20110713 Ver 1_Information Letter_20081028

ya r ° ",
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F EASLEY
GOVERNOR
John Hennessy
DENR - Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
October 28, 2008
OCj ®??
2.9 ?n
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Raleigh, NC 27699 - 1621
Dear John Hennessy
SUBJECT TIP Project No B-4851 Replacement of Bridge No 31 on SR 1308 over Brush
Creek in Yancey County
The Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch is completing the project
development, environmental and engineering studies for the TIP Project B-4851 This project is
included in the North Carolina Transportation Improvement Program and is scheduled
construction in fiscal year 2012
We have provided a copy of the Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) for your
use We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful in evaluating
potential environmental impacts of the project Your comments will be used in the preparation
of a federally funded Categorical Exclusion This document will be prepared in accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act If your agency desires to comment please have your
response in by January 30, 2009 so that your comments can be used in the preparation of this
document
If you have any questions concerning any of these projects, please contact Tracy Walter at
[phone] Please include the TIP Project Number in all correspondence and comments
Sincerely,
MAILING ADDRESS
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
BRIDGE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT UNIT
1551 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1551
Tracy A Walter
Bridge Project Planning Engineer
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
TELEPHONE [phone]
FAX [phone]
WEBSITE WIMN NCDOT ORG
LOCATION
PARKER LINCOLN BLDG
2728 CAPITOL BLVD-SUITE 168
RALEIGH NC 27604

NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
Replace Bridge No. 31 on SR 1308 over Brush Creek
Yancey County, North Carolina
TIP B-4851
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ - 1308(6)
WBS Element No. 38621.1.1

THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Natural Environment Unit
April 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ... . . .. ... . .... ... ....... 1
2 0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS....... .......... ..... ............ .. 1
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES .... ..... ..... ...... .......... .. 2
31 Soils ......... ................. . ....... ...................... ................................... 2
3.2 Water Resources ... . ......................................... .. ............. ..................... 2
4.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES .......... ...... ................................... ............................ 3
4.1 Terrestrial Communities... .... ... ... ... .. .. ......................... ........ 3
41 1 Mamtamed/Disturbed 3
4 12 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 3
4 1 3 Terrestrial Community Impacts 4
4 2 Terrestrial Wildlife ........ .... ............................. ............... .... ........... 4
4.3 Aquatic Communities ............... ..... .. ............ ..... ................... .. 4
4.4 Invasive Species .............. ... .............. ..... ............ .. . ...................... 5
5 0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES .......... .... ...................................................... ... 5
5.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the US ..... .. .......................... ......................... 5
5.2 Clean Water Act Permits ............ ... .. . ........................................................ 5
5.3 Construction Moratoria ............................................ ......................... .. ................ 6
5.4 N.C River Basin Buffer Rules ......................................................... .................... 6
5.5 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters ......................... ............................. 6
56 Mitigation ...................... ............................... .... .. ............................ ........ . 6
5 6 1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts 6
5 6 2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts 6
5.7 Endangered Species Act Protected Species . .... .. ........... .... ...................... .6
5.8 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. . . . ... ....................... ........................... 10
5 9 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species.. ..... .................. ....... ........ 10
6.0 REFERENCES .. .. .................................. ....................................... ... I1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Soils in the project study area 2
Table 2 Water resources in the project study area 2
Table 3 Physical characteristics of water resources in the project study area 3
Table 4 Coverage of terrestrial natural communities in the project study area 4
Table 5 Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the project study area 5
Table 6 Federally protected species listed for Yancey County 7
LIST OF APPENDICIES
Figure 1 Project Location Map Appendix A
Figure 2 Project Vicinity Map Appendix A
Figure 3 Jurisdictional Features Map Appendix A
Figure 4 Natural Communities Map Appendix A
Scientific Names Appendix B
USACE Stream Forms Appendix C
Virginia Big-Eared Bat Survey Report Appendix D
Appalachian Elktoe Survey Report Appendix D
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace bridge
number 31 on SR 1308 over Brush Creek (TIP B-4851) in Yancey County (Figure 1)
The following Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) has been prepared to assist in
the preparation of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project
2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS
All work was conducted as per the NCDOT Natural Environment Unit (NEU) standard
operating procedures dated January 1, 2007 Field work was conducted on July 2, 2007
and February 18, 2008 Potential jurisdictional areas identified in the study area were
documented and a field visit with the USACE and the NCDWQ will be scheduled
Personnel contributing to this document were
Principal
Investigator Knstoffer J G Dramby, PWS, CE
Education Graduate Certificate, Natural Resource Management, Virginia Tech, 2005
B S Biology, Towson University, 2000
Certification Professional Wetland Scientist (Society of Wetland Scientists)
Certified Ecologist (Ecological Society of America)
Experience Environmental Biologist, NCDOT, April 2006-Present
Ecologist, Williamsburg Environmental Group, March 2001-March 2006
Wildland Firefighter, USFS, Salmon-Challis National Forest, Salmon,
Idaho, September 2000
Wildlife Technician, USFS, Allegheny National Forest, April 2000-
September 2000
Wildlife Technician, Howard County Parks & Recreation, April 1999-
August 1999
Expertise Natural resource investigations, Section 7 field investigations, protected
species surveys, section 404/401 permitting, wetland delineation, water
quality/biological monitoring of streams and lakes, technical report
writing, habitat conservation plans and wildlife management plans
Investigator Jason Dilday
Education B S Marine Biology, UNC - Wilmington, 1993
Experience Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, July 2006 - Present
Fisheries Technician, NCWRC, July 2005 - June 2006
Fisheries Biologist, NCDMF, January 1999 - April 2005 Fisheries
Technician, NCDMF, December 1994 - December 1998
Additional investigators are listed in Appendix D
NCDOT 1 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
The project study area lies in the Blue Ridge physiographic region of North Carolina
(Figure 2) Topography in the project vicinity is comprised of steep hillsides with narrow
floodplains along streams Elevations in study area range from 2000 to 2400 ft above
sea level Land use in the project vicinity consists primarily of rural forested land,
composed of some agricultural land and scattered residencies
3.1 Soils
The Yancey County Soil Survey identifies three soil types within the study area (Table
1)
Table 1. Soils in the project study area.
Soil Series Mapping Unit Drainage Class H dric Status
Bandana sandy loam BdA Somewhat poorly drained Non-Hydnc
Buladean-Chestnut BtF Well drained Non- Hydnc
Complex
Cashiers fine sandy CcF Well drained Non- Hydnc
loam
3.2 Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are part of the French Broad river basin United States
Geological Survey ((USGS) Hydrologic Unit 06010108) Three streams were identified
in the study area (Table 2) The location of each water resource is shown in Figure 3
The physical characteristics of these streams are provided in Table 3
Table 2. Water resources in the project study area.
Stream Name Ma ID DWQ Index Number Best Usage Classification
Brush
Brush Creek 7-2-60 C-Tr
Creek
Little
Little Brush Creek Brush 7-2-60-1 C-Tr
Creek
UT to Brush Creek UT 1 7-2-60 C-Tr
NCDOT 2 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the project study area.
Bank Bankful Water Channel
Ma ID Height ft Width (ft) Depth ft Substrate Flow Clarity
Boulder,
Brush Creek 6-8 8-10 2-4 cobble, High Clear
sand
Boulder,
Little Brush cobble, High Clear
Creek 5-7 5-8 1-2 sand
UT to Brush 3-5 3-5 <1 Cobble, High Clear
Creek sand
Brush Creek, Little Brush Creek and UT 1 within the project study area do not contain
any Primary Nursery Areas, Essential Fish Habitat's (EFH), anadromous fish, or
moratorium requirements from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) However, despite no moratoria present, sediment and erosion control
measures should adhere to the Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds resulting from
known locations of Appalachian elktoe and Virginia spiraea downstream of the project
study area These known locations are located approximately 0 5 mi downstream in the
North Toe River Additionally, there are no High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW) or Water Supplies (WS-I and WS-11) within one mile of the
project study area The North Carolina 2006 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters does not
identify any listed stream system within 1 mile of the protect study area No benthic or
fish sampling has been conducted within 1 mile of the project study area
4.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
4.1 Terrestrial Communities
Two terrestrial communities were identified in the project study area
maintained/disturbed and mesic mixed hardwood forest Figure 4 shows the location and
extent of these terrestrial communities in the project study area A brief description of
each community type follows Scientific names of all species identified are included in
Appendix B
41 1 Maintained/Disturbed
Maintained/disturbed areas are scattered throughout the project study area in places
where the vegetation is periodically mowed, such as roadside shoulders and residential
lawns The vegetation in this community is comprised of low growing grasses and herbs,
including fescue, clover, and wild onion Japanese honeysuckle and multiflora rose were
invasive species observed within the community type during the field visits
4 12 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
The mesic mixed hardwood forest community occurs along the floodplams of Brush
Creek, Little Brush Creek, UT 1 and extends up the gradient along the hillside A mixed
NCDOT 3 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
matix of vegetation occurs within this community type including species that prefer
rather moist conditions or species in which typically inhabit drier environments
Sycamore, tulip tree, black walnut, scattered hemlock, red oak, white oak, red maple
dominate the canopy layer, while eastern red cedar, flowering dogwood, tag alder,
Christmas fern, and fescue make up the understory Japanese honeysuckle and multiflora
rose were invasive species observed within the community type during the field visits
4 1 3 Terrestrial Community Impacts
Terrestrial communities in the project study area may be impacted by project construction
as a result of grading and paving of portions of the study area At this time, decisions
regarding the final location and design of the proposed bridge replacement have not been
made Therefore, community data are presented in the context of total coverage of each
type within the study area (Table 4) Once a final alignment and preliminary design have
been determined, probable impacts to each community type will be calculated
Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial natural communities in the project study area.
Community Coverage (ac.)
Maintained/ Disturbed 91
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 179
Total 27.0
4.2 Terrestrial Wildlife
Many fauna species are highly adaptive and may populate or exploit the entire range of
biotic communities located within the project study area (those species actually observed
are indicated with *) Mammal species that commonly exploit forested habitats and
stream corridors found within the project study area include species such as eastern
cottontail, raccoon, Virginia opossum, gray fox, red fox, black bear, bobcat, river otter,
groundhog, meadow vole, spotted skunk, and white-tailed deer Birds that commonly use
forest and forest edge habitats include the American crow*, blue Jay, Carolina chickadee,
tufted titmouse, and yellow-rumped warbler Additional bird species that may use the
open habitat or water bodies within the project study area include American kestrel,
belted kingfisher, eastern bluebird, eastern meadowlark, red-tailed hawk*, wild turkey,
ruffed grouse, barred owl, red-shouldered hawk, and turkey vulture Reptile and
amphibian species that may use terrestrial communities located in the project study area
include the black rat snake, eastern box turtle, eastern fence lizard, five-lined skink,
mountain dusky salamander, American toad, gray tree frog, spring peeper, wood frog,
copperhead, common garter snake, and northern water snake
4.3 Aquatic Communities
Aquatic communities in the project study area consist exclusively of perennial streams
Perennial streams in the study area could support small mouth bass, redbreast sunfish,
yellow perch, rainbow trout, brown trout, spring peepers, crayfish, and various benthic
macroinvertebrates including mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies
NCDOT 4 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
4.4 Invasive Species
In accordance with the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina, multiflora
rose (threat status 1) and Japanese honeysuckle (threat status 2) are located in the project
study area NCDOT will follow the Department's BMPs for the management of invasive
plant species
5.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
5.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Three jurisdictional streams were identified in the project study area (Table 5) The
location of these streams is shown on Figure 3 USACE stream forms are included in
Appendix C The physical characteristics and water quality designations of each
jurisdictional stream are detailed in Section 3 2 All jurisdictional streams in the study
area have been designated as cold water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation
There were no junsdictional wetlands identified within the project study area (Figure 3)
Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the project study area.
Compensatory
Ma ID Length (ft.) Classification Mitigation Re uired Buffer
Brush Creek 2102 Perennial Yes Not Subject
Little Brush

Creek 1061
Perennial
Yes
Not Subject
UT 1 16 Perennial Yes Not Subject
5.2 Clean Water Act Permits
The proposed project has been designated as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the
purposes of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation As a result, a
Nationwide Permit (NWP) 23 will likely be applicable Other permits that may apply
include a NWP No 33 for temporary construction activities such as stream dewatenng,
work bridges, or temporary causeways that are often used during bridge construction or
rehabilitation The USACE holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required
to authorize project construction
In addition to the 404 permit, other required authorizations include the corresponding
Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWQ A NCDWQ Section
401 Water Quality General certification for a Categorical Exclusion may be required prior
to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit Other required 401 certifications may include a
GC 3688 for temporary construction access and dewaternng
NCDOT 5 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
5.3 Construction Moratoria
Pursuant to an NCWRC correspondence letter dated February 11, 2008, there are no
moratoria requirements present within the study area
5.4 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
There are no buffer requirements from the NCDWQ present within the study area
5.5 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
No waters within the project study area have been designated as a Navigable Water under
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act per list from USACE Asheville Office
5.6 Mitigation
5 6 1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts
The NCDOT will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to streams to the greatest extent
practicable in choosing a preferred alternative and during project design At this time, no
final decisions have been made with regard to the location or design of the preferred
alternative
5 6 2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts
The NCDOT will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation
opportunities once a final decision has been rendered with regard to the location of the
preferred alternative If on-site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation will be provided by
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP) In accordance with the "Memorandum of Agreement
among the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U S Army Corps of
Engineers, Wilmington District" (MOA), July 22, 2003, the EEP, will be requested to
provide off-site mitigation to satisfy the federal Clean Water Act compensatory
mitigation requirements for this project
5.7 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of January 31, 2008 the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists nine
federally protected species for Yancey County and one species listed as threatened due to
similarity of appearance (T S/A) (Table 6) A brief description of each species' habitat
requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey
results in the project study area
NCDOT 6 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
Table 6. Federally protected species listed for Yancey County.
Federal Habitat Biological
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Present
Conclusion
Clemmys muhlenbergii Bog turtle T S/A No NA
Glaucomys sabrinus Carolina northern flying E No No Effect
coloratuss squirrel
Puma concolor couguar Eastern puma E No No Effect
Corynorhtnus townsendia Virginia beg-eared bat E Yes MANLTAA
virgtntanus
Alasmidonta raveneltana Appalachian elktoe E Yes MANLTAA
Microhexura monttvaga Spruce-fir moss spider E No No Effect
Hedyotts purpurea var Roan mountain bluet E No No Effect
montana
Geum radiatum Spreading avens E No No Effect
Sptraea virgintana Virginia spiraea T No MANLTAA
Gymnoderma lineare Rock gnome lichen E No No Effect
T S/A - Threatened due to Snmlianty of Appearance
E - Endangered
T- Threatened
MANLTAA - May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect
Bog turtle
Habitat Requirements
The bog turtle inhabits shallow, spring-fed fens, sphagnaceous bogs, marshy
meadows and pasture, with thick, grass cover and crossed by slow, muddy
bottomed streams, and swamps with aquatic and semi-aquatic plants
Biological Conclusion Not Applicable
Carolina northern flying squirrel
Habitat Requirements
Habitat elevations are usually above 4500 ft, or narrow, north facing valleys
above 4000 ft The species favors the ecotone between coniferous and mature
northern hardwood forests The species inhabits northern hardwood with
hemlock in the absence of spruce and fir The Carolina northern flying squirrel
prefers moist forests with widely spaced, mature trees and moderate to thick
evergreen understory, and large numbers of dead snags Colonies of the species
aggregated in island-like distribution
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat for the Carolina northern flying squirrel does not exist in the project
study area The project elevation (2000 to 2400 ft) and its landscape is not
preferred habitat for the Carolina northern flying squirrel A review of NCNHP
records, updated February 13, 2008, indicates no known Carolina northern flying
squirrel occurrences within 10 mile of the study area Therefore, a biological
conclusion of No Effect was rendered
NCDOT 7 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
Eastern puma
Habitat Requirements
The eastern puma inhabits remote areas with dense vegetation and rocky crevices,
such as hilly woodlands, mountains, gorges, and southern swamps with large deer
populations This species often uses caves as temporary shelter Its home range
depends on age, sex, reproductive status, and food availability
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat in the form of large tracts of undisturbed land does not exist in the
project study area There are no NCNHP records, updated February 13, 2008,
indicating known eastern puma occurrences within 10 mile of the study area The
eastern puma has not been documented in the last 50 years in North Carolina
Therefore, a biological conclusion of No effect was rendered
Virginia big-eared bat
Habitat Requirements
The Virginia big-eared bat hibernates in caves and sometimes mines, where the
temperature is 54 degrees Farenheight (F) or less, but generally above freezing
Cave hibernation sites are often near entrances in well-ventilated areas If
temperatures near entrances become too extreme, they move to more thermally
stable parts of the cave They hibernate in tight clusters of a few to a hundred or
more individuals Maternity colonies are usually located in relatively warm parts
of caves During the maternity period, males are apparently solitary Where most
males spend the summer is unknown
Biological Conclusion May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect
Please reference attached October 9, 2007 Virginia big-eared bat survey report
located in Appendix D Concurrence from USFWS will be required for this
species
Appalachian elktoe
Habitat Requirements
The Appalachian elktoe has been reported from relatively shallow, medium-sized
creeks, and rivers with cool, well-oxygenated, moderate-to fast-flowing water
The Appalachian elktoe has also been observed in gravelly substrates often mixed
with cobble and boulders, in cracks in bedrock, and sometimes in relatively silt-
free, coarse, sandy substrates
Biological Conclusion May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect
Please reference attached October 19, 2007 mussel survey report located in
Appendix E Concurrence from USFWS will be required for this species
Rock gnome lichen
Survey Window Year round
Habitat Requirements
The Rock gnome lichen only grows in areas with a great deal of humidity, such as
high elevations above 5,000 feet where there is often fog, or in deep river gorges
at lower elevations Habitat for the rock gnome lichen is restricted to vertical
rock faces occasionally exposed to seepage water The species does well on
moist, generally open sites with northern exposures but needs partial canopy
NCDOT 8 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
coverage in southern or western aspect because it is intolerant of high-intensity
solar radiation
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat for the rock gnome lichen does not exist in the project study area
The project elevation (2000 to 2400 ft) and its landscape is not the preferred habitat
for the rock gnome lichen A review of NCNHP records, updated February 13,
2008, indicates no known rock gnome lichen occurrences within 10 mile of the
study area Therefore, a biological conclusion of No Effect was rendered
Roan mountain bluet
Survey Window May to September
Habitat Requirements
The roan mountain bluet prefers crevices of rock outcrops at the summits of high
elevation (4200-6300 ft) peaks of the southern Blue Ridge Mountains, and thin,
gravelly soils of grassy balds near summit outcrops
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat for the roan mountain bluet does not exist in the project study area
The project elevation (2000 to 2400 ft) and its landscape is not the preferred habitat
for the roan mountain bluet A review of NCNHP records, updated February 13,
2008, indicates no known roan mountain bluet occurrences within 10 mile of the
study area Therefore, a biological conclusion of No Effect was rendered
Spreading avens
Survey Window June to September
Habitat Requirements
The spreading avens is endemic to the Southern Blue Ridge Mountains Habitat
for this species includes high-elevation cliffs, outcrops, and steep slopes which
are exposed to full sun, and thin, gravelly soils of grassy balds near summit
outcrops
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat for spreading avens does not exist in the project study area The
project elevation (2000 to 2400 ft) and its landscape is not the preferred habitat for
spreading avens A review of NCNHP records, updated February 13, 2008,
indicates no known spreading avens occurrences within 10 mile of the study area
Therefore, a biological conclusion of No Effect was rendered
Virginia spiraea
Survey Window May to October
Habitat Requirements
The Virginia spiraea prefers flood-scoured, high-gradient rocky riverbanks,
braided areas of lower stream reaches, gorges, and canyons, as well as disturbed
rights-of-way Grows in thickets in association with a variety of grape species
and royal fern, among other plant associations Virginia spiraea occurs in sunny
areas on moist, acid soils, primarily over sandstone
Biological Conclusion May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect
Suitable habitat for Virginia spiraea does not exist in the project study area Stream
channels occurring within the project study area do not contain rocky flood-scoured
NCDOT 9 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
riverbanks in gorges or canyons A review of NCNHP records, updated February
13, 2008, does indicate known occurrences within 10 mile of the study area The
known populations are located downstream within 10 mile along the North Toe
River The habitats from known locations differ drastically in stream size and
debris accumulation along streambanks to those habitats present within the project
study area However, due to close proximity of known populations within 1 mile of
the project study area, a May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect biological
conclusion was rendered and concurrence from USFWS will be needed
Spruce-fir moss spider
Habitat Requirements
The spruce-fir moss spider is known only from Fraser fir and red spruce forest
communities of the highest elevations of the southern Appalachian Mountains in
western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee The typical habitat of this spider
is found in damp, but well drained, moss mats growing on rock outcrops and
boulders in well shaded situations within these The moss mats cannot be too dry
(the species is very sensitive to desiccation) or too wet (large drops of water can
also pose a threat to the spider) The spider constructs tube-shaped webs in the
interface between the moss mat and rock surface
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat for the spruce-fir moss spider does not exist in the project study
area The project elevation (2000 to 2400 ft) and its landscape is not the preferred
habitat for the spruce-fir moss spider A review of NCNHP records, updated
February 13, 2008, indicates no known spruce-fir moss spider occurrence within
10 mile of the study area Therefore, a biological conclusion of No Effect was
rendered
5.8 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies
of open water for foraging Large, dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically
within 10 mile of open water Suitable habitat for bald eagle does exist in the project
study area A survey was conducted 660 ft outside the project study area, however, no
bald eagle individuals were sighted nor were any bald eagle nests present Therefore,
coordination will not be needed with USFWS concerning the bald eagle
5.9 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species
As of January 31, 2008 the USFWS lists no Candidate species for Yancey County
NCDOT 10 April 2008

Natural Resources Technical Report
6.0 REFERENCES
Amoroso, J L 2002 Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
Carolina North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Raleigh
Burt, W H and R P Grossenheider 1976 A Field Guide to the Mammals North
America North of Mexico 3rd ed Boston Houghton Mifflin 255 pp
Conant, R and J T Collins 1991 A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians (Eastern
and Central North America) 3rd ed Boston Houghton Mifflin 450 pp
Cowardm, L M , V Carter, F C Golet, and E T LaRoe 1979 Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States U S Fish and Wildlife
Service U S Government Printing Office, Washington D C
Environmental Laboratory 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
Technical Report Y-87-1, U S Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
Vicksburg, Mississippi,
Environmental Laboratory 1992 Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual,
memorandum from Mayor General Arthur E Williams
Harrar, E S and J G Harrar 1962 Guide to Southern Trees New York Dover
Publications 2nd ed. 709 pp
LeGrand Jr, H E and S P Hall 2001 Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare
Animal Species of North Carolina North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Raleigh
Martof, B S , W M Palmer, J R Bailey, and J R Harrison III 1980 Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia Chapel Hill The University of North
Carolina Press 264 pp
National Geographic 1999 Field Guide to the Birds of North America 3'd ed
Washington, D C National Geographic Society
N C Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Management 1996 A Field Guide to North Carolina Wetlands
Report No 96-01 EPA 904/B-94/001
N C Department of Environment and Natural Resource, Division of Water Quality
1999a Internal Guidance Manual - N C Division of Water Quality Stream
Classification Method
TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
NCDOT
11
April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
1999b Basmwide Water Quality Plan, French Broad River Basin Raleigh, North
Carolina
http //h2o enr state nc us/basinwide/frenchbroad/documents/yadkm htm
N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
2003a Basinwide Assessment Report French Broad River Basin
http //www esb enr state nc us/Basmwide/frenchbroad%202003%20Report pdf
N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
2003c Surfacewaters and Wetland Standards 15 NCAC 02B 0100 & 0200
N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Integrated 305(b) and
303(d) Report) http //h2o enr state nc us/tmdl/documents/2004IRCate og nes4_
7 PDF
N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
2004 Basmwide Information Management System Water Body Reports
http //h2o enr state nc us/bims/Reports/reportsWB html
N C Department of Transportation 1997 Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters
N C Department of Transportation 2007 Invasive Exotic Plant List for N C
Unpublished
N C Natural Heritage Program 2004a Element Occurrence Search Report Yancey
County, North Carolina http //www ncsparks net/nhp/search html Updated
January 2004
Newcomb, L 1977 Newcomb's Wildflower Guide Boston Little, Brown and
Company 490 pp
Peterson, R T , editor 1980 A Field Guide to the Birds of Eastern and Central North
America 4th ed Boston Houghton Mifflin 384 pp
Radford, A E , H E Ahles, and C R Bell 1968 Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas Chapel Hill University of North Carolina Press 1183 pp
Rhode, F C , R G Arndt, D G Lindquist, and J F Parnell 1994 Freshwater Fishes of
the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware Chapel Hill University of
North Carolina Press 222 pp
NCDOT 12 April 2008
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-4851, Yancey County, N C
Schafale, M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina Third Approximation North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR Raleigh, North Carolina 325 pp
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service 1997
Soil Survey of Yancey County, North Carolina
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service 1998
Hydrologic Units-North Carolina (metadata) Raleigh, North Carolina
United States Fish and Wildlife Service 1994a Bakersville, North Carolina, National
Wetlands Inventory Quadrangle (7 5-minute series) 1 sheet
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 4 Southeast Region, North Carolina
Ecological Services 2003 Threatened and Endangered Species in North Carolina
Yancey County Updated 31 January 2008 http //nc-es fws gov/es/countyfr html
Webster, W D, J F Parnell, and W C Biggs 1985 Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia,
and Maryland Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press 255 pp
NCDOT 13 April 2008

0
183
1?7) fit` 231 2
• Reid ,{ Tipton Hill
I '
13211 ?•
A • 111.140
%
3" F6 I 1?'Q ? RJ
N' ¦
13
• 1 , i
ri7S /y ` ??? Q ? ty _ •
South
baN Ch 131
.
9
333 '-
Gro
e(
71
i M.
Zion
art
C

R
k v
Ch.
1
C 0 ovY oc
Peterson Town 1422 233 `
chop 1
'%
H
i
? 93

? ?

7
?
1416 arr
s
?
6
4 [ 3
?
1333

2 -
erenr
al
?
1 -
? • ?
?
1214
3
7
131
1 I -? ,? 23
13031 #333 ?? r
419 , ----?- ) 4
•1 YANCEY 235
--- ?' i 'r?t
I r? COUNTY 131 ,
%??? NonTH ?Mq NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
sI PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
OF 7AAj?
YANCEY COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO 31 ON SR 1308
OVER CREEK
B-4851
Figure 1
1339
r .ftppm
1
MITCHELL
COUNTY
13Cs lied Hill
1254
1
fir r
13 ` 128 1 fNA „
r Ae?lt?. 1314 1,
? ' _^1•??
k r l
"I ?4
.. f h nY ice' _ ? _:e !??.3 ry t i ?'+• f l ?! ? '
4 ? rtrY !
.y £ ? i S ''q P f
? , ? ? z l ? , ??' F vy _ ? Y? j' P
ry ? 5 r
ti^ r v+ h
w y ??
sN ? i S Wis.. ? `c? +?,.. ?--?"•^?r i} S ' . "3' „U ??u ? r . r? ? r i ? r
rn ?
??#?{lj? i •A? .M . a` .rf
-r4 ??• i S r -z. K
--'- e { - `?;? ?''` u `' 2,;['? vr. +, ? ?t r+- _ wit ??i ? ?•, h -brtp ??? ? ,? F? 3r -? _ _ _ _
4-£,*T ' x -r }F iti y'F ?_Y i - S e ?^tT' Ox.,iy t-' 4l 3'a
^, r zr ; f , s z
- ly it
Ir r
01,
_4? x '
?-
aw ? j S e
??"` y s}?ys r t y u 4 11 ? v 4
Legend f, ?a
< x??`;? r 4 t ,haw r "r'
C= Project Study Area
p "44JJ I '? ai ?'
N F? ?z
B-4851 "ORIM,
Of OPTN ?O
Yancey County
Replace Bridge No 31 on SR 1308 A
Over Brush Creek ??T OF Tact
Appendix B
Scientific Names of Species Identified in Report
Plants
Common Name
Black Walnut
Christmas fern
Clover
Eastern red cedar
Fescue
Flowering dogwood
Hemlock
Japanese honeysuckle
Multiflora rose
Red maple
Red oak
Sycamore
Tag alder
Tulip tree
White oak
Wild onion
Scientific Name
Juglans nzgra
Polystzchum acrostzchozdes
Trzfolzum sp
Junzperus vzrgznzana
Festuca sp
Cornus Honda
Tsuga canadenszs
Lonzcerajaponzca
Rosa multzflora
Acer rubrum
Quercus rubra
Platanus occzdentahs
Alnus serrulata
Lzrzodendron tulzpzfera
Quercus alba
Allzum sp
Animals
Common Name
American crow
American kestrel
American toad
Appalachian elktoe
Bald eagle
Barred owl
Belted kingfisher
Black bear
Black rat snake
Blue J ay
Bobcat
Bog turtle
Brown trout
Caddisfly
Carolina chickadee
Carolina northern flying squirrel
Common garter snake
Scientific Name
Corvus brachyrhynchos
Falco sparverzus
Bufo americanus
Alasmzdonta ravenehana
Hahaeetus leucocephalus
Strzx varza
Ceryle alcyon
Ursus amerzcana
Elaphe obsoleta
Cyanocztta crzstata
Lynx rufus
Clemmys muhlenbergzz
Salmo trutta
Tnchoptera spp
Poeczle carolznenszs
Glaucomys sabrznus coloratus
Thamnophzs szrtahs
Copperhead Agkastrodon contortrix
Crayfish Decapoda spp
Eastern bluebird Saaha saalis
Eastern box turtle Terrapene carohna
Eastern cottontail Sylvalagus floridanus
Eastern fence lizard Sceloporus undulatus
Eastern garter snake Thamnophis sartalis
Eastern meadowlark Sturnella magna
Eastern puma Puma concolor couguar
Five-lined skink Eumeces anthracanus
Gray fox Urocyon canereoargenteus
Gray tree frog Hyla versacolor
Groundhog Marmota monax
Mayfly Ephmeroptera spp
Meadow vole Macrotus pennsylvanicus
Mountain dusky salamander Desmognathus ochrophaeus
Northern water snake Nerodia sipedon
Raccoon Procyon lotor
Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykass
Redbreast sunfish Lepomas auratus
Red fox Vulpes Vulpes
Red-tailed hawk Buteojamazcensas
Red-shouldered hawk Buteo laneatus
River otter Lutra canadensas
Roan mountain bluet Hedyotas purpurea var montana
Ruffed grouse Bonasa umbellus
Small mouth bass Macropterus dolomaeu
Spotted skunk Spalogale putoraus
Spreading avens Geum radaatum
Spring peepers Pseudacras crucifer
Spruce-fir moss spider Macrohexura montavaga
Stonefly Plecoptera spp
Tufted titmouse Baeolophus bicolor
Turkey vulture Cathartes aura
Virginia big-eared bat Corynorhanus townsendu varganaanus
Virginia opossum Dadelphas varganaana
Virginia spiraea Sparaea vargznaana
White-tailed deer Odocoaleus varganaanus
Wild turkey Meleagras gallopavo
Wood frog Rana sylvataca
Yellow perch Perca flavescens
Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroaca coronata
USACE AID#
1117- -7t)
DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
DIM STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment // J1110P
1 Applicant's name 2. Evaluator's name 1z,UMMf61
3 Date of evaluation ? 'A 4 Time of evaluation / " J
5 Name of stream ???3s?.uSf- C(G[?- 6 River basin
7 Approximate drainage area _
9 Length of reach evaluated l?0
11 Site coordinates (if known) prefer in decimal degrees
"
8 Stream order l/ ??/
10 County Y[r
12. Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (ex 34 872312)
Longitude (ex -77 556611)
Method location determined (circle) ` GPS ;oteneaSr o o Ortho Aerial Photo/GIS Other G1S Other
13 Location of reach under evalu i ds and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location)
14. Proposed channel work (if any)
15 Recent weather conditions 'S
16 Site conditions at tune of visit 1 le
17 Identify any special waterway classifications known -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed _(]-IV)
18 Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES 1 NO If yes, estimate the water surface area
19 Does channel appear on USGS quad maps ES NO 20 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YE NO
21 Estimated watershed land use i/o Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _, ?O% Agricultural
?29/o Forester] Z6- Cl d / L -9/6 Other
22 Bankfull width 0'S/
o eare ogged _ /o Other
23 Bank height (from bed to top of bank) -> -,<-
24 Channel slope down center of stream Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25 Channel sinuosity Straight Z Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2) Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e g , the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality
Total Score (from reverse) ( Comments
Evaluator's Signature 1-? 7 . -/" Datel?/a?
This channel evaluation fors ntended to berms only as a guide to-assist landowners and env ronmental professionals in
gathering the data requrred'by the United Sf tes Army Co s--617 to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality The total score resulting from the completion o his form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mingahon ratio or requirement Form subject to ge--I/ersion 06/03 To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26
USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
EM STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
4
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment
1. Applicant's name 2. Evaluator's name 1G, /)MkV.61
3 Date of evaluation 4. Time of evaluation -Q?
5 Name of stream 6. River basin _ 6GU ?!'l-1i1?
7 Approximate drainage area -
9. Length of reach evaluated
11 Site coordinates (if known) prefer in decimal degrees
Latitude (ex 34 872312)
Method location determined (circle) I GPS
13 Location of reach under evaluation
AL'oNz, ?q? - 1B08 E;
8 Stream order ,/ ?.?
10. County YP
12 Subdivision name (if any)
Longitude (ex -77 556611) _
?opo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS ther G1S Other
ate new y roads act landmarks and atta h map identifying stream(s) location)
14 Proposed channel work (if any)
15 Recent weather conditions
16 Site conditions at time of visit
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters - Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18 Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES 1 NO If yes, estimate the water surface area
19 Does channel appear on USGS quad maps YES NO 20 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Surveys YE NO
21 Estimated watershed land use ogO/o Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial , +'-71n% Agricultural
S29-1. Forested /0% Cleared / L.vved °i nth- i
22 Bankfull width e lip
23 Bank height (from bed to top of bank) l/ -?
24 Channel slope down center of stream-Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity Straight Z Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2). Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation if a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e g , the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality
Total Score (from reverse) Comments
Evaluator's Signature Date_ 4z/pj/??
This channel evaluation fo:fb), ntended to be s only as a gust- to-assist landowners and env ronmental professionals in
gathering the data requir the United S tes Army E
f1Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality The total score resulting from the completion o or/dn is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement Form subject to - ersion
06/03 To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26
USACE A1D4 DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
EM] STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment / A-AOF
1. Applicant's name (??b% - 2 Evaluator's name
3 Date of evaluation 4 Tune of evaluation
5 Name of stre JI(G ?1'T w!/EV-- 6 River basin /?VZ?W
7 Approximate drainage area
9 Length of reach evaluated 100?_
8 Stream order ,/ 3
10 County y?-
I 1 Site coordinates (if known) prefer in decimal degrees 12 Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (cx 34 872312) --
Longitude (ex -77 556611)
Method location determined (circle) GP5 opo Shee rtho (Aerial) Photo/GIS ther GIS Other
13 Location of reach under eval a near n arks and atta h map identifying stream(s) location)
1:9F ?Ad-M# e-A4Pe-
14 Proposed channel work (if any)
15 Recent weather conditions -4v 's
16 Site conditions at time of visit G7? ?? !s
17 Identify any special waterway classifications known -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18 Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES 1 NO If yes, estimate the water surface area
19 Does channel appear on USGS quad map? 'ES NO 20 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YE NO
21 Estimated watershed land use fi?/° Residential % Commercial _% Industrial , Z?% Agricultural
i/o Forested /0% Cleared / Logged _% Other (
22 Bankfull width 23 Bank height (from bed to top of bank)
24 Channel slope down center of stream -Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) /<oderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25 Channel sinuosity Straight Z Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2) Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e g, the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality
Total Score (from reverse) Z?7 / Comments
Evaluator's Signature_
This channel evaluation
to be s only as a
gathering the data requireVby the United S tes Army
quality The total score resulting from the completion c
particular mitigation ratio or requirement Form subject to
Date W-lelkz9?_1
ko?ssist landowners and env ronmental professionals in
\Engmeers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
version 06/03 To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26
-y
a ???4
ow.m?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F EASLEY
GOVERNOR
October 9, 2007
MEMORANDUM
TO Bill Goodwin, Project Development Unit Head
Tracy Walter, Project Development Engineer
Kris Dramby, Environmental Specialist
FROM Melissa Miller, Biological Surveys Unit
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY
SUBJECT Section 7 Biological Conclusion for the Virginia big-eared bat
(Corynorhinus townsendu virgznianus) on TIP # B-4851 in Yancey
County
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the biological conclusion for the
federally endangered Virginia big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendu virginaanus) on
TIP # B-4851 in Yancey County A habitat assessment was conducted on October 2,
2007 by NCDOT biologists
The surrounding area is approximately 50% developed and 50% natural There is
good foraging habitat present as there are woods that border agricultural areas
Topographical maps indicate the presence of mines within the project vicinity Several
landowners confirmed the presence of mines very close to the project We were unable to
contact all of the landowners in the area and as such could not gain access to all of the
mines with the project vicinity The bridge itself smells very strongly of creosote and has
steel beams The underside of the bridge was checked for evidence of bats but none were
found The bridge is not the type preferred by bats for roosting NHP data indicates that
the closest documented occurrence of Virginia big-eared bats is approximately 17 miles
from the project site
Based on the presence of mines within the project area, this project has a
biological conclusion of MAY AFFECT NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
federally endangered Virginia big-eared bats To minimize impacts to the foraging
habitat, as little vegetation as possible should be removed from the project area Water
quality should also be maintained by controlling sedimentation and erosion
This biological conclusion does require confirmation by the U S Fish and
Wildlife Service If you need any additional information, please contact me at (919) 715-
1387
MAILING ADDRESS TELEPHONE [phone] or LOCATION
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 919-715-1335 PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 2728 CAPITAL BLVD SUITE 240
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER FAX [phone] RALEIGH NC 27604
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598 WEEISITE WWW NCDOT ORG
Oualifications of Investigators:
Investigator Melissa Miller
Education BS Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, North Carolina State University
Experience Environmental Biologist, NCDOT, February 2005-present
Assistant Wildlife Biologist, Howell Woods Environmental Learning
Center, Four Oaks, NC, Januaryl999-February 2005
Expertise Section 7 field investigations, protected species (terrestnal/aquatic)
surveys
Investigator Lance P Fontaine
Education B S Ecological & Evolutionary Biology, Tulane University, 1999
M S Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, 2002
Ph D Candidate, Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University
Experience Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC, October 2006 - Present
Lecturer, University of California at Irvine, January 2006 - September
2006
Research Assistant, Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX, August 2000 - December 2005
Pond Technician/Technical Consultant, Integrated Lakes Management,
Gurnee, IL September 1999 - August 2000
Expertise Endangered species (terrestrial/aquatic) surveys, section 7 field
investigation, biological assessment preparation, water quality analysis,
aquatic and wetland ecology studies, freshwater and marine fish ecology
and ecophysiology studies, invasive and exotic plant (terrestrial/aquatic)
control, statistics, bentluc macroinvertebrate collection, prescribed burns,
certified Scuba Diver
aµSGTt^
-y
aw
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTffiNT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F EASLEY
GOVERNOR
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
October 19, 2007
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Tracy Walter, Project Planning Engineer, Bridge Unit
Kris Dramby Project Manager, NEU
Heather Remmnger, Environmental Specialist
Biological Surveys Group, NEU
SUBJECT: Protected species survey report for the Appalachian elktoe
(Alasmidonta ravenekana) for the proposed bridge
replacement of Bridge 31 over Brush Creek on SR 1308
(Double Island Road), Yancey County, NC Federal Aid
Project No BRZ-1308 (6), WBS Element 38621 1 1, TIP
Project No B-4851
The following memorandum addresses the Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta
ravenehana), a federally protected species listed by the U S Fish and Wildlife Service for
Yancey County, NC The habitat requirements for the Appalachian elktoe are sand and
gravel substrate among cobbles and boulders and under flat rocks, usually in moderate
current at depths of less than three feet (Bogan, 2002)
Surveys, Habitat, and Methods
A mussel survey was conducted on September 25, 2007 by NCDOT biologists, Neil
Medlin, Anne Burroughs, and Heather Remmnger The survey was conducted in Brush
Creek approximately 100 meters above and 400 meters below the bridge crossing (to the
confluence with the North Toe River) Survey methodology included wading using
visual (batiscope) and tactile methods along the banks The Brush Creek crossing of SR
1308 (Double Island Road) is immediately upstream from the confluence with Little
Brush Creek Consequently, a portion of Little Brush Creek was also surveyed during
this site visit
Brush Creek contains runs, riffles and pool areas with normal substrate compactness The
substrate above and below the bridge is dominated by gravel, with a subdommance of
cobble, but silt, sand, bedrock, and boulders are also present Water levels in the stream
were low, with 100 percent of the water less than 2 feet in depth A 4-foot waterfall
composed of bedrock, boulders, and woody debris is located approximately 300 meters
MAILING ADDRESS TELEPHONE [phone] LOCATION
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX [phone] PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 2728 CAPITAL BLOUVARD
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBsITE WWW NCDOT ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548

downstream from Bridge Number 31 The portion of Brush Creek that was surveyed had
little to no riparian buffer, and surrounding land use was rural The banks were one meter
high and general very stable and the channel width vaned from 15 to 2 meters No
freshwater mussels were found in 2 5 person-hours of survey time in Brush Creek
Bridge Number 31 is approximately 400 meters upstream from the North Toe River A
brief survey of the River near its confluence with Brush Creek was conducted on the
same day During 1 person-hour of searching this section of the River, the only bivalve
species found was Asiatic clam (Corbicula fluminea), and they were common
Qualifications of Investigators
Investigator: Neil Medlin, Environmental Supervisor
Education: M A Biology, Appalachian State University
B S Biology, Appalachian State University
Experience: Environmental Supervisor, NCDOT, January 2002 - present
Environmental Biologist, NC Division of Water Quality
June 1990 - January 2002
Environmental Biologist, FL Department of Environmental Protection
(formerly Department of Environmental Regulation), August 1986 - June
1990
Expertise: Freshwater fish and benthic macroinvertebrate collection and
identification, aquatic habitat evaluations and function, biocntena and
biotic indices evaluations, Endangered species (terrestnal/aquatic) surveys
Investigator: Anne Burroughs
Education: B S Biological Sciences, Minor in Environmental Science,
North Carolina State University 1992
Experience: Biological Control Technician - NC Dept of Agriculture May 2001-Apnl
2003
Environmental Specialist - NC Dept of Transportation, May 2003-August
2003, January 2004-present
Expertise: Endangered species (terrestnal/aquatic) surveys, benthic
macroinvertebrate collection
Investigator: Heather Renninger
Education: B S Ecology/Environmental Biology, Appalachian State University
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, February 2007- present
Environmental Biologist, H W Lochner, Inc, 2003-2007
Biologist, Earth Tech, Inc, 2000-2003
Expertise: Section 7 field investigations and documentation, benthic
macroinvertebrate collection, 401/404 permitting, protected species
(terrestnal/aquatic) surveys, NEPA documentation, wetland delineation,
stream restoration, invasive species, avian ecology and behavior
I '
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: May Affect- Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Appropriate habitat for the Appalachian elktoe does occur in Brush Creek in the cobble
and boulder areas that have gravel and sand However, given that no freshwater mussels
were found in Little Brush or Brush Creek, it is apparent that the Appalachian elktoe does
not occur in the area immediately adjacent to the proposed project Furthermore, the
waterfall downstream from Bridge Number 31 probably serves as an impediment to the
upstream movement of potential fish hosts for the elktoe and other mussels The North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) lists known populations of Appalachian
elktoe in the North Toe River within one mile both upstream and downstream of the
Brush Creek confluence There are no known populations of elktoe in the Brush Creek
watershed The proposed bridge replacement may affect, but is not likely to adversely
affect the Appalachian elktoe
Reference Bogan, Art, 2002 Workbook and Key to the Freshwater Bivalves of North
Carolina
r ' ' w
L
V
CO)
L
m
L
O
00
M
r
C
O
r
h
6
Z
a
L
b
a?
T
LO
0
tx)
N
O
O
}
Additional Personnel Qualifications
Investigator William A Barrett
Education B S Marine Science, University of South Carolina
Experience Environmental Supervisor, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC, 1105 -present
Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC, 11/04 - 12/05
Environmental Specialist, Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, West Palm Beach, FL 10/97 -11/04
Environmental Scientist, GLE Associates, Inc, Tampa, FL 1/93 - 3/97
Environmental Scientist, EnviroAssessments, Inc, Tampa, FL 8/91 -1/93
Environmental Technician, Pace Laboratories, Inc, Tampa, FL 3/90 -
8/91
Expertise Natural resource assessment, Section 404/401 permitting, wetland
delineation, submerged aquatic vegetation assessment, technical review,
and technical report writing
Investigator Jeremy T Learner
Education B S , Natural Resource Management, UNC-Asheville, May 2000
Experience Environmental Senior Technician, NCDOT, February 2007-present
Erosion Control Technician, Durham County Engineering, February 2005-
June, 2006
Staff Scientist, WK Dickson, December 2003-February 2005
Environmental Scientist, MAA, September, 2001 - November 2002,
Naturalist, Kiawah Island Resort, SC, Summer Intern, 1998
Investigator Jennifer Harrod, Environmental Specialist, NCDOT
Education BS, Fisheries and Wildlife, North Carolina State University, 2006
Experience Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, June 2007 - present
Park Ranger, US Army Corps of Engineers, Wake Forest, NC
June 2003 - April 2007
c
n
rm#L o r
, cD
cD

Cl)

Q

(D

(D
' -n
-.
91)
C ?
(D

00 ?
?. w
CL M
SU
(D
h
-• n Z o
o
0
w
nom `

-? =o =
? CO)
_ . Cl) CL
?
?, v
? ••
co
?'
•
00

A (D
w?
00 =

0 lu

CD
w

z,
o
Z =
gnoN * lid
?
MA
0
c?
Ul
o?
U
3
m
m
CL
C.
0
0
CL
ic m
2). o
rrF
cl)
C _
CL
v?
?. D
CD
cr 0)
CD
CL
a
c?
a

c?
sv -n
o
00 ?
m o co
hn?
r 0 z
?Cl)?
w 0
°0
_.co3
003
?(?
0-0
c?
(D
mo
m
0
ml
CD
W
fm4L