basin included in Table A-15 are not on the Catawba
River. The Little River Dam, located on a tributary to Lake Hickory, is no longer used for
hydropower purposes and has become a local fishing spot. Lake Tahoma, located on a tributary
to the Catawba River upstream from Lake James, is now a recreational lake owned by Lake
Tahoma, Incorporated. The last three lakes are small water supply reservoirs serving the
municipalities of Maiden, Bessemer City and Newton.

2.8.2 Ecological Significance of the Catawba River Basin

Significant natural plant and animal communities in the basin are somewhat influenced by the
geology of the area. The Catawba River basin supports several nationally significant aquatic
habitat communities, notable for their rare mollusk, fish and insect populations (see Table A-16).
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 31

The most biologically important aquatic habitats in the basin are in Waxhaw Creek, Wilson
Creek and Upper Creek. The Linville River, which also contains several rare species, is valued
as a recreational river and has been designated a State Natural and Scenic River. Ecologically
significant wetlands in the basin are mostly small, isolated bogs, such as the nationally
significant Pineola Bog in Avery County and several bogs in McDowell County. These bogs are
often home to a variety of rare plants and animals. Large, high quality floodplain wetland
communities have not been identified in the basin.

Table A-16 Rare Aquatic and Wetland-Dwelling Species in the Catawba River Basin (as of
August 2003)

Major
Taxon
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
State
Status
Federal
Status
Crustacean Caecidotea carolinensis Bennett's Mill Cave water slater SR FSC
Crustacean Dactylocythere isabelae Catawba crayfish ostracod SR FSC
Fish Carpiodes velifer Highfin carpsucker SC
Fish Micropterus coosae Redeye bass SR
Fish Etheostoma collis pop 1 Carolina darter - Central Piedmont population SC FSC
Fish Cyprinella zanema pop 1 Santee chub - Piedmont population SR
Insect Ceraclea slossonae A caddisfly SR
Insect Bolotoperla rossi A stonefly SR
Insect Acerpenna macdunnoughi A mayfly SR
Insect Ephemerella berneri A mayfly SR
Insect Barbaetis benfieldi Benfield's bearded small minnow mayfly SR
Insect Homoeoneuria cahabensis Cahaba sand-filtering mayfly SR
Insect Heterocloeon petersi A mayfly SR
Insect Rhyacophila mainensis A caddisfly SR
Insect Matrioptila jeanae A caddisfly SR
Insect Triaenodes marginata A triaenode caddisfly SR
Insect Micrasema burksi A caddisfly SR
Insect Micrasema sprulesi A caddisfly SR
Insect Macdunnoa brunnea A mayfly SR
Insect Macromia margarita Mountain River cruiser SR FSC
Insect Palaeagapetus celsus A caddisfly SR
Insect Ophiogomphus howei Pygmy snaketail SR FSC
Insect Ophiogomphus edmundo Edmund's snaketail SR FSC
Mollusk Alasmidonta robusta Carolina elktoe EX
Mollusk Leptoxis dilatata Seep mudalia T
Mollusk Alasmidonta varicosa Brook floater E FSC
Mollusk Lasmigona decorata Carolina heelsplitter E E
Mollusk Villosa constricta Notched rainbow SC
Mollusk Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell SR
Mollusk Villosa vaughaniana Carolina creekshell E FSC
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 32

Rare Wetland-Dwelling Animals in the Catawba River Basin
Amphibian Hemidactylium scutatum Four-toed salamander SC
Bird Vireo gilvus Warbling vireo SR
Bird Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle T T (PD)
Insect Autochton cellus Golden banded-skipper SR
Mammal Sorex palustris punctulatus Southern water shrew SC FSC
Reptile Glyptemys muhlenbergii Bog turtle T T(S/A)
Rare Species Listing Criteria
E = Endangered (those species in danger of becoming extinct)
T = Threatened (considered likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future)
EX = Extirpated
PD = Proposed Delisted
SR = Significantly Rare (rare in North Carolina, but not yet officially listed as threatened or endangered)
SC = Special Concern (have limited numbers in North Carolina and vulnerable populations in need of monitoring)
FSC = Federal Species of Concern (those under consideration for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act)
T(S/A) = Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance

2.8.3 Significant Natural Heritage Areas in the Catawba River Basin

Figure A-10 is a map of the Significant Natural Heritage Areas of the Catawba River basin. The
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) of the Division of Parks and Recreation
compiles a list of Significant Natural Heritage Areas as required by the Nature Preserves Act.
The list is based on the program’s inventory of natural diversity in the state. Natural areas are
evaluated on the basis of the occurrences of rare plant and animal species, rare or high quality
natural communities, and geologic features. The global and statewide rarity of these elements
and the quality of their occurrence at a site relative to other occurrences determine a site’s
significance. The sites included on this list are the best representatives of the natural diversity of
the state, and therefore, have priority for protection. Inclusion on the list does not imply that any
protection or public access exists.

Sites that directly contribute to the maintenance of water quality in the Catawba River basin are
highlighted on the map and in the following text. More complete information on Significant
Natural Heritage Areas may be obtained from the Natural Heritage Program.

1. Waxhaw Creek Aquatic Habitat. A section of Waxhaw Creek in Union County, from the
vicinity of NC 200 downstream to the first tributary below SR 1117, is considered an
important aquatic habitat for a rare species of freshwater mussel known as Carolina
heelsplitter. Waxhaw Creek is one of only two streams in North Carolina and approximately
five streams nationwide that have living populations of this federally endangered species.

2. Wilson Creek Aquatic Habitat. Wilson Creek is a large creek that flows southeast from the
area of Grandfather Mountain to Johns River in northwestern Caldwell County. Wilson
Creek is one of only two known sites that support a population of a rare dragonfly, Edmund’s
snaketail. Edmund’s snaketail is a globally rare species, which was feared to be extinct until
it was rediscovered a few years ago.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 33

3. Upper Creek Aquatic Habitat. Upper Creek is a fairly large stream that flows southward
toward Catawba River in northern Burke County. The upper boundary of Upper Creek
Aquatic Habitat is at Timbered Branch, and the downstream boundary is at Warrior Fork, just
north of Morganton. Upper Creek is a nationally significant aquatic habitat recognized for
being the best of only two known locations with a population of a rare dragonfly, Edmund’s
snaketail. Upper Creek also supports another rare dragonfly, the pygmy snaketail. Two rare
freshwater mussel species, brook floater, a state threatened species; and eastern creekshell, a
significantly rare species, are also found in Upper Creek.

4. Linville Gorge/Grandfather Mountain. Linville Gorge, a 10,000-acre high quality natural
area significant for its 2,000-foot steep valley walls topped by quartzite cliffs, is one of the
few primeval gorges in the Appalachians. It contains several rare plant species, as well as a
few rare animal species and high quality examples of rare natural communities. Linville
Gorge is within the Pisgah National Forest and has been established as a National Wilderness
Area and a Registered Natural Heritage Area.

Grandfather Mountain is the highest mountain (5,964 feet) in the Blue Ridge Ranges region
of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Grandfather Mountain has an astonishing diversity of both
endemic and disjunct species, with nearly 60 rare plant and animal species known. Nearly
1,000 acres of Grandfather Mountain in Watauga and Avery counties are permanently
dedicated as a State Nature Preserve.

5. Gabbro sites. Mecklenburg and Union counties contain areas of unique geology that
support high quality wetland communities such as Upland Depression Swamp Forests.
Several of the upland depressions have recently been protected, but most of the gabbro sites
are highly threatened by development in the Charlotte area.

6. Piedmont Monadnocks. A cluster of monadnocks occurs on the southern edge of the
Catawba River basin in Gaston, Catawba and Burke counties. Three of the most prominent
monadnock clusters (remnant bodies of rock that are more resistant to erosion than the
surrounding rocks) are Crowders and Kings Mountains, South Mountains and Bakers
Mountain. In addition to their geologic significance, these monadnocks are significant
natural areas for their biodiversity.

The South Mountains are a rugged landscape of narrow ridges, ravine-like valleys and steep
slopes. The South Mountains support communities typical of the Blue Ridge but are
extremely rare in the Piedmont. Over 11,000 acres of South Mountains are protected as a
state park, and the recent acquisition of the adjacent Rollins Tract by the NC Wildlife
Resources Commission adds another 17,000 acres to the protected area. Crowders Mountain
and Kings Pinnacle are protected as the 3,000-acre Crowders Mountain State Park.
Approximately 300 acres of Bakers Mountain are owned by Catawba County and are under
consideration for protection as a park.

7. Shortia/Heartleaf sites. Northern oconee bells and dwarf-flowered heartleaf are two very
rare plants that live in areas of moist, sandy, acidic soils found on slopes of several streams in
Catawba, Burke, and McDowell counties. These species have been extirpated over most of
their former ranges by the damming of streams and rivers. Other populations have been
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 35

endangered through land development or excessive logging of the steep ravines in which the
plants grow.

2.8.4 Forestry in the Catawba River Basin

In Caldwell County, the Division of Forest Resources (DFR) manages approximately 300 acres
at the Tuttle Educational State Forest, which help protect the headwaters of Husband Creek and
Celia Creek. The forest, established in 1978, is managed as an outdoor classroom for school
groups and the general public, as well as for sustainable forestry. Visitation averages 35,000 per
year, including nearly 6,000 school children that are provided classes that focus on water quality
protection and soil conservation practices. More information is available on the North Carolina
Division of Forest Resources’ website at http://www.dfr.state.nc.us/.

The 1,700-acre Mountain Island Educational State Forest is currently being established on the
western shores of Mountain Island Lake along the Lincoln/Gaston county line. This forest helps
protect a significant portion of the watershed around Mountain Island Lake, which is used as the
primary drinking water supply for the greater Charlotte/Mecklenburg region. This forest focuses
on the benefits and importance of using proper Best Management Practices ("BMPs") and shows
how active sustainable forest management is compatible with water quality protection. While
the forest is not yet open to the public, a virtual tour is available on their website at
http://www.dfr.state.nc.us/esf/miesf/miesf_home.htm.

There is an estimated 171,000 acres of the Pisgah National Forest within the Catawba River
basin, which amounts to one-third of the entire holdings of the Pisgah National Forest. More
information about the National Forests and the USDA-Forest Service can be found on the
website at http://www.fs.fed.us/.

Forest Resources
Nearly 75 percent of forestland in the Catawba River basin is owned by nonindustrial private
landowners. Less than 5 percent of the forestland is owned by forest products companies, with
the remaining 20 percent under public ownership. Most of the forestland in public ownership
consists of the Pisgah National Forest (USDA-Forest Service, North Carolina’s Forests, 1990,
Southeastern Forest Experiment Station Resource Bulletin SE-142).

From the most recent data available, 25 different businesses in the basin are considered "Primary
Processors" of forestry-related raw material, which represents less than 10 percent of the total
number of primary processors (285) located in North Carolina. Some examples of a primary
processor include a sawmill, veneer mill, chip mill, paper mill or pallet mill. The state, with
general appropriations combined with tax revenue from forest product Primary Processors,
provides cost share assistance to private landowners for approved forestation practices through
the "Forest Development Program". Other state and federal cost share programs also are
available to promote forestation work and forestland management. More information on these
cost share programs is available at local DFR county offices and the DFR website at
http://www.dfr.state.nc.us/. At least 11,500 acres of land were reported as having been established or
regenerated in trees across the Catawba River basin during September 1997 through August
2002.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 36

During this same time period, DFR provided private forest landowners in the Catawba River
basin 1,655 individual forest management plans, encompassing 71,480 acres. In addition, 28
tracts of private forestland are certified Stewardship Forests, totaling over 3,700 acres. DFR’s
Urban and Community Forestry Program recognizes four municipalities in the Catawba River
basin, including Charlotte and Gastonia, as a "Tree City USA".

Forestry Regulation in North Carolina
Forestry operations in North Carolina are subject to regulation under the Sedimentation Pollution
Control Act of 1973 (G.S. Chapter 113A, Article 4 referred to as "SPCA"). However, forestry
operations may be exempted from the permit requirements in the SPCA, if the operations meet
compliance standards outlined in the Forest Practices Guidelines Related to Water Quality (15A
NCAC 1I .0101 - .0209, referred to as "FPGs") and General Statutes regarding stream
obstruction (G.S. 77-13 and G.S. 77-14).

Additionally, the Environmental Management Commission enacted a temporary riparian buffer
rule in 2001 (15A NCAC 2B .0243) that applies to the lakes and mainstem of the Catawba River.
This riparian buffer rule goes into full effect in August 2004 and creates certain restrictions
regarding timber removal and forestry activities in the buffer zone. Refer to Section A, Chapter
4, Part 4.11.3 for further discussion.

The North Carolina Division of Forest Resources (DFR) is delegated the authority to monitor
and evaluate forestry operations for compliance with these aforementioned laws and/or rules. In
addition, the DFR works to resolve identified FPG and basin buffer rule compliance questions
brought to its attention through citizen complaints. Violations of the FPG performance standards
that cannot be resolved by the DFR are referred to the Division of Land Resources for
enforcement action; violations of Catawba River temporary buffer rules are referred to DWQ for
enforcement. More information is available on the Water Quality Section of the DFR’s website
at http://www.dfr.state.nc.us/.

During the period September 1997 through August 2002, DFR conducted 1,186 FPG inspections
of forestry-related activities in the Catawba River basin; 92 percent of the sites inspected were in
compliance.

There are three Water Quality Foresters that cover the Catawba River basin. The DFR currently
has a Water Quality Forester located in seven of the DFR’s 13 Districts across the state. Service
Foresters and county personnel along with their other forest management and fire control
responsibilities handle water quality issues in the remaining districts. Water Quality Foresters
conduct FPG inspections, develop pre-harvest plans, and provide training opportunities for
landowners, loggers and the public regarding water quality issues related to forestry.

Forestry Best Management Practices
Implementing Forestry Best Management Practices ("BMPs") is encouraged by DFR in order to
efficiently and effectively protect the water resources of North Carolina. The Forestry Best
Management Practices Manual describes recommended techniques that may be used to comply
with the state’s forestry laws and help protect water quality. This document is available for
viewing on the Water Quality Section of the DFR’s website.

Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 37

Among the BMPs promoted for timber harvesting is the use of bridge mats for establishing
temporary stream crossings. Bridge mats are available for temporary use across the entire
Catawba River basin. The DFR’s Bridge Mat Loan and Education Program is an educational
and protection project which promotes the benefits of using portable bridges for stream
crossings, in lieu of using other techniques such as culverts or hard-surface crossings, both of
which have a greater potential to result in sedimentation. All bridge mat purchases for the
DFR’s program are funded by grant awards from the USEPA’s Nonpoint Source Pollution
Management Program under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act {1987}. More information
is available on the Water Quality Section of the DFR’s website at http://www.dfr.state.nc.us/.

The NCDFR frequently hosts workshops and ‘in-woods’ field tours for loggers, landowners and
other forestry professionals to provide refresher training on proper BMP implementation and the
importance of protecting water quality during forestry activities.
Section A: Chapter 2 – Catawba River Basin Overview 38