20040561 Ver 4_VBHI-FryingPanShoals_2012-00040_3bLetter_FINAL_30Mar2017_20170313

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Southeast Regional Office
263 13th Avenue South
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-5505
http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov
Colonel Kevin P. Landers Sr., Commander
U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers Wilmington District
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1398
Attention: Ronnie Smith
Dear Colonel Landers:
MAR 3 0 2017
F/SER47:KR/pw
This letter is in reference to public notice SAW-2012-00040 dated March 9, 2017. The Village
of Bald Head Island (Village) requests the Wilmington District modify the permit it issued for
construction of a terminal groin and beach nourishment. The Village seeks authorization to
dredge a portion of Frying Pan Shoals and place the dredged material along the shoreline of Bald
Head Island, including West Beach and South Beach. The permit modification request would
benefit the Village in securing an additional source of material for beach nourishment activities.
The Wilmington District's initial determination is the proposed project may adversely affect
essential fish habitat (EFH) or associated fisheries managed by the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (SAFMC), Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management Council, and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The SAFMC designated Frying Pan Shoals as a Habitat Area
of Particular Concern under the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
Frying Pan Shoals support aquatic resources of national importance in accordance with Section
906(e)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986.
As detailed in the enclosed letter dated March 9, 2017, the NMFS shares concern the proposed
project may adversely affect EFH. The NMFS believes dredging sand from Frying Pan Shoals
may have long-term impacts to a substantial amount of shoal habitat the SAFMC designates as
EFH for cobia, Spanish mackerel, and king mackerel and the NMFS designates for Atlantic
highly migratory species (tuna, swordfish, billfish, small and large coastal sharks, and pelagic
sharks). The NMFS believes systematic dredging of Frying Pan Shoals, such as the proposed
project and subsequently other projects, may result in cumulative and unanticipated changes in
habitat quality. The NMFS provided the Wilmington district with four EFH conservation
recommendations. The most notable recommendation is the NMFS request that excavation of
Frying Pan Shoals for beach nourishment activities be excluded from permit modifications, as
cumulative adverse impacts are likely to occur with the proposed project.
Pursuant to Part IV 3(b) of the Memorandum of Agreement between the Department of
Commerce and the Department of the Army dated August 11, 1992, I have reviewed the findings
of my staff and determined the proposed work would adversely impact aquatic resources of
national importance. I request you consider fully the views and recommendations of the NMFS
in making your final decision concerning authorization of the proposed work. I also encourage

continued efforts to resolve this matter at the staff level, and I have directed my staff to cooperate
in any related effort to this end.
Thank you for consideration of this request. Please contact Dr. Ken Riley at [phone], or
by e-mail at [e-mail] if you have questions regarding this matter.
Enclosure
cc: (sent via electronic mail)
COE, [e-mail]
USFWS, [e-mail]
NCDCM, [e-mail]
NCDCM, [e-mail]
EPA, [e-mail]
SAFMC, [e-mail]
ASMFC, LHavel@asmfc org
F/SER4, [e-mail]
F/SER47, [e-mail]
Sincerely,
G1, Roy E. Crabtree, Ph.D.
' r Regional Administrator
2

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Southeast Regional Office
263 13th Avenue South
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-5505
http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov
March 9, 2017 F/SER47:KR/pw
Colonel Kevin P. Landers Sr., Commander
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1398
Attention: Ronnie Smith
Dear Colonel Landers:
NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) reviewed public notice SAW-2012-00040,
dated February 8, 2017. The Village of Bald Head Island (Village) requests authorization from
the Department of the Army to modify a permit for groin fillet maintenance and beach
nourishment. Specifically, the Village seeks authorization to dredge a portion of Frying Pan
Shoals and place the dredged material along the shoreline of Bald Head Island, including West
Beach and South Beach. The Wilmington District's initial determination is the proposed project
may adversely affect essential fish habitat (EFH) or associated fisheries managed by the South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC), the Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management
Council, or NMFS. For reasons detailed below, the NMFS agrees with this determination and
concludes borrowing sand from Frying Pan Shoals may have long-term impacts to a substantial
amount of shoal habitat the SAFMC designates EFH for cobia, Spanish mackerel, and king
mackerel and the NMFS designates for Atlantic highly migratory species (tuna, swordfish,
billfish, small and large coastal sharks, and pelagic sharks). In accordance with Part IV, Section
3(a) of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Department of Commerce and the
Department of the Army, dated August 11, 1992, the NMFS has also determined the mining of
Frying Pan Shoals may lead to substantial and unacceptable impacts to aquatic resources of
national importance (ARNI). As the nation's federal trustee for the conservation and
management of marine, estuarine, and diadromous fishery resources, the NMFS provides the
following comments pursuant to authorities of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and the
Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson -Stevens Act).
Description of the Proposed Project
The Village has relied on a variety of shoreline management actions to address chronic erosion
on the western end of South Beach, The Point, and West Beach over the past 18 years. The most
recent project, completed in December 2015, included construction of a 1,300-linear-foot
terminal groin concurrent with a federal beach disposal operation on Bald Head Island. Recent
physical monitoring reports the average annualized loss is 371,700 cubic yards of sand from
West Beach and South Beach. Previous groin fillet maintenance and beach nourishment projects
used material sourced from the Wilmington Harbor Federal Navigation Project and Jay Bird
Shoals. Since 2001, Bald Head Island has received 250,000 to 366,000 cubic yards of sand per
year from the Wilmington Harbor Federal Navigation Project. The Wilmington District has
committed to continue contributing beach compatible sand from the Wilmington Harbor Federal

Navigation Project to the Village for beach nourishment activities. Other sources of material
approved in the current permit for beach disposal are located on Jay Bird Shoal and Bald Head
Creek Shoal.
The Village wants to secure an additional long-term source of material for groin fillet
maintenance and beach nourishment. The Village has identified a borrow source located within
a 460-acre site on the western portion of the Frying Pan Shoals formation, approximately one
mile off the southeast shoreline of Bald Head Island. Sediment would be excavated to a depth up
to -25 feet by cutter suction dredge and pumped by submerged pipeline to the shoreline of Bald
Head Island. The identified borrow site could yield up to 8.5 million cubic yards of sand
material meeting North Carolina's standards for beach compatibility. Because of draft
restrictions to access the borrow source, the Village also seeks authorization for the dredge plant
to excavate a fairway (channel) to access the borrow location. The effective width of the fairway
would not exceed 400 feet and the affected area would be approximately 22.5 acres. The public
notice does not discuss the fate of the material dredged for the fairway, and it is not clear if the
material is suitable for beach disposal. Hence, impacts from dredging the fairway may exceed
the amount stated.
The Village proposes to conduct physical monitoring of the borrow site immediately after
dredging, annually for three years, and biennially thereafter until the permit expires in November
2024. The footprint of each monitoring survey would include the entire permitted nourishment
site as well as the area of excavation within Frying Pan Shoals. The results of the monitoring
would be incorporated into the Village's existing Shoreline Monitoring Program annual report.
The Village does not propose any environmental surveys or ecological studies of affected
fisheries or fish habitat.
Consultation History
The NMFS participated in a scoping meeting with the Village, North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and the Wilmington District on November 4, 2016. The NMFS expressed concerns that
a project of this scope may affect EFH associated with an important cape -associated shoal
complex. The NMFS recommended a more thorough alternatives analysis be completed and
recommended the analysis include additional sources of material from the Wilmington Harbor
Federal Navigation Project (e.g., Outer Ocean Bar and Mid -River) and the Wilmington Harbor
Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site. The NMFS also recommended the Village investigate
other offshore sand sources not affiliated with the Cape Fear inlet and shoal complex (e.g., Outer
Continental Shelf).
The NMFS commented extensively in review of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
entitled, Village of Bald Head Island Shoreline Protection Project, dated August 2014, and its
EFH Assessment, dated January 2014. The NMFS comments noted significant errors and
omissions in these documents. The NMFS provided guidance on interpretations of impacts to
fisheries. The NMFS provided an EFH conservation recommendation requesting the permit
authorizing the terminal groin and beach nourishment not include dredging of sand from Frying
Pan Shoals without further EFH consultation and in-depth review of environmental impacts. The
2

Wilmington District agreed, and the permit it issued did not authorize dredging in Frying Pan
Shoals.
Essential Fish Habitat and Aquatic Resources of National Importance
Pursuant to the Magnuson -Stevens Act, the SAFMC and NMFS designate EFH within the study
area to include tidal inlets and cape -associated shoal complexes because these areas provide
feeding, resting, and staging habitat for a variety of commercially, recreationally, and
ecologically important fish species. The SAFMC also designates these areas as an HAPC under
the fishery management plans for shrimp, snapper/grouper complex, and coastal migratory
pelagic species because these areas are rare, sensitive to stress and disturbance, and important to
ecosystem function. Understanding how tidal inlets and shoals function to provide habitat is the
product of a complex mix of connections between biological processes and physical factors. The
cape -associated shoal complexes of North Carolina are known "hot -spot" environments where
dense aggregations of fish are supported by local primary production. The SAMFC provides
additional information on the species it manages and their EFH in Fishery Ecosystem Plan of the
South Atlantic Region (available at www.safmc.net), and the NMFS provides additional
information on the EFH of highly migratory species in Amendment 10 to the 2006 Consolidated
HMS Fishery Management Plan: Essential Fish Habitat (available at
www. nmfs. noaa. gov/sfa/hms/)
Several fish and invertebrates inhabiting the project area are ARNI in accordance with Section
906(e)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (PL 99-602), including bluefish
(Pomatomus saltatrix), spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), croaker (Micropogonias
undulatus), southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), blue crab (Callinectes sapidus),
Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculates), pompano (Trachinotus carolinus), and penaeid
shrimp.
Impacts to Essential Fish Habitat
The Wilmington District and NMFS evaluated EFH impacts from dredging sand at Jay Bird
Shoals, Bald Head Creek Shoal, and the Wilmington Harbor federal channel during the original
EFH consultation for this project. Consequently, this additional review focuses on the EFH
impacts from dredging sand at Frying Pan Shoals.
The North Carolina coast consists of a series of cuspate bays or coastal compartments, each with
different spatial orientations and a geologic character reflecting the adjacent continental shelf
(McNinch and Luettich 2000; Riggs and Ames 2009). Frying Pan Shoals, like the other cape -
associated shoal complexes in North Carolina, is a prominent feature extending to the continental
shelf break. Among the three cape -associated shoal complexes, Frying Pan Shoals extends the
farthest, approximately 30 miles. Each of the cape -associated shoal complexes appears to have
large volumes of high quality, beach compatible sand (Riggs et al. 2011). Cape -associated shoal
complexes are constantly changing. They shift under normal current regimes, but storm events
are largely responsible for sediment transport, sand distribution, and shoal migration. Wind -
driven currents and storm -induced waves suspend sediment causing frequent erosion and
deposition on the seabed. A significant knowledge gap exists in understanding the role of cape -
associated shoal complexes in the function and maintenance of North Carolina's barrier island
system (Kalo and Schiavinato 2009). It is entirely unknown how barrier islands and longshore
3

coastal currents will respond to dredging and removal of large volumes of sand from Frying Pan
Shoals. There is potential for significant short-term and long-term physical and biological
impacts from dredging shoal habitat.
Frying Pan Shoals is characterized by a high fish production, a high benthic faunal density, and
species diversity. The Shoals are critically important for fisheries as it demarcates the boundary
where the Labrador Current flowing south collides with the Gulf Stream Current flowing north.
This biogeographical boundary plays a key role in supporting shrimp, the snapper -grouper
complex, coastal migratory pelagic species, and highly migratory species by generating localized
areas of high productivity. Upwelling in frontal eddies and summer bottom intrusions driven by
the Gulf Stream contribute to this productivity by providing nutrient rich waters and a succession
of biological responses (Lee et al. 1991).
Shoal habitat is defined by such factors as exposure, sediment texture, depth, and rugosity. The
NMFS is primarily concerned about the impacts of dredging on prey resources and foraging
habitat provided by the Frying Pan Shoal complex. Benthic invertebrate communities consisting
of crustaceans, worms, and mollusks are diverse and productive despite the high-energy
disturbance regime affecting the Shoal complex. Infaunal species provide important trophic
linkages coupling benthic-pelagic ecosystems. Many of the organisms utilizing these habitats
also provide trophic linkages between inshore and offshore populations. Succession and
recovery of benthic communities established in shallow high-energy environments may reflect
the adaptation of communities that occur in these habitats to frequent disturbance from episodic
storm events (Normandeau Associates 2014). Potential impacts caused by dredging include
physical removal of benthic faunal communities and disturbance of foraging habitat for fish and
invertebrates. Dredging can also affect benthic communities by altering sediment transport
characteristics of a shoal favoring sedimentation instead of resuspension. Benthic impacts are
expected to be reflected in measures of abundance, biomass, and taxa richness. Several practices
have been suggested to reduce recovery times for benthic communities following dredging
events. Most important is ensuring dredging activities do not create a depression in which fine
sediments deposit and collect. This may change the sediment composition and associated
infaunal assemblages, which is essential for recovery and recolonization (Byrnes et al. 2004;
Crowe et al. 2016). Also, timing of dredging prior to the peak recruitment period of spring and
summer, along with the preservation of local refuge patches to maximize the rate and success of
benthic recolonization have also been suggested to improve recovery times (Byrnes et al. 2004;
Brooks et al. 2006).
The NMFS believes dredging and alterations of habitat on Frying Pan Shoals could affect
spatiotemporal longshore movements of migratory fish species by disrupting feeding behavior
(i.e., movement based on patchy food availability) and by disrupting a significant orientation cue
for migration. Frying Pan Shoals serve as a migratory corridor for many species that traverse the
coastal waters of the Southeast. Data on fish migration through North Carolina's cape -associated
shoal complexes are sparse (Schwartz 1989). Anadromous species are the most common and
well known fish to exhibit longshore migratory behavior. Anadromous species have complex
lifecycles where individuals migrate great distances along the continental shelf and then return to
their natal rivers to spawn. In the Southeast, Atlantic sturgeon, shortnose sturgeon, striped bass,
American shad, and blueback herring move along and across the shoal habitat multiple times
4

throughout their life cycle. Sexually mature adults move across the shoals to aggregate and stage
at river mouths and inlets prior to spawning migration in rivers. Similarly, young -of -year
emerge from estuaries and migrate across the shoals en route to the waters of the North Atlantic
for growing. Inlets and nearshore shallow areas with predominantly sandy substrate are
particularly important refuge and foraging habitat for sturgeon and other anadromous species
(Laney et al. 2007; Taylor et al. 2016).
A number of marine species seasonally migrate across the shoals. Cobia is a popular recreational
and commercial species distributed worldwide in tropical, subtropical, and warm -temperate
waters. Cobia are abundant in the warm waters off the coast of the U.S. from Virginia south
throughout the Gulf of Mexico. The SAFMC manages cobia as part of the Coastal Migratory
Pelagics Fishery Management Plan because the species is highly migratory. In late spring,
schools of fish begin to migrate north from Florida. Migration and movement correlate with
water temperature. Schools of migrating fish occur throughout coastal waters moving along
beaches and the nearshore environment. Cobia form large spawning aggregations off North
Carolina in May and June.
There are numerous other examples of spatial movement patterns of fish across Frying Pan
Shoals at various temporal scales. Atlantic menhaden form large schools that migrate between
inshore and offshore waters foraging on plankton. During fall and early winter, menhaden
migrate south around the North Carolina capes to spawn (ASMFC 2015). The accumulation of
menhaden and other schooling planktivores (e.g., anchovies, sardines, herring, and scad) on the
shoals attract pelagic predators such as Spanish mackerel, king mackerel, and coastal sharks.
The NMFS is concerned the systematic dredging of cape -associated shoal complexes, such as the
proposed project and subsequently other projects, may result in cumulative and unanticipated
changes in habitat quality. Although opportunistic invertebrate communities may repopulate
these areas after dredging, benthic populations may not recover to pre -project levels. Dredging
will also suspend any fine material in the borrow area which may clog the gills in young, less
mobile fish and invertebrates and thereby increase their mortality rates within assemblages. The
extent of negative effect is dependent on the life history stages of the species present and the
duration of the event. Frying Pan Shoals are a long-established seascape feature unique to North
Carolina that provides valuable habitat for fishery resources utilizing estuaries and offshore
waters as a part of their life cycle. Avoiding dredging of sand from this shoal complex would
ensure that these important areas would not be altered to the point they no longer provide
valuable habitat.
Monitoring Needed for the Dredging Impacts
To fully evaluate the proposed mining of Frying Pan Shoals for sand, the NMFS requires
additional information regarding the rates at which borrow areas are expected to fill and
measures the Wilmington District may require the Village to take to limit dredging to portions of
the Shoal expected to fill in most rapidly. The NMFS also requires information on the biological
monitoring the District may require quantifying whether the actual impacts to EFH are within
acceptable limits. To characterize distribution, abundance, biomass, and diversity of fish and
invertebrates on the Shoal complex, the NMFS recommends using fishery -independent surveys
5

that include a combination of active sampling (e.g., trawling) and passive sampling (e.g.,
acoustic surveillance technology).
Dredging Best Management Practices
The NMFS requests the District develop best management practices (BMPs) to minimize the
adverse effects from dredging the shoal -complex and provide these for review before the District
makes its final decision on the proposed permit modification. For example, limiting the dredging
to the prevailing downdrift flanks of the shoals and limiting the depth of the dredge cuts to ten
feet may be good practices. Dredging within the shoal -complex should be limited to the portions
of the shoal expected to fill in most quickly once dredging has stopped. Environmental windows
(seasonal restrictions) should be used to limit the timing of dredge and disposal activities to
protect fish during sensitive life stages.
Impacts to Aquatic Resources of National Importance
Several fish and invertebrates known to inhabit the project area are ARNI in accordance with
Section 906(e)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (PL 99-602), including
bluefish, spotted seatrout, croaker, southern flounder, blue crab, Spanish mackerel, pompano,
and penaeid shrimp. These species utilize sandy shoals for spawning, refuge, foraging, or
nursery areas. As proposed, the work could directly and permanently eliminate a substantial
amount of sandy shoal habitat. Indirect impacts to this habitat and the ARNI that depend upon
the Shoals also may result from the altered wave climate caused by removing a substantial
portion of the Shoal. These indirect and cumulative impacts from the proposed action include
increased turbidity and sedimentation from placement of fill in the aquatic environment and loss
of food production functions performed by sandy shoals.
EFH Conservation Recommendations
Section 305(b)(4)(A) of the Magnuson -Stevens Act requires the NMFS to provide EFH
Conservation Recommendations for any federal action or permit which may result in adverse
impacts to EFH. Therefore, the NMFS recommends the following to ensure the conservation of
EFH and associated fishery resources:
1. The excavation of Frying Pan Shoals for terminal groin maintenance and beach
nourishment should be eliminated from the project design. The NMFS would reconsider
this recommendation based on receipt of additional environmental analysis performed
including an EFH Assessment addressing the proposed permit modifications.
2. An alternatives analysis should be done to identify whether Frying Pan Shoals is the least
environmentally damaging practicable alternative sand source the Village could use
during the remainder of the permit period. This analysis should include examination of
additional offshore sources, including those in the Outer Continental Shelf, capable of
providing beach compatible sand.
3. A physical and biological monitoring plan for the offshore borrow areas should be
developed to more accurately determine impacts to shoal habitat. The objectives of the
monitoring should include documenting the extent and grain -size distribution of the
material filling the excavation sites. Environmental monitoring should also document
biological components of the ecosystem, including fish, invertebrates, and infauna, to
quantify recovery and whether the actual impacts to EFH are within acceptable limits.

4. BMPs should be developed to minimize the adverse impacts associated with dredging
Frying Pan Shoals and integrated into the project design. For example, limiting the
dredging to the prevailing downdrift region of the shoal and limiting the depths of the
dredge cuts to ten (10) feet may be good practices. Similarly, restricting the time of year
for construction activities including dredging, groin maintenance, and beach nourishment,
should be included to reduce impacts to EFH and vulnerable life stages of federally
managed fishery species. Please provide a list of BMPs to NMFS for review before the
District makes its final decision on the proposed permit modification.
Section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson -Stevens Act and implementing regulation at 50 CFR
Section 600.920(k) require the Wilmington District to provide a written response to this letter
within 30 days of its receipt. If it is not possible to provide a substantive response within 30
days, in accordance with the "findings" with the Wilmington District, an interim response should
be provided to the NMFS. A detailed response then must be provided prior to final approval of
the action. The detailed response must include a description of measures proposed by the
Wilmington District to avoid, mitigate, or offset the adverse impacts of the activity. If the
response is inconsistent with the EFH conservation recommendations, the Wilmington District
must provide a substantive discussion justifying the reasons for not following the
recommendations.
Closing
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Please direct related questions or
correspondence to the attention of Dr. Ken Riley at our Beaufort Field Office, 101 Pivers Island
Road, Beaufort, North Carolina 28516-9722. He may be reached by telephone at (252) 728-
8750 or by e-mail at [e-mail].
cc: COE, [e-mail]
USFWS, [e-mail]
NCDCM, [e-mail]
NCDCM, [e-mail]
EPA, [e-mail]
SAFMC, [e-mail]
ASMFC, [e-mail]
F/SER4, [e-mail]
F/SER47, [e-mail]
Sincerely,
Virginia M. Fay
Assistant Regional Administrator
Habitat Conservation Division
7

References
ASMFC. 2015. Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR 40): Atlantic Menhaden
Stock Assessment Report. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, North Charleston,
South Carolina. 643 pp.
Brooks, R.A, C.N. Purdy, S.S. Bell, and K.J. Sulak. 2006. The benthic community of the
eastern U.S. continental shelf: A literature synopsis of benthic faunal resources. Continental
Shelf Research 26:804-818.
Byrnes, M.R., R.M. Hammer, J.L. Kelley, D.B. Baker, T.D. Thibaut, S.A. Zichichi, L.M. Lagera,
S.T. Viada, B.A. Vittor, J.S. Ramsey, and J.D. Germano. 2004. Environmental surveys of
potential borrow areas offshore northern New Jersey and southern New York and the
environmental implications of sand removal for coastal and beach restoration. U.S. Department
of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Leasing Division, Marine Minerals Branch,
Herndon, VA. OCS Report MMS 2004-044. Vol I: 264 pp and Vol II:194 pp.
Crowe, S.E., D.C. Bergquist, D.M. Sanger, and R.F. Van Dolah. 2016. Physical and biological
alternations following dredging in two beach nourishment borrow areas in South Carolina's
coastal zone. Journal of Coastal Research 32:875-889.
Kalo, J., and L.C. Schiavinato. 2009. Developing a management strategy for North Carolina's
coastal ocean, Report of the Ocean Policy Steering Committee. North Carolina Coastal
Resources Commission. North Carolina Sea Grant Publication. April 2009. 86 pp.
Laney, R.W., J.E. Hightower, B.R. Versak, M.F. Mangold, W.W. Cole, Jr., and S.E. Winslow.
2007. Distribution, habitat use, and size of Atlantic sturgeon captured during cooperative winter
tagging cruises, 1988-2006. Pages 167-182 in J. Munro, J. E. Hightower, K. McKown, K. J.
Sulak, A. W. Kahnle, and F. Caron, editors. Anadromous sturgeons: habitats, threats, and
management. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 56, Bethesda, Maryland.
Lee, T.N., J.A. Yoder and L.P. Atkinson. 1991. Gulf stream frontal eddy influence on
productivity. Journal of Geophysical Research 96:22-191.
McNinch, J.E. and R.A. Luettich. 2000. Physical processes around a cuspate foreland:
implications to the evolution and long-term maintenance of a cape -associated shoal. Continental
Shelf Research, 20: 2367-2389.
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2014. Understanding the habitat value and function of
shoal/ridge/trough complexes to fish and fisheries on the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico outer
continental shelf. Literature Synthesis for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management. Contract # M12PS00031. 116 pp.
Riggs, S.R. and D.W. Ames. 2009. Impact of the Oregon Inlet terminal groin on downstream
beaches of Pea Island, NC Outer Banks. Unpublished report. 19 pp.
8

Riggs, S.R., D. Ames, S.J. Culver, and D.J. Mallinson. 2011. The battle for North Carolina's
coast: evolutionary history, present crisis, and vision for the future. Chapel Hill: University of
North Carolina Press. 142 pp.
Schwartz, F.J. 1989. Zoogeography and ecology of fishes inhabiting North Carolina's marine
waters to depths of 600 meters. Pages 335-374 in R.Y. George and A.W. Hulbert, editors. North
Carolina Coastal Oceanography Symposium. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA-NURP
Rep. 89-2.
Taylor, A. D., K. Ohashi, J. Sheng, and M. K. Litvak. 2016. Oceanic distribution, behaviour,
and a winter aggregation area of adult Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus, in the
Bay of Fundy, Canada. P1OS One 11:1-16.
9