HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-Chapter-1-Chowan-Basin-OverviewChowan – Chowan Basin Overview 1 02/18/2021
Contents
Chapter 1 Chowan Basin Overview............................................................................................................ 2
1.1 General Description ...................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Watershed Boundaries in the Chowan River Basin ...................................................................... 3
1.3 Aquatic Habitats ............................................................................................................................ 4
1.3.1 Types of Aquatic Habitats ..................................................................................................... 4
1.3.2 Fisheries in the Chowan River Basin ..................................................................................... 6
1.4 Population and Land Cover ........................................................................................................... 7
1.4.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 7
1.4.2 Land Cover – National Land Cover Data (NLCD) ................................................................... 8
1.5 Point Source Pollution ................................................................................................................. 10
1.6 Nonpoint Source Pollution .......................................................................................................... 10
1.6.1 Agriculture........................................................................................................................... 10
1.6.2 Forestry ............................................................................................................................... 14
1.6.3 Golf Courses ........................................................................................................................ 18
1.6.4 Stormwater ......................................................................................................................... 19
1.7 Projects Requiring Water Quality Certifications (WQCs) ............................................................ 19
1.8 Climate Risk and Resiliency ......................................................................................................... 20
1.9 Contaminants of Emerging Concern ........................................................................................... 23
References ............................................................................................................................................... 24
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 2 02/18/2021
Chapter 1 Chowan Basin Overview
1.1 General Description
The North Carolina portion of the Chowan River basin is in the northeastern coastal plain, but its
headwaters begin in Virginia (VA). Three major rivers – the Blackwater, Nottoway and Meherrin – begin
in VA and flow south-southeast to form the Chowan River near the Virginia-North Carolina state line.
Nearly 1,300 square miles of land is included in the North Carolina (NC) portion of the basin, but most of
the drainage area (3,600 square miles) lies in VA (Figure 1-1). Major tributaries to the Chowan River in NC
include Potecasi Creek, Wiccacon River, and Ahoskie Creek. All or portions of Northampton, Hertford,
Gates, Bertie and Chowan counties are located in the basin along with several local municipalities
including Ahoskie, Colerain, Conway, Gatesville, Powellsville and Rich Square (Figure 1-2). Most of the
water used in the basin for public or private use comes from groundwater sources. Projected use
estimates indicate that there will be a small increase in water use over the next several years.
Important natural resources in the basin include wetlands, anadromous fish spawning areas and
Merchant’s Millpond State Park. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) considers 100 miles
of the Chowan River and its tributaries significant aquatic habitat because of diverse, rare, and vulnerable
populations of freshwater mussels. Five mussel species are listed as threatened by the Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC). These include the triangle and alewife floaters, the eastern lampmussel, the eastern
pondmussel and the tidewater mucket. No species in this basin have been listed as endangered.
The basin is part of the larger Albemarle-Chowan River basin (HUC 030102), which includes southeastern
VA and NC’s Pasquotank River basin. The Chowan River is the second-largest tributary to the Albemarle
Sound, one the country’s largest estuaries. The Albemarle Sound, in turn, is part of the Albemarle-Pamlico
Estuarine System. It is the second largest estuarine system in the United States and includes portions of
or all of the Chowan, Pasquotank, Roanoke, Tar-Pamlico, Neuse, and White Oak river basins. In recognition
of the numerous benefits provided by the Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds, the United States Congress
designated the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine System an “estuary of national significance” in 1987. That
same year, the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study (APES) was among the first of 28 National Estuary
Programs established by the EPA through amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA). Upon adoption of
its first Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan (CCMP) in 1994, the program became known as
the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Program (APNEP) and it broadened its mission to include applied
conservation, management and engagement initiatives to protect natural resources within the region. In
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 3 02/18/2021
2012, the program was formally renamed and identified as a Partnership, reflecting the importance of
coordinated and integrated efforts for protecting and restoring the estuarine ecosystem in the region.
Figure 1-1 General Map of the Entire Chowan River Basin
1.2 Watershed Boundaries in the Chowan River Basin
The Division of Water Resources’ (DWR) previous basin plans used subbasin boundaries that were
numbered based on the river basin and location within the river basin. DWR has changed how these
subbasins are grouped to conform to the federal cataloging unit known as hydrologic unit codes (HUCs).
Each hydrologic unit is identified by a unique number. The largest HUC is two digits (region). Two
additional digits can be added to the HUC to sub-divide it into smaller areas, or watersheds. The HUCs are
nested within each other from the largest geographic area (region) to the smallest geographic area
(cataloging unit) (USGS, 2020). Each HUC represents the area of the landscape that drains to a portion of
the stream network (USGS, 2020). This report is organized by chapters at the HUC 8. The conversion from
DWR subbasins to HUC 8 is illustrated in Figure 1-2. Note that a portion of the Chowan River basin near
Edenton is now in the Pasquotank River basin based on the USGS Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD)
(USGS, 2020).
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 4 02/18/2021
Figure 1-2 General Map of the Chowan River Basin in North Carolina with the old DWR Subbasins and 8-Digit Hydrologic Units
1.3 Aquatic Habitats
The areas where rivers and sounds meet are described as “drowned river estuaries” (Riggs and Ames
2003). Due to the retreat of the last glacial maximum, the old river channels were submerged over the
past 17,000 years due to sea-level rise. The transition zone from river to estuary occurs in a broad zone
where riverine processes become estuarine. The Chowan River, like the Roanoke River, is a mainstem or
trunk river, discharging large volumes of fresh water into the Albemarle Sound estuary. The erosion of
upland clay soils is the source of significant loads of sediment deposited in the sound following storms.
1.3.1 Types of Aquatic Habitats
The Fisheries Reform Act was passed in 1997 by the NC General Assembly in recognition that protecting
habitat is as important as preventing overfishing. The act established the requirement to develop a Coastal
Habitat Protection Plan (CHPP) to protect and enhance important coastal fisheries habitats. The CHPP lists
six distinguishable habitat types along the state’s coast: water column, submerged aquatic vegetation,
shell, soft and hard bottom habitats, and wetlands (NCDMF, 2016).
1.3.1.1 Water Column
The water column is a unique, dynamic habitat with changing physical and chemical properties that links
all the various habitats and provides the means of transport of organisms from one habitat type to
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 5 02/18/2021
another. Water depth and direction of flow can vary depending on meteorological events, such as
precipitation and wind direction, tidal events, and proximity to inflow from inland rivers and outflow
through the coastal inlets. These factors also influence mixing of the water column’s dissolved gases and
ions, suspended particles, and temperature.
1.3.1.2 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
The submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) habitat is populated with various species of plants that are not
able to support themselves out of the water. The plant composition is dependent upon factors such as
depth, salinity, wave action and water clarity. The SAV provide surface area for organism residency and
egg deposition, refuge from predation, and food matter for grazers and detritivores.
1.3.1.3 Shell Bottom Habitat
Shell bottom habitat is comprised of, as the name suggests, both living oysters, clams and other shellfish
and the shell remnants of these organisms. Some of these habitats are called beds, rocks, or reefs while
others may be layers of heavily weathered and broken shell fragments upon finer, underlying sediments.
Established mollusks beds can function as "living shorelines," defusing wave action and reducing the rate
of shoreline erosion.
1.3.1.4 Soft Bottom Habitat
The unconsolidated, unvegetated soft bottom habitat is not unique to the marine, or brackish-water
environments, but extends up to the headwaters of freshwater channel networks. Soft bottom habitat is
nourished and maintained by shoreline erosion and stormwater runoff throughout the basin and by
transport from the headwaters to the estuaries and sounds. The composition of the bottom can vary from
organic detrital material to fine silt, clay and sand to coarse sands.
1.3.1.5 Hard Bottom Habitat
The hard bottom habitat is typically located offshore, beyond the breakers. Hard bottom is colonized by
sessile organisms and provides vertical relief, which attracts and sustains economically important species
and their prey. The establishment of artificial reefs, both in the sounds and the ocean, as well as
shipwrecks helps to supplement hard bottom habitat. Near shore and in the estuaries, this habitat can be
negatively impacted by degraded water quality.
Hard and shell bottom habitats are less abundant in the Chowan River basin due to the low salinity levels.
Low salinity limits the distribution of oysters, clams and other marine mollusks, and sediment load
deposited on the estuary bottom. The sole artificial reef built in the Albemarle Sound is at the mouth of
the Chowan River, named Black Walnut Point Reef (AR-191). The reef was established in the mid-1980’s
to create additional hard bottom habitat, attract sport fish and provide a recreational opportunity
accessible for small vessels.
1.3.1.6 Wetlands
Wetlands provide a transition zone between terrestrial and aquatic habitats. The extent to which wetlands
are inundated depends on the elevation of the bottom materials and the height, or stage, of the water
column. The species diversity and distribution of wetlands is influenced by the factors mentioned above
and determines whether the wetlands are periodically inundated (intertidal) or always submerged
(subtidal) (NCDMF, 2016). Wetland habitat types are identified by the depth and duration of the
hydrology, the landscape position, the soil type, and the dominant vegetation (Carolina Wetland
Association, 2016).
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 6 02/18/2021
Wetlands also provide critical habitat for waterfowl, certain mammals and amphibians, reptiles, aquatic
insects, fish and birds (ASWM, 2019b). Many migratory bird species, like tundra swans, egrets, herons,
and various duck and songbird species, use wetlands to rest, forage for food, and seek shelter from
predators and inclement weather. These safe-haven patches in the landscape are essential for the survival
of migratory birds (Wisconsin Wetland Association, 2016). Geographically isolated wetlands are
particularly important for amphibians, as many frogs and salamander species require a network of fish-
free small wetlands to survive and prosper (Leibowitz, 2003). There are also many rare and at-risk species
that require wetlands to survive. Approximately 70 percent of the NC endangered species depend on
wetlands (NCDWR, 2018). Estuarine wetlands serve as nursery habitat for clams, oysters and crayfish.
They are also an important source of fish and shellfish food production for striped bass, pike, sunfish,
crappie, crab, clams, oysters, crayfish, and shrimps. Besides providing ecosystem services, wetlands are
great places for recreation, such as fishing, boating, hunting, birdwatching, hiking, and enjoying nature
(NCDWR, 2018). Examples of publicly accessible wetlands found in the Chowan River basin in Gates
County include the Chowan Swamp Game Land and Merchant Mill Pond State Park. More information
about these and other publicly accessible wetlands can be found on DWR’s ncwetlands.org website.
1.3.2 Fisheries in the Chowan River Basin
The Chowan River basin has historically been a significant fisheries resource. Some of the species that
have been sought include striped bass (Morone saxatilis), Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus),
American shad (Alosa sapidissima), hickory shad (Alosa mediocris), and alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus)
and blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), collectively known as “river herring”. All of these species are
anadromous meaning they migrate from the ocean as adults through inlets into the coastal bays and
sounds and ascend the freshwater rivers and creeks to spawn. They typically return to the waters in which
they were spawned. Some will return for several years to spawn again while some will die after spawning
only once. The region where the Chowan and Roanoke rivers discharge into the western Albemarle Sound
is an important nursery area for the anadromous larval fish transported downstream where they mature
before moving to the ocean. Cues that trigger spawning runs are warming temperatures and high-water
flows.
Anadromous fish spawning runs have supported important commercial harvest industries and
recreational fishing, have provided families sustenance and been the focus of cultural events throughout
the region. Commercial fishery still exists but not at the harvest levels of the past. The cumulative impacts
of unregulated fishing offshore and inland, habitat and water quality degradation, and limited access to
historical spawning habitat by dam and culvert construction have contributed to the decline of
anadromous fish populations in the basin. With the implementation of fishing moratoria, seasons, and
limits for commercial and other harvests, some species populations have recovered. Striped bass has
recovered, but river herring stocks have not despite harvest restrictions (NCDMF, 2016).
Three fish species found in the Chowan River basin are designated as endangered: the Atlantic sturgeon,
the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum), and the Roanoke logperch (Percina rex). The shortnose
sturgeon is uncommon in the basin and easily confused with its more common relative, the Atlantic
sturgeon. The primary threats to sturgeons are habitat degradation, water pollution, dredging, water
withdrawals, fishing net entanglement, and habitat access impediments (NOAA, 2020a; b). The logperch
in the basin is only found in Virginia in the upper reaches of the Nottoway River and its tributaries. A
survey of the North Carolina portion of the Meherrin River has been recommended to determine if
populations of logperch live in that watershed (NCDWR, 2014). Some of the threats to Roanoke logperch
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 7 02/18/2021
populations are siltation and hydrologic alteration from changes in land use, channelization, water
withdrawal, toxic spills, and disrupted gene flow and habitat loss from damming (NCDWR, 2014).
The upper reach of the Chowan River is globally significant due to its overall freshwater mussel diversity
according to Alderman and Alderman (2009). This area provides habitat for six state-listed mussel species.
Additionally, the yellow lance (Elliptio lanceolata), a federally designated threatened species, and the
Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), a candidate for threatened designation, are found in the upper
reaches of the Nottoway River. Mussels are particularly sensitive to siltation as well as hydrologic
alteration from changes in land use, channelization and disrupted gene flow and habitat loss from dam
and culvert construction. Mussels are also dependent on sustainable populations of the host fish species
for the successful maturation of their young, or glochidia.
1.4 Population and Land Cover
1.4.1 Population
Population and density data help identify the watersheds likely to have the most impacts from urban
growth. Increases in population often result in more impervious surface cover which often increases the
amount of nonpoint source pollution and stormwater runoff. Increases in stormwater runoff can impact
aquatic habitats, stream flow and downstream flooding. Population data can also be used to project future
water demand and assist with local water supply planning efforts. Population information presented here
is intended to estimate expected population growth in the counties and municipalities located wholly or
partially in the Chowan River basin. Information presented here is available on North Carolina’s Office of
State Budget and Management (OSBM) website.
Based on the 2010 census, the estimated population for the basin is just over 95,000. Most of the
population growth is occurring in Gates and Hertford counties. County population projections for 2020
and 2030 indicate that populations in all counties are expected to decrease. Bertie and Northampton
counties are expected to see the largest decreases (Table 1-1).
Table 1-1 Population Growth and Projections by County
County
% of
County in
Basin
Population
2000
Population
2010
Percent
Growth
2000-
2010
Population
Projection
2020
Percent
Growth
2010-
2020
Population
Projection
2030
Percent
Growth
2010-
2030
Bertie 30% 19,773 21,282 7.6 19,058 -10.5 16,454 -22.7
Chowan 67% 14,526 14,793 1.8 14,668 -0.8 14,670 -0.8
Gates 80% 10,516 12,197 16.0 11,915 -2.3 11,914 -2.3
Hertford 100% 22,601 24,669 9.2 24,121 -2.2 23,360 -5.3
Northampton 65% 22,086 22,099 0.1 20,416 -7.6 19,057 -13.8
Totals 89,520 95,040 6.2 90,178 -5.1 85,455 -10.1
Note: The numbers reported here reflect county population. The county is not entirely within the basin. The intent
is to demonstrate growth for counties located wholly or partially in the basin.
Municipal populations in the Chowan River basin are relatively small, ranging from 91 in Como to 4,855 in
Ahoskie (2017) (Table 1-2). Growth in municipal areas was modest between 2000 and 2010. There were
slight declines in most of the municipalities between 2010 and 2015. Murfreesboro was the only
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 8 02/18/2021
municipality with an increase in population between 2010 and 2015. The largest municipalities, Ahoskie
and Murfreesboro, grew by 7.3 percent and 33.2 percent, respectively, between 2000 and 2015.
Table 1-2 Population Growth by Municipality
Municipality Population
2000
Population
2010
Population
2015
Percent
Growth
2000-2010
Percent
Growth
2010-2015
Percent
Growth
2000-2015
Ahoskie 4,523 5,039 4,855 11.4 -3.7 7.3
Aulander 922 895 850 -2.9 -5.0 -7.8
Cofield 347 413 407 19.0 -1.5 17.3
Como 78 91 91 16.7 0.0 16.7
Conway 734 836 835 13.9 -0.1 13.8
Gatesville 281 321 313 14.2 -2.5 11.4
Jackson 695 513 487 -26.2 -5.1 -29.9
Lasker 103 122 121 18.4 -0.8 17.5
Murfreesboro 2,421 2,835 3,225 17.1 13.8 33.2
Rich Square 931 958 943 2.9 -1.6 1.3
Seaboard 695 632 604 -9.1 -4.4 -13.1
Severn 263 276 270 4.9 -2.2 2.7
Winton 956 769 734 -19.6 -4.6 -23.2
Woodland 833 809 767 -2.9 -5.2 -7.9
Note: The numbers reported reflect municipality population. The intent is to demonstrate growth for
municipalities located wholly or partially within the basin.
1.4.2 Land Cover – National Land Cover Data (NLCD)
Land cover assists with developing land use management policies, modeling nutrient and pesticide runoff,
understanding spatial patterns in biodiversity, ecosystem status and health, and evaluating the effects of
land use changes on water quality over time (Homer et al., 2012). North Carolina uses land cover datasets
available from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD). In the Chowan River basin, changes in land use
mirrors population with a greater percentage of impervious surface near population centers. Land cover
types and percent coverage are included in Table 1-3. Spatial distribution is shown in Figure 1-3.
Table 1-3 Land Cover – North Carolina Portion of the Chowan River Basin HUC 030102 from NCLD 2016
Land Cover Type
2001 2011 2016
Square
Miles
Percent of
Total
Square
Miles
Percent of
Total
Square
Miles
Percent of
Total
Agriculture 387.5 29.9% 381.1 29.4% 381.3 29.4%
Barren 0.4 0.0% 0.4 0.0% 0.4 0.0%
Developed 53.7 4.1% 54.5 4.2% 55.4 4.3%
Forest 445.4 34.3% 436.3 33.6% 466.3 35.9%
Grassland/Shrubland 94.1 7.3% 108.5 8.4% 77.5 6.0%
Open Water 52.6 4.1% 53.2 4.1% 53.1 4.1%
Wetland 264.4 20.4% 264.2 20.4% 264.3 20.4%
Total 1,298 1,298 1,298
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 9 02/18/2021
Figure 1-3 Chowan River Basin Land Cover1 (Source: NLCD 2016, https://www.mrlc.gov/data)
Developed, Forest, Grassland/Shrubland, Agriculture, and Wetland classes were created by aggregating two or more 2016 NLCD classifications. Developed is a combination of Developed, Open Space, Developed, Low Intensity,
Developed, Medium Intensity, and Developed High Intensity. Forest represents deciduous, evergreen, and mixed forest classes. Grassland/Shrubland is Grassland/Herbaceous and Shrub/Scrub. Agriculture is Pasture/Hay and
Cultivated Crops. Wetland is Woody Wetlands and Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands. 2016 NLCD definitions of classifications are found at https://www.mrlc.gov/data/legends/national-land-cover-database-2016-nlcd2016-legend.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 10 02/18/2021
1.5 Point Source Pollution
Point source pollution refers to pollution that enters surface waters through “any discernable, confined
and discrete conveyance, such as a pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, discrete fissure, or container”
(US EPA, 2019). Point source pollutants are primarily associated with wastewater and stormwater
discharges from municipal (city and county) and industrial wastewater treatment facilities. They can also
originate from small, domestic wastewater systems that serve schools, commercial properties, residential
subdivisions, and individual homes. To ensure that point source pollution does not negatively impact
water quality or human health, wastewater, and stormwater point source pollutants are regulated
through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. The NPDES permitting
program sets monitoring and treatment requirements for facilities discharging wastes directly to surface
waters (US EPA, 2019). The program also keeps records of the spatial location of point sources of pollution.
This information from the NPDES program can be assessed alongside ambient water quality data to ensure
that both permit requirements are being met and are sufficient to protect the water quality of receiving
streams and rivers. More information about permitted programs can be found in Permitted and
Registered Activities chapter (Chapter 7).
1.6 Nonpoint Source Pollution
Nonpoint source pollution (NPS) is defined to mean “any source of water pollution that does not meet
the legal definition of “point source” in Section 502(14) of the Clean Water Act (CWA)” (US EPA, 2020).
NPS can result from any number of activities and land uses. Construction and land clearing activities,
agriculture, golf courses, mining operations, solid waste disposal sites, urban landscapes, and on-site
wastewater treatment systems (septic systems) all contribute to NPS and can add sediment, nutrients,
bacteria, heavy metals, oil, and grease to a waterbody. NPS is difficult to monitor and account for. DWR
works with several state and local agencies to identify potential NPS and the types of activities that may
be impacting water quality in the area, but data gaps exist. These unknowns include, but are not limited
to, the amount of fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and dry-litter animal waste applied to land, as well as
the level at which these same pollutants may be impacting
groundwater and air quantity and eventually reaching
surface waters through baseflow or atmospheric deposition.
There are several programs in place through various
organizations that protect water resources from NPS. Many
include funding for best management practices (BMPs) that
can reduce the amount of sediment, nutrients, and bacteria
entering a waterbody as well as protect streambanks, reduce
erosion, and manage waste. More information about these
programs can be found in the Statewide, Regional and Local
Initiatives chapter (Chapter 6).
1.6.1 Agriculture
Approximately 29 percent of the land use in the North Carolina portion of the Chowan River basin is
identified as agriculture (Table 1-3). Excess nutrients, pesticides, herbicides, bacteria, and sediment are
often associated with agricultural activities. To understand how agriculture has changed over the past 10
to 15 years, the USDA, National Agricultural Statistic Service’s (NASS) Census of Agriculture was reviewed.
The USDA publishes the Census of Agriculture every five years. The data collected by and reported in the
Best management practice (BMP) is
defined as “a structural or
nonstructural management-based
practice used to singularly or in
combination to reduce point source or
nonpoint source inputs to receiving
waters in order to achieve water
quality protection goals” (15A NCAC
02B .0202).
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 11 02/18/2021
census provide an overview of agricultural operations on a national, state, county, or county equivalent
scale to show the importance and value of agriculture to a particular region. It also helps evaluate historic
agricultural trends to formulate policies, develop programs, and identify and allocate local and national
funds for agricultural programs (USDA, 2017). The data can be queried at the state, county, or watershed
scale. Because the watershed scale includes portions of VA, agriculture data was queried at the county
scale for counties located entirely or partially within the Chowan River basin. This includes Bertie, Chowan,
Gates, Hertford, and Northampton counties.
Per the 2017 Census of Agriculture, a total of 959 farm operations are operating on a total of 510,698
acres (798 mi2) in Bertie, Chowan, Gates, Hertford, and Northampton counties. This is a decrease from
what was reported in the 2007 Census of Agriculture when 1,153 total farms were operating on a total of
532,071 acres (831 mi2). The total number of acres identified as cropland has increased from
approximately 355,000 acres in 2007 to just over 372,000 acres in 2017 while pastureland and woodland
has declined (Table 1-4).
Livestock inventory numbers have also changed over time. Per the 2017 Census of Agriculture, the poultry
inventory increased between 2007 and 2012 from 9.5 million birds (chickens, broilers) on 114 farms to
11.4 million birds (chickens, broilers) on 132 farms. In 2017, the total number of birds decreased by
400,000 birds (11 million chickens, broilers) on a total of 133 farms (Table 1-5). Bertie County had the
highest inventory followed by Hertford (Table 1-5). The livestock inventory for cattle and hogs decreased
between 2007 and 2017, but in the case of hogs, information was withheld from one or more counties to
avoid disclosing data from individual farms (Table 1-4) (USDA, 2017). Information that is obtained through
the Census of Agriculture cannot be used for statistical purposes. It can only be used to compare changes
over time. This makes it difficult to assess the extent of potential impacts animal operations and animal
waste may have on water quality.
As of May 2020, there were 40 permitted animal operations in the Chowan River basin (Figure 1-4). All
are permitted swine operations. Animal operations are defined under General Statute 143.215.10B as
feedlots that have more than 250 swine, 100 confined cattle, 75 horses, 1,000 sheep, or 30,000 confined
poultry with a liquid waste management system. All permitted animal operations are required to have a
Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). The CAWMP is incorporated into the animal permit
issued by DWR by reference and defines the fields to which waste is land applied, the crops to be grown,
and other details about the operation. All waste must be applied at no greater than agronomic rates (an
amount that can be used productively by the crops that are planted) (General Statute 143-215.10C). These
permitted animal facilities are inspected annually.
Most poultry operations in North Carolina use a dry waste management system and are referred to as dry
litter poultry operations. Such operations are deemed permitted under administrative code (NCAC) 15A
NCAC 02T .1303. Owners or operators of dry litter poultry operations with 30,000 or more birds are
required to adhere to rules set forth under 15A NCAC 02T .1303 and General Statute 143-215.10C. These
requirements include minimum stream setbacks, land application rates, soil and waste analysis, and
recordkeeping. This information is included in a waste utilization plan (WUP) (also known as a nutrient
management plan (NMP)). Producers are required to keep WUPs (NMPs) on file at the farm and do not
have to submit the plan to DWR for review.
To better understand where potential nutrient sources may be contributing to the increases in organic
nitrogen or the resurgence of harmful algal blooms in the basin, information on the location of potential
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 12 02/18/2021
nutrient sources (including dry litter poultry operations and manure hauling) could help DWR adapt the
basinwide stream monitoring program, identify new water quality monitoring stations, and help create a
mass balance of nitrogen and phosphorus for the basin. Stream monitoring data has historically been
valuable in understanding and addressing nutrient related impacts to recreational use, the economic well-
being, and overall ecological integrity of the basin (Deerhake, personal communication). DEQ will
continue to work collaboratively with federal, state, and local agencies as well as stakeholders in the basin
to identify information sharing opportunities to target water quality monitoring and BMP implementation
throughout the basin.
A table of permitted animal feeding operations as well as a general overview of animal feeding operations
(AFO) can be found in the Permitted and Registered Activities chapter (Chapter 7). More information can
also be found on the Animal Feeding Operations (AFO) Program’s website. A more detailed review of how
the number of animals has changed over time can be found in Appendix V-III. It includes a review of animal
inventory numbers for counties located entirely or partially in the basin in Virginia as well as North
Carolina.
Figure 1-4 Animal Operation Permits Map
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 13 02/18/2021
Table 1-4 USDA Census of Agriculture Data – Bertie, Chowan, Gates, Hertford and Northampton counties (2007, 2012, 2017)
2007 2012 2017 2007 2012 2017
Number of Operations Number of Acres/Animals
Number of Farms & Land Area 1,153 1,129 959 532,071 513,991 510,698
Land Use
Total Cropland 849 870 722 354,632 351,288 372,265
Total Pastureland 324 243 193 13,625 12,738 10,331
Total Woodland 694 652 506 153,280 140,508 123,356
Harvested Cropland 704 710 589 341,186 338,520 341,036
Land in irrigated farms 145 115 79 166,909 142,720 119,587
Irrigated land 145 115 79 26,361 21,688 15,947
Livestock Inventory
Cattle (including calves) 115 96 114 4,100 4,142 3,798
Hogs 46 45 57 292,637** 130,480** 133,084**
Chickens* 114 131 132 9,496,888 11,396,089 10,993,282
Crops
Corn, Grain 366 263 240 64,711 35,961 40,192
Soybeans 495 525 466 100,189 119,854 131,062
Cotton 317 289 225 117,573 116,848 98,143
Tobacco 59 44 32 4,442 5,997** 6,910**
Peanuts 242 171 159 31,557 29,101 29,188
Wheat 178 287 162 22,505 47,864 30,860
Forage (hay, haylage, silage,
greenchop) 61 48 45 4,855 2,520 2,636**
Fertilizers and Chemicals
Cropland fertilized, except
cropland pastured 616 585 495 305,945 289,554 244,064
Pastureland and rangeland
fertilized 71 38 46 1,669 830 1,165
Manure 161 158 145 21,475 16,524 21,424
Organic fertilizer*** (NA) (NA) 18 (NA) (NA) 480
Acres treated with chemicals to control:
Insects 476 490 393 249,455 241,083 300,818
Weeds, grass or brush 504 654 514 279,184 320,746 341,188
Nematodes 141 190 138 49,996 81,275 56,737
Diseases in crops and orchards 129 214 177 36,523 78,639 87,243
Growth, thin fruit, ripen or
defoliate 256 213 221 96,981 94,841 102,629
*Broilers and other meat-type chickens.
**(D) Information withheld from one or more counties to avoid disclosing data for individual farms (USDA,
2017).
(NA) Information not available (USDA, 2017).
***This is a new item for 2017. These are the number of cropland or pastureland on which approved organic
fertilizers were applied (USDA, 2017).
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 14 02/18/2021
Table 1-5 USDA Census of Agriculture Data – Poultry Inventory 2007, 2012, 2017
County 2007 2012 2017 2007 2012 2017
Number of Farms Number of Animals (Poultry)*
Bertie 51 63 67 5,251,485 6,083,898 5,863,743
Chowan 8 6 2 259,495 250,475 **(D)
Gates 12 17 20 826,791 1,125,530 1,474,245
Hertford 21 31 25 1,623,690 2,116,632 2,140,814
Northampton 22 14 18 1,535,427 1,819,554 1,514,480
Totals 114 131 132 9,496,888 11,396,089 10,993,282
*Broilers and other meat-type chickens.
**(D) Information withheld from one or more counties to avoid disclosing data for individual farms
(USDA,2017)
Soil and water technicians along with the Albemarle Resource Conservation and Development Council,
Inc. (ARCD) are continually working with agricultural operations to identify areas to implement nutrient
and sediment reducing BMPs as well as identifying how best to redesign drainage from agricultural fields
to reduce the amount and speed at which stormwater runoff enters a waterbody. For nearly four decades,
significant efforts have been made to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus loads originating from agricultural
land through the installation of best management practices (BMPs). Over the past decade (July 2010 and
June 2020) alone, more than $1.2 million was spent by the Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs)
through various cost share programs managed by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture &
Consumer Services (NCDA&CS) Division of Soil and Water Conservation (DSWC) to install BMPs
throughout the basin. Several practices have also been installed using funds available through programs
managed by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service
(NRCS). A list of practices that have been installed in the basin can be found in the Statewide, Regional
and Local Initiatives chapter (Chapter 6). BMPs that target nutrient reduction and sediment removal
should continue to be prioritized and implemented throughout the Chowan River basin.
1.6.2 Forestry
Special attention is needed to ensure that water quality is protected while timber is being harvested.
Inappropriate management practices can impact water quality by altering in-stream habitat, increasing
sediment load, and increasing stream temperature. These impacts can also alter the interface of the
aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem and change watershed functions. Without appropriate practices in place
during and after harvests, sediment entering a waterbody can have a negative impact on water quality.
Sediment can stem from exposed cuts for skid trails, slopes with bare soil, and improperly constructed
stream crossings, forest roads, and log decks. As a result, the majority of regulations and erosion control
recommendations pertaining to forestry focus on preventing debris and sediment from entering
waterbodies. Properly planned and executed forest management plans facilitate the sustainable harvest
of forest products while protecting water quality.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 15 02/18/2021
1.6.2.1 Forest Practices Guidelines (FPG) Related to Water Quality
The North Carolina Forestry Service (NCFS) is delegated the authority to monitor and evaluate forestry
operations in North Carolina. NCFS staff regularly inspect timber harvests for compliance with the Forest
Practice Guidelines (FPG) for Water Quality. The FPGs are a set of results-based guidelines meant to
protect water quality and are mandatory, statewide requirements defined by North Carolina
Administrative Code (02 NCAC 60C .0100-.0209). All forestry-related, site-disturbing activities must
comply with the FPGs if the activity is to remain exempt from permitting and other requirements specified
in the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act (SPCA) of 1973 (NCFS, 2017). Inspections often
involve NCFS staff visiting the same site multiple times to provide forest operators and landowners
technical assistance for BMPs to minimize impacts of forestry on water quality.
1.6.2.2 Locations of Harvests
Over the last ten years, timber harvests were scattered throughout the entire basin. Compared to other
counties, however, there have been relatively fewer harvests in portions of Bertie and Chowan counties,
particularly in the Cypress Swamp, Edenhouse Point-Chowan River, and Mount Gould Landing-Chowan
River watersheds (Figure 1-5; Figure 1-6). Because landowners are not required to notify NCFS of timber
harvesting or related forestry activities, the numbers reported here are not a full representation of the
timber harvests in the basin (Coats, 2017).
Between July 2007 and June 2012, the NCFS inspected 569 timber harvests in the Chowan River basin,
totaling 37,395 acres (Figure 1-5). NCFS found 12 harvests to be out of compliance, resulting in a
compliance rate of 97.9% (Table 1-6). The most common violations were related to streamside
management zones (SMZ), debris entering streams, stream crossings, or rehabilitation of the project site.
Between July 2012 and June 2017, the NCFS inspected 734 timber harvests, totaling 44,669 acres (Figure
1-6). Six harvests were out of compliance, resulting in a compliance rate of 99.2% (Table 1-6). The most
common violations were related to debris entering streams.
Between July 2017 and June 2020, the NCFS inspected 440 timber harvests, totaling 28,452 acres. Fifteen
harvests were out of compliance, resulting in a compliance rate of 96.6% (Table 1-6). The most common
violations were related to stream crossings. More information about the NCFS water quality inspection
process can be found online on NCFS’s website.
Table 1-6 Number of Inspections Conducted by NCFS in the Chowan River Basin
Time Period # Inspected Timber Harvests Total Acres # Out of Compliance
07/2007-06/2012 569 37,395 12
07/2012-06/2017 734 44,669 6
07/2017-06/2020 440 28,452 15
1.6.2.3 Forestry Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Knowledge of the soils and hydrology of a site can help address harvest schedules, equipment types,
flooding potential, and reforestation options. Silvicultural or forestry activities in wetlands, regardless of
size, should be conducted in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on the unique hydrologic and
ecological functions of those ecosystems. Implementing forestry BMPs is strongly encouraged to protect
the water resources of North Carolina efficiently and effectively.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 16 02/18/2021
The NC Forestry BMP Manual details specific tools and methods which can be used during forestry
operations to reach compliance with the FPGs. From 2013 to 2016, the NCFS carried out surveys across
the state to assess the implementation of BMPs on timber harvests. These surveys gave a snapshot of
practices used in different areas of the state and helped to understand where additional
recommendations may be needed. In the Chowan River basin, the NCFS conducted surveys on seven sites,
assessing 542 total BMPs. Seventy-nine percent of the BMPs assessed were implemented successfully.
NCFS found that when BMPs were properly implemented, there was no risk to water quality (Coats, 2017).
To protect the waters of NC and promote the use of bridgemats, the NCFS allows loggers and timber
buyers to borrow the NCFS's bridgemats for use during forestry-related operations. A bridgemat consists
of a panel that establishes a temporary crossing over streams, ditches, or small water channels.
Temporary bridges can be a very effective solution for stream crossings since the equipment and logs stay
out of the water channel. When installed and removed correctly, bridgemats cause very little soil
disturbance. Bridgemats are free to borrow from the NCFS for forestry use in the Chowan River basin and
have been for several years. More information about bridgemats is available on the NCFS website.
Figure 1-5 Water Quality Inspections in the Chowan River Basin July 2007 - June 2012 (NCFS, 2020)
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 17 02/18/2021
Figure 1-6 Water Quality Inspections in the Chowan River Basin July 2012 - June 2017 (NCFS, 2020)
1.6.2.4 Forestry and Algal Blooms
In recent years, there has been growing concern over forest management and its influence on algal
blooms in the Chowan River basin. In August 2016, NCFS personnel conducted an aerial assessment via
aircraft along the Chowan River to see if algal blooms were emanating from timber harvests. At that time,
the NCFS found no visible algal growth originating from past timber harvests of varying ages. NCFS met
with stakeholders in the basin, including the SWCD and the ARCD, to discuss riparian buffer incentives for
landowners wanting to harvest timber adjacent to known nutrient-sensitive waters. NCFS continues to
explore how forest management may influence water quality by collaborating with landowners, state and
federal agencies, and researchers (Coats, 2017).
1.6.2.5 Forestry: Next Steps
Several state and local entities are working together to understand forestry's impacts on water quality in
the Chowan River basin. SMZs are "an area along both sides of intermittent streams and perennial streams
and along the margins of perennial waterbodies where extra precaution is used in carrying out forestry-
related, land-disturbing activities to protect water quality" (02 NCAC 60C .0102). Per administrative code,
the SMZ shall be of sufficient width to "confine visible sediment resulting from accelerated erosion" (02
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 18 02/18/2021
NCAC 60C .0201). Chapter 4 of the North Carolina Forestry BMP Manual includes information about SMZs
and riparian buffers, and it states the general recommendation for SMZ width is "50 feet along each side
of intermittent streams, perennial streams and perennial waterbodies" (NCFS, 2006). The width of the
SMZ may vary depending on the purpose of the SMZ and the site's conditions. Wider SMZs may be needed
for sites that exhibit highly erodible soils, soil areas with little or minimal groundcover near the waterbody,
and special waters such as trout, water supply watersheds, nutrient-sensitive waters, and shellfish waters
(NCFS, 2006). Because waters in the Chowan River basin have been designated as nutrient-sensitive
waters (NSW), a wider SMZ may be needed to protect water quality during timber harvests. A wider SMZ
could also minimize the amount of woody debris entering a waterbody after heavy rainfall or extreme
storm events.
Forestry-related, land-disturbing activities can alter hydrologic processes and influence water quality. It
can take months to years for water quality to return to pre-harvest conditions (Ensign and Mallin, 2001),
but forestry research studies also demonstrate that properly implemented BMPs effectively protect
aquatic and riparian ecosystems (Cristian et al., 2016). More research specific to the Chowan River basin
and silviculture in forested swamps is needed to understand the relationship between forestry-related
operations, groundwater, nutrients, and algal blooms within the basin. Stakeholders throughout the
watershed have acknowledged that there is no one clear source, or cause, of the algal blooms, however,
this also does not rule out forestry practices as a significant contributing source. Continued monitoring
could help pinpoint some of the point and nonpoint sources of nutrients entering the basin. In addition,
NCFS has recommended a "comprehensive water quality study" of forestry-related activities in coastal
bottomland swamp forests to help understand the relationship of silviculture and algal blooms. The study
would require substantial new funding for five or more years, landowner commitment, and experienced
foresters and researchers to conduct the study. “Although not in a position to fund such a project, NCFS
has offered to assist with project scoping, selecting foresters and researchers willing to participate in such
a project, provide technical expertise on forestry practices, provide applicable references for literature
review and general review and oversight” (Brogan, 2018).
Local stakeholders have been working with local foresters to identify ways to protect forested areas in the
basin. One recommendation is to establish a conservation program for swamp forest buffers similar to
existing federal and state cost share programs for agricultural lands. The program could provide an
economic incentive to landowners to conserve and manage swamp forest buffers. Conserving and
managing the swamp forest buffers, in turn, could protect critical drainage areas, protect water quality,
and provide aquatic and terrestrial habitat throughout the basin.
More information and frequently asked questions about logging in North Carolina can be found on NCFS’s
website.
1.6.3 Golf Courses
Golf courses utilize intensive turf management practices that often rely heavily on the use of fertilizers
and chemical pesticides. Stormwater runoff then carries these pollutants to nearby streams, impacting
aquatic life and habitat. The construction of golf courses can also introduce sediment into streams and
destabilize streams that are straightened or altered to meet the design of the golf course. Because there
is little information on stormwater management and the amount of commercial fertilizers or pesticides
used for turf management on golf courses, it is difficult to assess the impact they may be having on water
quality in the Chowan River basin.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 19 02/18/2021
1.6.4 Stormwater
Stormwater runoff is rainfall or snowmelt that flows across the ground and impervious surfaces (e.g.,
buildings, roads, parking lots, etc.). In urbanized areas, stormwater systems often concentrate stormwater
runoff into smooth, straight conduits. The runoff gathers speed and volume as it travels through the
system before it is released. The outfall is often directed to a surface waterbody where the high velocity
can scour streambeds, damage streambanks and vegetation, and destroy aquatic habitat. The volume can
cause flooding, damage infrastructure, and cause unnaturally high fluctuations in stream flow.
Many daily activities have the potential to cause stormwater pollution, and in an area where activities
(e.g., construction, land clearing, etc.) have the potential to contribute more pollutants through
stormwater runoff, measures should be taken to minimize impacts from runoff. One major component in
reducing impacts from stormwater runoff involves planning up front during the design process. New
construction designs should include plans to prevent or minimize the amount of runoff leaving the site.
Wide streets, large cul-de-sacs, long driveways, and sidewalks lining both sides of the street are all
features of urbanizing areas that create excess impervious cover and consume natural areas. Green
infrastructure (GI) can be used to minimize the impact from runoff. GI has several definitions but generally
involves the use of natural landscape features (e.g., soil, vegetation, forests, wetlands, etc.) to help
maintain ecological processes, sustain natural resources, and contribute to community and individual
health and quality of life (Firehock, 2013).
The presence of intact riparian buffers, floodplains and/or wetlands in urban areas can also reduce the
impacts of development. These porous, natural landscapes hold rainwater and snowmelt and allow the
water to infiltrate slowly. This slow infiltration also helps recharge groundwater supplies. Where feasible,
establishing and protecting existing buffers, floodplains and wetlands should be considered, and the
amount of impervious cover should be limited as much as possible. Preserving the natural streamside
vegetation or riparian buffer is one of the most economical and efficient BMPs for reducing the amount
of stormwater reaching surface waters. In addition, riparian buffers provide a variety of benefits including:
moderation of water temperature by providing shade, holding water and decreasing the high
temperatures often measured in stormwater runoff; preventing erosion and lose of land; providing flood
control; moderating streamflow; and providing food and habitat to aquatic and terrestrial life (Burgess,
2004). For more information on stormwater and how to manage it, refer to the Division of Energy, Mineral
and Land Resources (DEMLR) Stormwater website: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-
land-resources/stormwater.
1.7 Projects Requiring Water Quality Certifications (WQCs)
Although federal and state regulations have slowed the loss of wetlands since the mid-1980s,
approximately one-third of the wetland alterations in the coastal plain have occurred since the 1950s,
primarily due to agricultural and managed forests conversion (USGS, 1996). Currently, under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA), administered by the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), it is unlawful to
discharge dredged or fill material into waters of the United States without federal approval, unless the
discharge is covered under an exemption. Most routine farming, ranching, or silviculture activities that
are part of an “on-going” farming or forestry operation and do not convert a wetland area to an upland
are considered exempt and do not require a Section 404 permit or DWR water quality certification.
Routine activities include cultivation, plowing, harvesting, minor drainage, seeding, and bedding (US EPA,
1990; USGS, 1996). The “Swampbuster” provision of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments to the
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 20 02/18/2021
1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourages (through financial disincentives) the
draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. In some situations, farmers use the
USDA Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) to restore previously converted or altered wetlands and avoid
penalties for new wetland conversions.
In addition to the federal authorization of the CWA’s Section 404, Section 401 authorizes states to issue
Water Quality Certifications (WQCs) for any federally permitted or licensed activity that results in dredged
or fill material discharging to waters of the United States in the state where that discharge occurs (US EPA,
2017a; US EPA, 2017b). Wetland fill is the most common type of permanent impact approved under NC’s
401 wetland certification program administered by DWR. Wetlands filled during construction activities
(e.g. road construction, commercial and domestic development) generally lose all wetland functions.
Other types of permanent impacts include excavation, grading, flooding, and vegetation clearing (in
certain circumstances). Permitted projects must take steps to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands,
streams, and other aquatic resources and provide Compensatory Mitigation for unavoidable permanent
losses as required by the federal permit (Individual or Nationwide) or state water WQC (US EPA, 2017b).
Between 2007 to 2017, DWR approved certifications for over 36.5 acres of permanent wetland and 4,500
linear feet of permanent stream impacts in the Chowan River basin. The North Carolina Department of
Transportation’s (DOT) transportation improvement projects (TIPs) resulted in the largest permitted
impacts of wetland acreage in the basin during this time period.
The 2011 TIP for US 158 (NC DWR Project Number 20111075 / DOT TIP R-2583), in Hertford
County, had 10.5 acres of permanent wetland impacts and 3,786 linear feet of permanent stream
impacts.
The 2012 TIP for road widening over seven miles of US 13/US 158 (NC DWR Project Number
20120296 / NC DOT TIP R-2507), from NC 45/US 158 near Winton in Hertford County to US158 in
Tarheel in Gates County, resulted in over 21.7 acres of permanent wetland impacts. Both projects
met all compensatory mitigation requirements through purchasing credits from NC’s in-lieu Fee
program through the Division of Mitigation Services.
1.8 Climate Risk and Resiliency
In October of 2018, Governor Roy Cooper signed Executive Order 80 (EO80), “North Carolina’s
commitment to address climate change and transition to a clean energy economy”. Section 9 of EO80 was
a directive to the cabinet agencies to integrate climate adaptation and resilience planning into cabinet
agency policies, programs, and operations (DEQ, 2020).
In June 2020, the North Carolina Climate Risk Assessment and Resiliency Plan (2020 Resiliency Plan) was
published by DEQ. It defined a resilient North Carolina as “a state where our communities, economics,
and ecosystems are better able to rebound, positively adapt to, and thrive amid changing conditions and
challenges, including disasters and climate change; to maintain quality of life, healthy growth, and durable
systems; and to conserve resources for present and future generations” (DEQ, 2020). The 2020 Resiliency
plan includes the recommendations of the agencies involved with executing EO80, as well as stakeholders
throughout the state, on how to integrate climate adaptation and resiliency planning into their policies,
programs, and operations. It provides the state’s best understanding of projected change in climate;
considers climate justice issues; evaluates state infrastructure, assets, programs, and services that are
vulnerable and at risk to climate and non-climate stressors; and includes preliminary actions currently
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 21 02/18/2021
underway or which can be taken to reduce risk. It also includes nature-based solutions and
recommendations to enhance ecosystem resiliency and sequester carbon through natural and working
lands (NWL). The plan concludes by describing next steps for implementing and updating the 2020
Resiliency Plan as well as strategic resilience initiatives (DEQ, 2020).
One of the first steps in developing the 2020 Resiliency Plan was for DEQ to work with the North Carolina
Institute for Climate Studies (North Carolina State University), representatives from many major higher
education institutions, and subject matter experts to develop the North Carolina Climate Science Report
(NCCSR). Key findings were categorized by percent probability and, except where noted, referred to future
changes through the end of the century. Definitions for virtually certain, very likely, likely, unlikely, etc.
are included in the NCCSR as well as Chapter 3 and Appendix A of the 2020 Resiliency Plan. Key findings
of the NCCSR include:
Sea level: It is virtually certain that sea level will continue to rise along North Carolina’s coast due
to the expansion of ocean water from warming and melting of ice in Greenland and the Antarctic
ice sheets.
Flooding: It is virtually certain that rising sea level and increasing storm intensity will lead to an
increase in storm surge flooding in coastal North Carolina. Inland flooding is also likely to increase
due to extreme precipitation events.
Temperature: It is very likely that temperatures in North Carolina will increase substantially in all
seasons and that the number of warm and very warm nights will increase and that the summer
heat index will increase due to increases in absolute humidity.
Precipitation: It is very likely that extreme precipitation frequency and intensity will increase
statewide due to increases in atmospheric water vapor content, and it is likely that total annual
precipitation will increase.
Drought and wildfires: It is likely there will be more frequent and intense droughts across the
state and that this increase will likely increase wildfires.
Ecosystem and habitat loss: Sea level rise will result in a loss of wetlands and the habitats
associated with them. The loss of wetlands will impact not only commercial and recreational
fisheries, but also adversely impact water quality, decrease a buffers capacity to attenuate
nonpoint source pollution runoff, and reduce the resilience of coastal communities. Due to
warmer temperatures, harmful algal blooms may increase impacting aquatic organisms and
human health.
Public health: Saltwater intrusion due to climate change will impact both groundwater and surface
water drinking water sources and impact the amount of freshwater available to irrigate
agricultural crops. Extreme weather events will put more stress on emergency management,
public services, and institutions, and require more resources to address the impacts. Poor air
quality, injuries, and loss due to flooding, heat-related illnesses, and increased areas where
disease-carrying vectors, such as mosquitoes, will all impact human health.
Non-climate stressors: Many of these impacts will be compounded by non-climate stressors such
as population growth, urbanization, and economic inequality. Climate-related impacts will likely
have greater effects on vulnerable populations, exacerbating disparities that already exist
(Kunkel, et al., 2020; DEQ, 2020).
Programs with DEQ’s DWR that may be impacted by climate change include:
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 22 02/18/2021
Water Quality: Increases to temperature and the length of the warm season can result in
increased algal production, lower dissolved oxygen concentrations, degraded aquatic
communities, and impacts to commercial and recreational fisheries (i.e., fish kills, trout
reproduction, shellfish harvesting).
Water Supply Planning: Water supply planning will be affected by decreased water availability
from more frequent drought conditions.
Water and Wastewater Facilities: More frequent and intense rain events increase the flood risk
to many facilities that DWR regulates such as wastewater treatment plants and animal operations.
Discharges permitted through NPDES are currently based on low-flow statistics calculated with
historical stream flow data. Variable precipitation in the future could affect typical low flows,
changing the capacity of receiving streams to assimilate pollutant loads.
Non-Point Source Pollution: More frequent and severe precipitation events can increase the
delivery of nonpoint source pollution loads to surface waters impacting aquatic habitats, water
supply intakes, dam maintenance (i.e., sediment build up and removal), etc.
Basinwide planning can contribute to climate resilience by identifying natural resources that may be
affected by climate change, providing recommendations for adaptive management, and recognizing
nature-based solutions to climate impacts. Basin plans frequently recommend protecting wetlands and
floodplains, installing stormwater BMPs, identifying and retrofitting high-risk infrastructure, projecting
and planning for changes in water use and availability, identifying areas that are disproportionately
burdened with environmental hazards, and implementing green infrastructure (GI), low-impact
development and living shorelines (Atkins, 2015; US EPA, 2016; DEQ 2020). Many of these same strategies
fall in line with those identified in the 2020 Resiliency Plan.
Many of the recommendations presented in basins plans have also been identified as means to mitigate
impacts from increased precipitation and flood events caused by climate change. One example, found in
Chapter 5 of the 2020 Resiliency Plan, is land use guidance which includes protecting riparian buffers. This
is also one of several strategies identified in basin plans to increase North Carolina’s resilience to water
quality impacts from flooding. Chapter 5 in the 2020 Resiliency Plan notes that several watersheds have
rules in place that protect riparian buffers. Many of these rules were put into place to reduce the amount
of nutrients entering waterways from point and nonpoint sources of pollution, but they can also help
alleviate impacts from flooding. In addition to rules to protect riparian buffers, the NC Flood Act of 2000
required that communities regulating land use “prohibit certain uses in the 100-year floodplain”.
Prohibited uses include new solid waste disposal facilities, hazardous waste management facilities,
salvage yards, and chemical storage facilities. By expanding and enforcing these protections statewide,
state and local governments increase the capacity of the natural landscape to assimilate pollutants before
they enter a waterbody (DEQ, 2020). Since inland flooding is projected to increase, it is critical to adopt
practices that reduce storm-driven nonpoint point source pollution.
Basin plans also encourage the collection of more data for many different DWR programs to garner a
deeper understanding of current conditions and changes over time and encourage the use of natural and
working lands (NWL). The basin plans will continue to be a source of this information and will increasingly
analyze NC’s major river basins with a lens towards climate resiliency. More information about the global
impacts of climate change can be found on the Fourth National Climate Assessment website
(https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/). For more information on North Carolina’s efforts to address climate
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 23 02/18/2021
change, visit https://deq.nc.gov/energy-climate/climate-change. More information about NWL can be
found here: https://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/project/north-carolina-natural-and-working-lands.
1.9 Contaminants of Emerging Concern
Contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) are increasingly being detected in surface and groundwater
across the state. They come from a wide range of sources including pesticides, lawn and agricultural
products, disinfection by-products, wood preservatives, pharmaceutical and personal care products
(PPCPs), and industrial chemicals as well as their by-products (US EPA, 2019). Potential sources include
conventional wastewater treatments plants, individual on-site wastewater collection systems, and
industrial and chemical manufacturing facilities. GenX and 1,4-dioxane are examples of CECs recently
identified in North Carolina surface waters. These compounds often go undetected and untreated
because facilities do not have the analytical tools, methods or treatment systems in place that can detect,
eliminate or treat them.
While a compound may be unique to a specific source or river basin, many are widespread. The effects of
CECs on aquatic ecosystems and on human health are mostly unknown, and the lack of appropriate
analytical methods and monitoring techniques makes identification and management a challenge. The
uncertainty of whether these emerging compounds are present, their effects on human health and their
impacts to aquatic ecosystems is a growing public concern. Because CECs are not fully understood, state
agencies and EPA are working on analytical methods to identify the compounds in a variety of media
(water, wastewater, biosolids, soils, sediment, agricultural products) and identify treatment options for
public water supply systems to provide safe drinking water to the public and ensure that aquatic
ecosystems are protected.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 24 02/18/2021
References
Alderman, J.M. and J.D. Alderman. 2009. Chowan River Freshwater Mussel Survey – Prepared
for Citizens Against OLF. Alderman Environmental Services, Inc., Pittsboro NC. Unpublished
report. Received via email September 2, 2009. 53pp.
ASWM, (2019b). About Wetlands, Retrieved from https://www.aswm.org/wetlands/about-wetlands.
Atkins. 2015. Flood Loss Avoidance Benefits of Green Infrastructure for Stormwater Management.
Prepared for US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-05/documents/flood-avoidance-green-infrastructure-
12-14-2015.pdf
Brogan, Sean. 2018. Personal communication to Dwayne Hinson, Pasquotank Soil & Water Conservation
District (SWCD) and Mark Powell, Albemarle Resource Conservation and Development Council, Inc.
(ARCD). RE: Inquiries Regarding Forestry's Connection with Algal Blooms in the Albemarle Region. Dated
12/14/2018.
Burgess, C., (Ed.), 2004. Buffers for Clean Water. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality, Raleigh, NC.
Carolina Wetland Association, (2016). Wetlands 101. Retrieved from
http://carolinawetlands.org/index.php/other-resources/wetlands-101/ .
Cristian, R., W.M. Aust, M.C. Bolding, S.M. Barrett, J.F. Munsell, and E.B. Schilling. 2016. Effectiveness of
forestry best management practices in the United States: Literature review. Forest Ecology and
Management 360: 133-151.
Coats, W.A. 2017. "An Assessment of Forestry Best Management Practices in North Carolina, 2012-
2016." North Carolina Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services (NCDA&CS) North Carolina Forest
Service (NCFS). Raleigh, NC.
Deerhake M., personal communication, January 14, 2021.
Ensign, S. E., and M. A. Mallin. 2001. Stream water quality following timber harvest in a Coastal Plain
swamp forest. Water Research 35:3381–3390
Firehock, Karen. November 2013. Evaluating and Conserving Green Infrastructure Across the Landscape:
A Practitioner’s Guide. The Green Infrastructure Center Inc. (GIC). Charlottesville, Virginia.
http://www.gicinc.org/north_carolina.htm
Homer, C.H., Fry, J.A., and Barnes C.A. 2012. The National Land Cover Database, U.S. Geological Survey
Fact Sheet 2012-3020, 4 p.
Kunkel, K.E., D.R. Easterling, A. Ballinger, S. Bililign, S.M. Champion, D.R. Corbett, K.D. Dello, J. P. Dissen,
G.M. Lackmann, R.A. Luettich, Jr., L.B. Perry, W.A. Robinson, L.E. Stevens, B.C. Stewart, and A.J. Terando.
2020. North Carolina Climate Science Report (NCCSR). North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, 233
pp. https://ncics.org/nccsr
Leibowitz, S.G., (2003). Isolated Wetlands and their Functions: an Ecological Perspective. Wetlands:
23:517-531.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 25 02/18/2021
Moser, M.L. and W.S. Patrick. 2000. Fecundity and status of blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis)
and alewife (A. pseudoharengus) in the Albemarle Sound Drainage, North Carolina. Final report
to North Carolina Sea Grant Fishery Resources Grant Program. March 2000. 51pp.
North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC). Subchapter 60C – Forest Practices Guidelines Related to
Water Quality. 02 NCAC 60C .0101 - .0209. Transferred from 15A NCAC 011 .0101-.0209.
http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2002%20-
%20agriculture%20and%20consumer%20services/chapter%2060%20-
%20division%20of%20forest%20resources/subchapter%20c/subchapter%20c%20rules.pdf.
NCAC. Subchapter 02B – (Environmental Management) Definitions. 02 NCAC 02 .0202. Readopted
Effective November 1, 2019. http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-
%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0202.pdf.
North Carolina Association of Regional Councils of Governments (NCARCOG). About.
https://www.ncregions.org/about/. Accessed June 21, 2020.
NCARCOG. Regional Councils. https://www.ncregions.org/regional-councils/. Accessed June 21, 2020.
NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). 2020. North Carolina Climate Risk Assessment and
Resiliency Plan: Impacts, Vulnerability, Risks, and Preliminary Actions. A Comprehensive Strategy for
Reducing North Carolina's Vulnerability to Climate Change. Plan: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/climate-
change/resilience-plan/2020-Climate-Risk-Assessment-and-Resilience-Plan.pdf. Website:
https://deq.nc.gov/energy-climate/climate-change/nc-climate-change-interagency-council/climate-
change-clean-energy-17. Accessed 6/15/2020; 12/05/2020.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 2015, North Carolina Surface
Irrigation System Operators Training Manual.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Operator_Certification_Files/WW_Files/WW_Downloads/
Need_To_Know/NC%20Surface%20Irrigation%20System%20Operators%20Training%20Manual_2015.pd
f
NC DEQ. Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources (DEMLR). Dam Safety Program web
site. https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/energy-mineral-land-
permits/dam-safety. Accessed May 2020.
NC Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF). 2016. North Carolina Coastal Habitat Protection Plan
(CHPP) Source Document. Morehead City, NC. Division of Marine Fisheries. 475p.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/habitat/chpp/downloads.
NCDWR. 2014. A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized
Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina. Bryn H. Tracy (editor). North Carolina Division of Water
Resources, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC. On
behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes. November 01, 2014.
https://nc.fisheries.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Summary-Document.Final_.pdf.
Accessed 26 May 2020.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 26 02/18/2021
NC DWR, (2018). NC Wetlands. Retrieved from http://www.ncwetlands.org/.NC Executive Order No. 80
(EO80). October 29, 2018. https://files.nc.gov/governor/documents/files/EO80-
%20NC%27s%20Commitment%20to%20Address%20Climate%20Change%20%26%20Transition%20to%2
0a%20Clean%20Energy%20Economy.pdf
North Carolina Forest Service (NCFS). Bottomland and Swamp Forests. Accessed 08/23/20.
https://ncforestservice.gov/Managing_your_forest/bottomland.htm#:~:text=Bottomland%20swamps%2
0are%20estimated%20to,Mitigating%20flood%20impacts.
NCFS. N.C. Forestry Best Management Practices (BMP) Manual. Revised 2005-2006. Webpage updated
03/02/2017. Accessed 03/19/2019. https://www.ncforestservice.gov/water_quality/bmp_manual.htm.
NCFS. N.C. Forestry Best Management Practices (BMP) Manual. Chapter 4. Revised 2005-2006. Webpage
updated 03/02/2017. Accessed 01/09/2020.
https://www.ncforestservice.gov/water_quality/bmp_manual.htm.
NCFS. Differences Between FPGs & BMPs in North Carolina. Webpage updated 03/03/2017. Accessed
03/19/2019. https://www.ncforestservice.gov/water_quality/fpg_bmp_differences.htm.
NCFS. Forest Development Program (FDP). Webpage updated 04/26/2017. Accessed 03/19/2019.
https://www.ncforestservice.gov/Managing_your_forest/fdp.htm.
NCFS. Frequently Asked Questions about Logging in North Carolina. Accessed 12/05/2020.
https://www.ncforestservice.gov/Managing_your_forest/logging_faq.htm.
NCFS. Water Quality Inspection Process. Webpage updated 06/08/2018. Accessed 12/05/2020.
https://www.ncforestservice.gov/water_quality/WQ_Inspection_Process.htm.
NOAA 2020a. Shortnose Sturgeon. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/shortnose-
sturgeon. Accessed 27 May 2020.
NOAA 2020b. Atlantic Sturgeon. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/atlantic-sturgeon.
Accessed 27 May 2020.
O’Driscoll, M., R. Bond, I. Hillman, C. Skibiel, C. Humphrey, and C. Sanderford. 2018. Existing
Data for Evaluating Coastal Plain Ecological Flows in the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuary Region.
Draft. Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership. 54pp.
Riggs, S.R. and D.V. Ames. 2003. Drowning the North Carolina coast: sea-level rise and estuarine
dynamics. North Carolina Sea Grant. N.C. State University.
SARP. 2020. Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership. Southeast Aquatic Barrier Prioritization
Tool. Improve aquatic connectivity by prioritizing aquatic barriers for removal using the best
available data. https://connectivity.sarpdata.com/. Accessed 28 May 2020.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2013. NWP_AppendixD_Culverts.pdf.
https://www.sas.usace.army.mil/Portals/61/docs/regulatory/NWP_AppendixD_Culverts.pdf.
Accessed 28 April 2020.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 27 02/18/2021
USACE. 1979. Water Resources Development by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in North
Carolina. 1 January 1979. U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic. 123pp.
USACE. 2020. Chowan River Basin, VA/NC Comprehensive Watershed Study.
https://www.nao.usace.army.mil/About/Projects/Chowan-Watershed-Study/. Last Accessed 16
April 2020.
United States Department of Agriculture. 2017. Census of Agriculture United States Summary and State
Data. Vol. 1.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 2019. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES): NPDES Permit Basics. [Online]. Accessed 12/6/2019.
https://www.epa.gov/npdes/npdes-permit-basics.
US EPA, (May 3, 1990). Memorandum: Clean Water Act Section 404 Regulatory Program and Agricultural
Activities. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/memorandum-clean-water-act-section-404-
regulatory-program-and-agricultural-activities .
US EPA. 2019. Contaminants of Emerging Concern including Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care
Products. Last updated April 19, 2019. Accessed 6/15/2020. https://www.epa.gov/wqc/contaminants-
emerging-concern-including-pharmaceuticals-and-personal-care-products.
US EPA. 2020. Basic Information about Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution. Last updated October 7, 2020.
Accessed 11/15/2020. https://www.epa.gov/nps/basic-information-about-nonpoint-source-nps-
pollution.
US EPA. 2016. Green Infrastructure and Climate Change: Collaborating to Improve Community
Resiliency. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-
08/documents/gi_climate_charrettes_final_508_2.pdf
US EPA. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Webpage updated 04/10/2019. Accessed 01/08/2020.
https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/exemptions-permit-requirements-under-cwa-section-404.
US EPA, (2017a). Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit Program. Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/section-404-permit-program .
US EPA, (2017b). Clean Water Act, Section 401. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/clean-
water-act-section-401-certification.
US Federal Government. 2017. “Glossary”. US Climate Resilience Toolkit. [Online]
https://toolkit.climate.gov/content/glossary. Accessed 12/5/2019.
United States Geological Survey (USGS). Current Conditions for Virginia.
USGS 1996, National Water Summary on Wetland Resource, North Carolina Wetland Resources Paper
2425. p297-302.
https://waterdata.usgs.gov/va/nwis/current/?type=flow. Accessed May 5, 2020.
Chowan – Chowan Basin Overview 28 02/18/2021
USGS. Hydrologic Unit Maps. https://water.usgs.gov/GIS/huc.html. Updated April 2020. Accessed
June 21, 2020.
USGS. National Hydrography. https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-
hydrography/watershed-boundary-dataset?qt-science_support_page_related_con=4#qt-
science_support_page_related_con. Accessed June 21, 2020.
US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). (2018). Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United
States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E.
Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program,
Washington, DC, USA, 1515 pp. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018.
Wisconsin Wetland Association, (2016). Why migrating birds need wetlands. Retrieved from
https://wisconsinwetlands.org/updates/why-migrating-birds-need-wetlands/.
Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, B. DeAngelo, S. Doherty, K. Hayhoe, R. Horton, J.P. Kossin, P.C.
Taylor, A.M. Waple, and C.P. Weaver. (2017). Executive summary. In: Climate Science Special Report:
Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken,
B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp.
12-34, doi: 10.7930/J0DJ5CTG.